Slashdot Mirror
Defense Distributed Has 3D-Printed an Entire Gun
Daniel_Stuckey writes with this snippet from Motherboard with an update on Cody Wilson's Defense Distributed project: "On Friday morning, Forbes's Andy Greenberg published photos of the world's first completely 3D-printed gun. It has a 3D-printed handle, a 3D-printed trigger, a 3D-printed body and a 3D-printed barrel, all made of polymer. It's not completely plastic, though. So as not to violate the Undetectable Firearms Act and guarantee it would get spotted by a metal detector, Wilson and friends embedded a six-ounce hunk of steel inside the gun. They're calling it 'The Liberator.'" (A name I'm sure that Wilson didn't come up with accidentally.)
...drastically less gun crimes than the US.
Replaced by other weapons of opportunity.
Nope.
Guns can be had for cheap so that really isn't a barrier. On the low end this printed gun probably costs more than a real gun that actually fires a round with some power behind it, has some accuracy, and has a really good chance of NOT blowing up in your face. I have seen rifles in good working order for about $90 (Mosin-Nagent M91/30s or M44s) and handguns for about $120 (Nagent revolvers) from reputable shops. Granted these are not brand new but good condition WWII era Soviet military surplus. If you looked hard you could probably get those cheaper in a shootable but beat up condition but I haven't seen any.
Time to offend someone
f you had ever actually read the case law instead of quoting some talking point you would know the following. Since the first case to touch on the subject in 1886 the Supreme Court has never questioned the individual right. But please carry on.
1. Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 Year 1886 - Supports individual right.
"We think it clear that there are no sections under consideration, which only forbid bodies of men to associate together as military organizations, or to drill or parade with arms in cities and towns unless authorized by law, do not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms."
2. United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 Year 1939 - Supports individual right. In the absence of evidence since miller was dead and his lawyer a no show the court could not overturn the ruling. Also of interest they used military applicability as a test for 2nd amendment protection meaning ar-15's and ak-47's would be a protected weapon.
"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense... The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."'
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
According to this page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate ), the gun-related deaths in the US are:
Total firearm-related death rate: 10.2
Homicides: 3.2
Suicides: 6.3
Unintentional: 0.2
Undetermined: 0.1
The graph in the comic shows the US "gun related murders" on a logrithmic scale a little under 4. Based on that, it's clear that his graph is including gun homicides and not gun suicides.
I've bought handguns at a gun show with no wait and no background check. When I sold one of them, I advertised it as "no wait, no checks" and someone posed as a buyer just to say I wasn't supposed to say that, even though I'm not even allowed, as a non-dealer, to conduct a check. My most recent gun show was at the Dallas Convention Center, though I read they hadn't had once since 2002, which is about when I left TX (and the gun show I went to was a few years before that), though I did also see a reference to a gun show there in 2012, but no idea if it happened. Walk in with a wad of cash and two guns, and walk out with less cash and 4 guns. Nobody looks twice at you if you flash a gun before asking about theirs.
Learn to love Alaska
Of course only an American would think that they are unique in overthrowing tyranny. Whilst it is true that America was founded as a direct result of this you ARE NOT unique and special. For example we here in Britain; The English Civil War, wich actually resulted in the execution of our king in an attempt to curtail tyranny. Perhaps you forgot about that one. We also find some sections of the American populace self centered, selfish. Perhaps reason you have so many troubles is this idea of Libertarianism, essentially the idea of, "my rights first, fuck everybody else's rights". I honestly think your founding fathers is they could see what you have become as a nation would disown you. This idea that an unarmed populace couldn't fight a tyrannical government is pretty weak to be honest. For every example that you give I can give a counter. For example The Spanish Civil War. Unarmed civilians very quickly organised into armed "militia". So your populace is having to endure slaughter, innocent kids etc... Because you as a nation seem to have this paranoid belief that the jack boots are going to kick your doors down at "3AM" and arming yourselves to the teeth with little of no regulation ("My rights, me, me, me") is the answer. It obviously isn't working. Time to evolve and change?