Slashdot Mirror
3D Printed Guns Might Lead To Law Changes In Australia
angry tapir writes An inquiry by an Australian Senate committee has recommended the introduction of uniform laws across jurisdictions in the country "regulating the manufacture of 3D printed firearms and firearm parts." Although current laws are in general believed to cover 3D printed guns, there are concerns there may be inconsistencies across different Australian jurisdictions. Although there aren't any high-profile cases of 3D printed weapons being used in crimes in the country, earlier this year a raid in Queensland recovered 3D printed firearm parts.
taxation? prohibition? choose the last one and the state makes no money.
I RTFA. Don't worry, the proposal was widely shelved, in what seems like a rare moment of clarity in Australian politics these days. Any restrictions on 3D printing would be about as useful as regulating lathes because they could be used to make Owen or Sten guns. If current legislation is not sufficient to cover 3D printed guns then there are bigger problems to fix.
Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
3D printed gins are no different to any other home-made gun.
It doesn't matter if its 3D printed, machined with a lathe, hand-forged by a blacksmith or made on a production line, its still a gun and is still just as illegal or legal as any other gun (depending on what sort of gun it is and what jurisdiction you are in)
You need to restrict the bullets not the guns. At the basest form a pipe is a gun.
law is fluid, it changes as it's required and a gun is a gun.
But milling weapons is ok? Like, the normal traditional way of making rifles that's been in used for some hundred years?
3d printing seems a bit ineffficient compared to a CNC mill.
It's not about the gun itself, but about gun proliferation in countries that have strict gun control laws. The general public has no access to guns produced by legit companies on a production line. Lathing, machining and gunsmithing take skill that few people possess. However, if and when access to 3D printers becomes commonplace, and if a viable 3D printable gun is designed, then anyone will be able to hit "print", do a little finishing and some assembly, and have a gun. This will make having an illegal firearm well within reach of the majority of the population (of course you'll still have to get some ammo for it).
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
This will make having an illegal firearm well within reach of the majority of the population (of course you'll still have to get some ammo for it).
There are some pretty nice black powder revolvers out there. You could print one of those. Say, a nice .50 caliber Morgan. Historical and massive!
Prohibition never works. Only making a better society does.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
governments/TPTB are becoming increasingly concerned that the average citizen could get pissed off and instead of being powerless (as they have been for centuries), they may actually be capable of doing something. In this case it's criminals getting guns with nefarious intent but honestly, this is the tip of the iceberg. We are nearing the tipping point between the people being dependant on governments and companies for things like food and electricity and being self-sufficient. The prospect of "we don't need you anymore" should scare them too because it's when the current social organizational system will start breaking down. It might take a few decades but thanks to affordable automation and openly shared progress, people will start dropping off the grid in droves, not because they can but because it's easy.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Only making a better society does.
And you don't do that by arming every idiot who thinks they need a gun.
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
Depends on what you consider 'works'. For instance, we have a prohibition on murder in the US. It does not make murder go away, it does not 100% stop it, but it does shift the risk/reward in a way that significantly reduces it. 'Gun prohibition' does not need to remove every gun from circulation, it only needs to make them uncommon and hidden, maybe even drive up the black market prices up enough that common criminals do not have them and 'crimes of passion' occurrences drop, not to mention the reduction in accidental shooting.
It may or may not be a good idea for any particular country, but prohibition can be a good harm reduction mechanism for a wide range of problems. The issue is we tend to only think of the failures as 'prohabition'.
After all what is a gun? I mean it may seem intuitive but I mean really think about how you write a formal definition that includes everything you want to regulate but isn't overreaching and hits things you don't. It's not the easiest thing in the world.
So, maybe the law needs to be changed to deal with a new development. Would hardly be the first time. Sounds like that's what they are evaluating.
And you don't do that by arming every idiot who thinks they need a gun.
No, you do it by reducing the number of idiots, by educating people. Then your people are responsible enough to own guns (or whatever) and you don't have to engage in prohibition.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW15CGAiscw
Democide - death by government.
If you want to be unarmed when YOUR government decides to start killing you, good luck with that. You idiot. Gun ownership REDUCES crime, the evidence from the U.S.A. is overwhelming.
"As Gun Sales Soar, Gun Crimes Plummet"
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/05/14/disarming-realities-as-gun-sales-soar-gun-crimes-plummet/
Still, don't let the FACTS get in the way of your religiously held (i.e. insane) belief system.
3D printed guns are a long way off from being able to click print and create a functioning, useful firearm. It's much easier to create a makeshift firearm using more traditional tools. 3D printing isn't as easy as people make it seem. Most people 3D printing firearms will probably do it just for fun, and probably aren't looking to hurt anyone. They probably have a better chance of hurting themselves when it blows up after 10 shots. If they want to use it to hurt someone else, there are much easier ways of obtaining a weapon.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Unfortunately education only increases Wis, not Int. So you simply have idiots who think they know a lot. Having said that I still support free education, do you?
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
That approach has worked well in the US.
Give it time. And there's one area where people might be interested in printed firearm: home defense. Sure, I'd much prefer a nice, reliable high caliber revolver. But even a shitty single shot / single use gun will greatly improve my chances over nothing at all, as long as the gun only has a small chance of misfiring or blowing up in my face. And I don't think we're that far off from that reality.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Depends on what you consider 'works'. For instance, we have a prohibition on murder in the US. It does not make murder go away, it does not 100% stop it, but it does shift the risk/reward in a way that significantly reduces it.
This is not a good example, as there are no societies which "allow" murder with which to compare.
You're being disingenuous. Much of the control of private firearms involves the _sale_ or transport of the weapons. Few home workshops, and few home gun smiths, can make a reliable extended magazine or rile action from scratch, they'd require extensive training in precision machining. But now people like Cody Wilson are publishing designs to make exactly such mechanisms for AR-15 equivalent assault rifles ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... )
That approach has worked well in the US.
It hasn't been tried here, so how could it work?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You cunt feminists government needs to go.
Prohibition works pretty well over here in Australia. ~0.5% of the US' yearly incidents of firearm deaths (~9% adjusted per-capita). Violent crime overall is also 1/5th of that in the States.
The rules on firearms seem pretty fair - you need a reason to have one. If it's a concealable classification (like a pistol), you are assessed yearly on your ability to operate it and whether you still have a good reason to keep it in an activated state.
The problem with that idea is that it assumes that firearms are something that are uncommon or rare in the first place. Firearms are incredibly easy for anyone to produce with or without a 3D printer. A used drill press, lathe, or CNC costs the same as a good 3D printer. The scary black rifles like the AR-15 and AK-47s can partly be made with nothing more than a jig and a Dremel or a drill press.
But you are right in that it may be a good idea depending on the country. Australia doesn't have a multi billion dollar drug and contraband smuggling economy walking across its borders every year from Mexico.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
DIY manufacturing ammo is way easier than firearms.
Bullets just require a mould, which anyone can buy or make, and some wheel weights, sailing weights, or lead from any number of sources, and a cheap gas furnace.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
How do you make the rifled barrels for your AR-15s and AK-47s?
In the US you may be able to easily buy one but in Australia getting a barrel seems to be just as hard as getting a full gun (at least from my understanding)
Although there aren't any high-profile cases of 3D printed weapons being used in crimes in the country
"High-profile" might be a bit redundant. I doubt any crime involving a 3D printed weapon will get treated as "low profile" for a while yet.
Or it could just be the author's fancy way of saying "I haven't heard of any such cases."
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
True, the difference is not in the gun itself, but in the means of production. A 3D printer requires little skill to operate (or soon will), lowering the bar to making a gun for most people. People making home made guns with a CNC machine or even by hand has not proven to be a big problem in most countries. It isn't clear yet if 3D printed guns will be a problem or not, but it seems like law makers want to get in ahead of time.
Plus it means they can throw some extra charges at anyone they arrest who happens to own a 3D printer. Law enforcement is always looking for new ways to apply some additional stress on people it questions, even if most of the charges are eventually dropped as completely baseless.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
it's control of the 3-D printers they're after... ultimate aim is to have them DRM'd so you can't pirate shapes...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
You missed the explosive in the bullet. Which is kindof the point.
You can ban something and work on removing the desire for the banned thing at the same time, which is what Australia has been doing since their gun control laws were enacted. It appears to be working exceptionally well.
The rest of the developed world seems to find the opposite is true, and judging by their number of gun deaths, something seems to be working.
What is the religion of Islam ??? Is religion is right ???
http://twainban.blogspot.com/2015/03/what-is-islam-why-islam.html
Or I can go to Home Depot buy some black pipe and a nail and I have a gun.
Gun ownership REDUCES crime, the evidence from the U.S.A. is overwhelming.
Oh, yeah, definitely overwhelming. The homicide rate in the US is only, what, four times that of Australia's? Must mean Australia has four times the guns! Er, wait, no that's not right. Maybe you guys are using them wrong?
Still, don't let the FACTS get in the way of your religiously held (i.e. insane) belief system.
Couldn't have said it better.
It's sad what's happened to Australia. Used to be I would look up to Australia as a nation of free men. Now it's an island full of pussified babies suckling at the government's teat. Many things Americans enjoy are banned or heavily restricted or censored: porn, video games, guns. Guys, what happened? Ozzies used to be so tough.
I don't think that plastic will ever be a reasonable material for making a firearm, no matter how good the printer gets. Otherwise we would see somebody making plastic guns using industrial injection molding methods. But all firearms on the market and even those produced in basements are pretty much completely made out of metal. Some use wood or plastic, but usually only in decorative pieces, or the stock of a rifle, and definitely not in the barrel or chamber (pardon my terminology if I'm using words incorrectly). The only really viable means to 3D print a firearm is via something like laser sintering, and even with the patents expiring, the cost of those machines will still be in the 10's of thousands of dollars. If somebody is willing to spend $35,000 to produce guns, then 3D printing is definitely not the most efficient way of doing it. Sure prices will come down, but so will the prices of all the other methods of manufacturing firearms, which means that 3D printing will likely never be the best way to do it. 3D printing is great for one-off prototypes, but once you want something resilient that can last, and that doesn't take huge amount of resources to make, you pretty much have to move to other production methods. That being said, I can definitely see 3D printers being used for some parts of the production, but possibly just for making molds for more traditional methods to be used in the actual production.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Having said that I still support free education, do you?
Yes. And Health Care, too, just in case you're wondering. As opposed to Health Insurance.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Why are 3D printed firearm parts any different than CNC milled firearm parts? The CNC milled ones are likely more accurate too.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
It has been tried its called drug prohibition and it failed miserably. All prohibitions fail. 80 million Americans want guns and nothing will really stop them from having them. If they prohibit them then 80 million americans will decide to be criminals.
You send someone a couple of bitcoins and he ships it to you.
You have to love the Internet! Or are they going to pass laws banning the Internet and bitcoin?
It's working for the internet as well. Give it enough time and no aussie is ever going to wish they could learn anything about the world outside Oz. Ignorance may not be strength, but it is safe.
The issue with this is that you are only looking at firearm death's.
First, there are close to 2.2million guns in private ownership in Australia.
The numbers you should look at are overall crime rates. Something that I cant seem to find a number on. Guns in private hands reduce overall crime, not deaths by firearm or just violent crime. From the Armed lady that stops a rape to the armed grandma that stops a robbery, all crime is effected.
You use your cnc machine to manufacture a long bore drilling machine and a button rifling machine. Both of those machines are fairly simple and would be easy to manufacture once you have a cnc mill.
I'd be less concerned about someone 3D printing a gun out of plastic and more concerned by the fact that Chechen's have been making them from scrap metal in their basements for the past 100 years.
There is no such thing as free education. There is education that someone else pays for, but anyone who believes government education is free is an economic illiterate.
Didn't I read somewhere that the rate of rape in AU is like 3X that of the US? I guess the aussies like their women unarmed. With pretty much every US state now having some form of CCW, that particular crime has gotten pretty dangerous here.
Given that education is unquestionably of a net benefit to society it's really more of an investment. Does that appease your preconceptions?
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
Precision, huh?
Like the type you'd get when using a shovel as raw material?
There are all sorts of places around the world where the legal system has broken down to the point the only deterrent against murder would be the victim's allies taking vengeance
Even within the US we have historical examples of where murder was either effectively legal or outright legal provided provided the parties involved were of the correct types.
*nod* which is why I suspect such a ban would not work in the US (culture + penetration), but might make sense in other countries that have other backgrounds and situations. My general point was not to say gun prohibition is always a good idea, but that prohibition can work or not depending on the situation and thus such rules need to be evaluated on a case by case basis.
In a perfect world every criminal would 3d print their guns. Think how much safer we would all be after their plastic weapons blow up in their faces!
The rest of us would build them from metal using lathes. Imagine a world were everyone (well everyone now that the criminals have removed themselves) has that kind of DIY skills!
Why the hell would anyone want to stop the criminals from offing themsleves?
It's rather funny the only thing slashdot could do is give you a -1. They couldn't actually counter your argument though.
Most of the rest of the developed world reports reports homicides only after convictions which lowers their apparent crime rate to a fraction of its true value. In the US any homicide using a firearm whether justified or not counts as a gun death. When our police shoot someone in the back who is fleeing, that counts as a gun death.
Which doesn't explain the orders-of-magnitude difference in rates, or historical comparisons...
Few home workshops, and few home gun smiths, can make a reliable extended magazine or rile action from scratch, they'd require extensive training in precision machining. But now people like Cody Wilson are publishing designs to make exactly such mechanisms for AR-15 equivalent assault rifles
You can mail order 80% finished lower receivers for AR-15s. To finish them is not very difficult, little more than "punch holes here" and "shave off this much metal here". This is the "firearm" portion of the gun. The rest of the gun (trigger mechanism, upper receiver, furniture) are all legally mail order as well with no background check.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
"Fair" means the government has to prove you shouldn't have one. But that's because in the USA, we have this quaint notion that government's powers are derived from the consent of the governed, not the other way around.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
because it is not true as you could easily have found out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
FTFY. This is what happened when specific gun laws banning "Saturday night specials" went into effect in the USA. They made sure the poor, especially blacks and hispanics, didn't have any cheap guns to protect themselves.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Have gnu, will travel.
But the rapes still happen, meaning unless everyone's armed, the crimes still continue. If people are scared, just get a dog. Problem solved, and you won't accidentally shoot a loved one in the face.
All for the low low price of a massive increase in violent gun deaths!
Or just get a dog. Unless you are always going to be sober, awake, and not incapacitated through illness or injury, your gun won't save you.
There was no argument to counter....
Countries with less guns have less killings of all types. Simpletons like you never bother with facts, just made up scenarios.
Hahahahaha
Are you some kind of retard?
Oh of course, you're an American. Facts and logic are of no concern to you.
Yep, take your dog to work, so that it can guard you when you walk to your car in a dark empty parking lot. Or better yet, take your dog shopping. Take your dog everywhere. It will fit in your pocket!
An ar-15 is fairly complicated to make from scratch. But rifling a barrel is something 5hat pre-dates the industrial revolution and can easily be done by hand. But you don't need rifling to kill someone at close range.
Because you said so not because there are an valid facts to back that up.
Last time i checked none of the first world countries were orders of magnitude from each other in homicide rates. Next time learn what an order of magnitude is before you use it like you know what it means.
See the above comment that you cant just directly compare statistics because there is no normalization in data collection between countries. Like others have said a large number of countries do not record a homicide as a homicide until they have a conviction. It's common knowledge that the vast majority of crime go unsolved and only some smaller percentage of those ever result in an actual conviction. The US is also in the midst of a raging drug war caused by the same people who think banning guns are a good idea. When the option to go to jail for life for being in possession of an ounce of heroin or murdering a snitch is presented which one do you think most people choose. Apples and oranges comparison to try and compare murder rates between countries untill a standard for recording is agreed upon.
Why the attack on America? Are you jealous? Why do you give a rat's ass what we do?
No one with any brains cares about gun deaths just deaths in general. The fact is that US drug laws incentivize murder.
Except that very few people have the skills to hand-forge such a part, or access to the heavy-duty equipment to set up a production line for it. 3D printing is vastly more available.
But the rapes still happen, meaning unless everyone's armed, the crimes still continue. If people are scared, just get a dog. Problem solved, and you won't accidentally shoot a loved one in the face.
The point of not having as many gun control laws is that criminals don't know who has a gun. Having laws that prohibit people from carrying a gun, guarantees to a criminal that their victim will be unarmed.
The point is that it doesn't need to last. It only has to work once; enough to scare off or incapacitate a burglar. There is already a design for a 3D printed gun that is sort of reliable for a single shot.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Just what we need, OSHA for bad guys.
All I know is that when I had to pay for my own education, I took it much more seriously. I also learned English well enough to know that nothing in my missive alluded to any preconception that needed appeasement. Society, as an abstraction, has no rights as such. Only individuals do. The person who makes the investment reaps the benefits. Education should be a private matter between individuals. In the case of minor children, their parents should contract for educational services. Maybe then schools would actually turn out educated individuals instead of being glorified day care centers.
Yes, because keeping the poor uneducated is such a great idea. Not classist at all.
Unless you make a trigger it's an 'other gun' and is 10 years federal.
Yes, I am planning on draining the next gun buy backs funds with 100 zip guns. And making a 5 figure payday in the process.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yes, there are societies out in the world where murder is socially accepted. In some cases, it's expected.
Are other sorts of violent deaths acceptable to you?
Well, there's the difference between Oz and the US. In the US, we have these things called 'rights', which are inherent in every citizen. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are a collection of rules that protect these rights from the government- this is one reason why the 18th Amendment failed so spectacularly. One of these rights says that we get to keep things that go bang. That's why we don't have to justify owning a gun. A citizen shouldn't have to justify anything to his government.
Is my dog always going to be awake, uninjured and in the same room as me?
The guy who did that is an experienced manufacturer of AK-47 rifles, with access to all the right tools. The AK-47 is not a "precision" firearm to begin with, the fit and finish are pretty loose compared to other rifles, leading to it's legendary reliability.
Why is this a point at all? The US has a public education system. Are we talking about some other country?
You can do it yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The 'forge' is where the metal stock you make into a part is made. Any non-toy CNC machine can cut mild steel. Heat treatment shops, just heat treat, they don't care what the part is (unless it's particularly cool/sick).
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Different countries also have different social, political and cultural dynamics . You really need to make a distinction between evaluating data to make a claim that "X is better than Y" or "X is improving crime at a faster rate than Y" and claiming that if something works in X will work in Y. Without control there is no comparison.
The closest thing to control you are going to get is to look at each country as unique systems and measure its performance against past data. And you know what happens when you stick to such a methodology? There isn't a single study case in the world which has observed any measurable benefit (defined as decrease in violent crime or murder) from adding or removing guns in society. That is to say - guns don't matter, so can we please stop wasting tax money on snake oil ?
Here's some countries with "more guns"
Serbia - gun ownership 70%, murder rate 1.1/100000
Switzerland - gun ownership - 46%, murder rate: 0.6/100000
Saudi Arabia - gun ownership 35%, murder rate 0.8/100000
Sweden - gun ownership 31.6%, murder rate 0.8/100000
France - gun ownership 31.2%, murder rate 1.1/100000
Here's some countries with "less guns":
Tunisia: 0.1% gun ownership, 2.2/100000 murders
Singapore: 0.2% gun ownership, 0.2/100000 murders
Fiji: 0.5% gun ownership, 4.4/100000 murders
North Korea; 0.6% gun ownership, 5.2/100000 murders
Lithuania: 0.1% gun ownership, 6.7/100000 murders
Lithuania 0.7% gun ownership, 6.7/100000 murder ( 202 absolute )
Here's some countries with similar murder rate to the USA (4.7/100000):
Niger - 0.7% gun ownership
Latvia - 19% gun ownership
Yemen - 54% gun ownership
Thailand - 15% gun ownership
Pattern? None.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
What's most annoying is that we drew an imaginary line on Earth, called it USA and we treat it as uniformly behaving entity. Zoom in a little into the imaginary lines called states and there's no correlation either:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
Didn't I read somewhere that the rate of rape in AU is like 3X that of the US?
You're trying to compare apples and oranges. It's hard enough to compare any two US states given the huge differences in reporting methods and laws on rape, and damn difficult to compare any US state and Australia. There is very little difference between Australian states in law on rape, the gathering of crime statistics (all based on convictions), and police training and qualification. Most Australians who visit the US are stunned by your bizarre laws and "police". It's not rape if you're married?!! Some states vote to see which untrained people get to play police!!
If you only get your news from Slashdot you might believe a growing percentage of Australians don't think we have a cultural problem with attitudes to women (unfortunately not a majority), and that that's the root cause of the rape problem (though not only women get raped). If so, you'd be mistaken.
One major difference is that is it's rare for Australians to propose that arming women will reduce the problem - quite the reverse. I suspect that may have something to do with huge difference in the amount of money gun manufacturers make in the two countries. Apropos of little - which industries fund the anti-gun lobbyists? (bullet proof vest are illegal for citizens here - so I'm guessing it isn't the ballistic protection manufacturers).
Oh and you might want to take a look at the huge percentage of "sex offenders" in the US. Given the bizarre laws you have in many States it's hard to tell whether you simply cannot be trusted around other people or you're just mostly batshit crazy religious nutjobs. Probably a bit of both.
The problem with that idea is that it assumes that firearms are something that are uncommon or rare in the first place. Firearms are incredibly easy for anyone to produce with or without a 3D printer. A used drill press, lathe, or CNC costs the same as a good 3D printer. The scary black rifles like the AR-15 and AK-47s can partly be made with nothing more than a jig and a Dremel or a drill press.
Agreed. I've seen plenty of firearms in PNG and Indonesia that were made by people without lathes. Not as lethal as those turned out by trained and well equipped gunsmiths - but the people they were used to shoot looked just as dead to me.
Australia doesn't have a multi billion dollar drug and contraband smuggling economy walking across its borders every year from Mexico.
Not from Mexico, no. And not one way either (we ship drugs both ways - hello Rio, how's the marmalade? - hello France, how's the green skins? - etc). It's true we don't ship a lot of guns to Mexico. We do bust large quantities of drugs coming in (occasionally going out), and while we do blame China and North Korea for the origin of some of those drugs - we also recognize they are just trying to compete to satisfy the demand. Australia does have a history as a being used to route weapons through to other parts of the world - but as far as I know Mexico isn't one of those places (I suspect Virginia has a monopoly on that).
How do you make the rifled barrels for your AR-15s and AK-47s? In the US you may be able to easily buy one but in Australia getting a barrel seems to be just as hard as getting a full gun (at least from my understanding)
CNC = millions of dollars and can produce a viable firearm that can spit out thousands of bullets without blowing up in your hand or face. 3D print = less that a thousand and the firearm is proportionally reliable. A congressman told me this once: Laws are deemed to be for this or that. It is all just smoke and mirrors for the real purpose. Really I can make a zip gun for a lot less than that and shoot 12 gauge shells for less than $20 and is not likely to explode in my hand. I could make one out of plastic that would shoot a .22 .25 or 9mm round and not blow up my hand.. I could find all the materials I need at your local Acme hardware store.
why would I spend a grand or two on a machine that can print a plastic gun that may or may not blow my hand off when instead I can go to bunnings and buy maybe 20 bucks worth of bits to fire bullets with ZERO risk. Care to ban every hardware store, auto wreckers, machine shop, plumbing supplies store, rubbish tip, etc. in the country?
Just more examples of our government wasting our money. Move along, nothing to see here.
One major difference is that is it's rare for Australians to propose that arming women will reduce the problem - quite the reverse.
The only possible reason for rejecting the clear logic of self-defense is if you are under the mistaken impression that women are too scatterbrained to learn how to operate a simple mechanical device. So which is it, do you reject the notion of self-defense or are you a misogynist?
One major difference is that is it's rare for Australians to propose that arming women will reduce the problem - quite the reverse.
The only possible reason for rejecting the clear logic of self-defense is if you are under the mistaken impression that women are too scatterbrained to learn how to operate a simple mechanical device. So which is it, do you reject the notion of self-defense or are you a misogynist?
You logic is flawed. If self-defense is a requirement for any section of society: only those prepared to shoot first will benefit; you can kiss civilisation goodbye. And before you trot out that tired old cliche about how you "can't rely on the police", maybe you should make the system work before advocating the return to a system that was abandoned in favour of law and order.
The right to self-defense is not seriously questioned by any valid system of ethics. It is absolute. Anyone who would deprive free men of the means of self-defense cannot be taken seriously about any ethical question. You cannot be faulted for not having learned this given your heritage is as a subject of a monarch instead of as a free and sovereign citizen. We Americans have had these concepts enshrined in law since the beginning of our republic, which under any definition is "civilization." When your logic leads to illogical conclusions, it is time to check your premises.
The right to self-defense is not seriously questioned by any valid system of ethics.
Translation: Any system of "ethics" that contradicts my beliefs I deem invalid
Reality: No "system of ethics" denies you the right to self-defence, but I'll ignore that by redefining "self defence" to mean "my right to carry firearms" (and relegate police duties to traffic control only).
Anyone who would deprive free men of the means of self-defense
Strawman: No guns != No self-defence
Anyone who would deprive free men of the means of any means of "self-defense" TFTFY
Can you point to the issue of Hansard showing the legislation that says I can't exercise "self-defense"? No? (there's a surprise).
We Americans have had these concepts enshrined in law since the beginning of our republic, which under any definition is "civilization."
Ironically - that is an excellent example of flawed logic. Did you miss the "well regulated" bit of your constitution? How's that confirmation bias working out for you?
When your logic leads to illogical conclusions, it is time to check your premises.
Excellent advice - do try it.
From the land where we've had one mass shooting. Which was, before the gun restrictions. A country where we still have a "right" to self-defense - we just don't equate self-defense with arsenals (we just call the police). Obviously us colonial subjects of the Queen would have even less Sandy Hook episodes if guns were not "well regulated" (less tiger attacks if we carried magic tiger rocks, and less rapes in the military if those women had access to firearms). Thanks for the lesson in logic.