Slashdot Mirror
Gun Rights Hacktivists To Fab 3D-Printed Guns At State Capitol
giulioprisco writes On January 13th Come And Take Texas (CATI) will be manufacturing 3D-printed firearms on location at the State Capitol. In 2013 Defense Distributed made public the 3D printable files (STL files) for the world's first fully 3D printable gun. Their more recent Ghost Gunner is designed to automatically manufacture publicly created designs with nearly zero user interaction. According to CATI’s website, “In the last year and a half Texan Gun Rights Groups all around the Lone Star State have walked, assembled, and engaged in Humanitarian efforts all while Open Carrying their Long Guns and Black Powder Pistols. This has succeeded in Educating the Public as well as Law Enforcement, to show that the presence of Firearms in Public is not only Safe but Highly supported.”
is Still a Lost Art. Thank goodness for "Educating" the Public.
If there's anything that'll push forward legal restrictions on 3D printers/home CNC, it'll be assholes like this making a media push over how easy it is to make weapons and OMG THE CHILDREN. This is why we can't have nice things.
They think they're protesting against gun control, but they're actually making a powerful and probably effective protest for 3D printer control.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
It seems to me that there has been a lot of media and public backlash against open carry. I'm not personally affected by open carry at the moment, but I'd be hesitant to visit any state where open carry becomes too prolific. My opinion is simply that when everyone open carries, I will have a harder time discerning who is a threat and who isn't.
Because a right not exercised is a right lost .
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Because someone *isn't* going to corneal their weapon....
Most gun owners are lawful gun owners. If the law requires open carry, then those carrying openly are probably not a threat to you. Anyone still carrying concealed more likely is. It's like making schools and other places gun free zones: if a person is already planning to commit an illegal act (robbery, murder, etc) then tacking on one more illegal act isn't a big deterrent. The only ones affected by the law are those that actually follow it.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Interesting country, where white folks earnestly protest that they should be able to openly carry weapons and not be viewed as a threat, while black folks have to protest that they should be able to walk around unarmed and not be viewed as a threat.
If you don't plan on using any of these much vaunted gun rights to defend the other rights in your Constitution, WTF is the point?
If you're going to say "well, the 1st amendment is shot, the 4th is being ignored, the 5th is being tramped on, but I have my gun" ... why the hell are you even bothering??
Why are none of you gun advocates killing off the NSA officials and the rest of the security people who are shitting all over the rest of your fucking rights? Or are you just a bunch of one trick ponies who only give a crap about your guns?
If so, you should seriously STFU and start worrying about the other rights they've been taking away from you. Otherwise you're just a bunch of children playing cowboy.
Or should we conclude gun advocates are totally OK with tyranny and the erosion of your other rights?
If you won't defend the rest of your Constitutional rights, you don't deserve this one either.
Pathetic.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
This may come as a surprise to you, but the amendment does not actually say anything about a "state run militia". The actual ratified text is "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
If you go on to read additional support documentation (yeah, there's more there than just the amendment itself), it talks about allowing the people to form their own militias. Some of the quotes in the debate about the amendment are quite enlightening, one I particularly agree with is "to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them. . . by totally disusing and neglecting the militia." along with "Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." both attributed to George Mason (known historically as the father of the bill of rights).
The whole idea is stupid - good quality guns in the US (where this is going on) are cheap and easily available. 3D printed guns are expensive and incredibly unsafe, because they're not only made of bonded plastic powder or filament, which can't stand up to the stress of gunpowder exploding, so the guns risk exploding and injuring the user, and in any case will be inaccurate and have a very short useful life. You could make a better "gun" with a block of wood and a drill, more quickly and at lower cost.
The only perspective from which this makes sense is that they're gun fanatics trying to attach themselves to 3D printing for PR purposes, to promote their theory that there need to be more guns in the US, and that they be completely uncontrolled, which is a position that is not only extremely unpopular (90% of the US supports background checks, so violent felons can't easily get guns, and only a few fanatics think that it's a good idea for guns to not be detected by metal detectors).
So really, why promote a few fanatics who, if successful, would lead to even more gun deaths in the US? With the internet we can't stop them completely, but by giving them front-page promotion, we're just encouraging them, which is (IMO) extremely bad judgement.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
It's already illegal for a felon to have a weapon, and it's already illegal for anyone to use a weapon in the commission of a crime (and last I checked, shooting people _not_ in self defense is still a crime in this country). So your lawmaking escapade seems to be a little misplaced.