.... no. you are wrong. jesus, you don't even have to be a gun guy to figure this out.
you're transferring chemical energy into kinetic energy. a more dense object will lose less energy en route than a less dense object, because if you assume the same mass, the less dense object will have a greater surface area / frontal area, causing much more drag.
lead is also useful thanks to its terminal performance, that is, it deforms so that more of that kinetic energy is delivered to the target, rather than being conserved as the projectile travels through the target. Terminal performance is less about poking holes in things and more about delivering considerable destructive energy to specific areas.
bullet striations do not uniquely identify a firearm.
the only occasions where that CAN be used to uniquely identify a firearm involve some sort of marring in the chamber/barrel unique to that gun (that is, actual physical damage), or if the firearm was shoddily manufactured (that would more or less count as physical damage).
thing about modern manufacturing techniques is that one barrel is pretty much identical to another barrel off the same line.
now, you can use those striations to shorten the list of possible firearms -- the direction of the rifling can be determined, if you're clever you can find the rifling rate, and obviously the type of rifling (number of leads/lands, their shape etc). but.. to narrow it down any more than a list of firearm types?
That's voodoo.
You can say "this bullet may have been fired from that gun", but you can't say "this bullet WAS fired from that gun". It's a huge difference, one being circumstantial and the other conclusive.
First of all, no, that'd shatter and fall apart when it hit something.
Second of all, is it REALLY that hard to melt lead and pour it into a round mould?
No, no it's not, it's lightyears more simple to do than 3D print a vastly inferior final product. Do you even know why lead is used for bullets? It's dense. Lots of energy, little volume. How dense is powdered sintered metal? Not very? It's a shitty projectile.
That still won't work for a barrel. This plastic.. mess.. I wouldn't trust it as a barrel. The inner surface of the bore WILL melt and deform, on the first shot. Stuff gets hot!
There's many, many different kinds of "strength" in a material. Plastic isn't a good choice for a high-temperature/pressure/friction environment.. and forget about rifling. Aluminum would have some pretty awful spalling I'd imagine, porcelain won't take the pressure.
The problem is that a 3-D printed gun is completely unremarkable.
It's not the easiest way to make a gun. It's not the best way to make a gun. It's not the simplest way to make a gun. It's not the cheapest way to make a gun.
The gun won't be the strongest, most accurate, safest.. nothing.
Guns ARE accessible to anyone. Hell, Kirk made one by himself on an alien planet!.. but more realistically, this is ancient-fucking-tech here. I could cobble a gun together from shit in my basement in a day or two, if I needed to. Making it go BANG! would take a little longer, but, gosh. Here's the thing about that part.... it's pretty damned easy to make yourself some blackpowder. Hard part is just measuring things well, honestly.. well, that, and exactly how primitive you have to get. The sulfur may be hard to find.... but potassium nitrate? Lotta ways to make that.. and charcoal, well, that's ubiquitous.
Er, I'm pretty sure what Bloomberg is actually getting at is that:
Security is going to be more invasive and pervasive than in the "olden days", because TERRORISM! It'll be unconstitutional, and that'll have to change, because GUNS ARE BAD! We're not going to just focus on Muslims, because THE CONSTITUTION!
In short, Bloomberg is just being his assholish self again, saying a whole lot of nothing. I'd wager he was upset the bomber wasn't a right-wing white middle-aged American male mad about health care or our black President. He made that prediction about the Times Square bomber almost immediately, I can only imagine he's just waiting for his prophecy to come true so he can howl and scream about these horrible right-wing evil hicks out there.
It's still better than the prequel trilogy -- Super Mario Bros is at least so disjointedly fucking confusing as to keep you wondering. Still better writing than Lucas's terrible "romantic" banter. Just.. awful.
You arbitrarily change the definition of a word to what you deem it should be, and then when confronted, you argue that your definition is the broadly accepted usage of the word (which is news to at least a few of us) and that since language is a living thing that anyone who disagrees with your new invented definition is a dinosaur who just needs to like, get with the times, daddy-o.
And they, too immigrated onto this hunk of land. Maybe they were first, but there's really no such thing as a non-immigrant anywhere but, well, a little bit of Africa and/or the Middle East. Everywhere else? The people living there came from somewhere else, it's just a matter of how long ago it happened.
50% oxygen? well.. people on oxygen get that, so i'll assume it wouldn't be fatal.. it would make the 4th of July a little more interesting. and i'd probably kill myself the first time i saw a hawk-sized mosquito.
The cabin is a fairly large area and can take in air from the exterior. The risk isn't nearly what you make it out to be, unless someone's carrying a few gallon jugs onto the plane -- but realistically, without TSA and their liquid restrictions, *someone carrying several gallons of shit would never get on a plane anyway*. Because it's strange, and someone would ask "why are you carrying 3 gallons of liquid" and the game would be over.
But, yeah. Cabin air isn't enclosed, it's not a tight space. There is air exchange taking place at all times during the flight.. just not much when at cruising altitude. It can be adjusted, though, and there's always those wonderful oxygen masks that can fall from the overhead bins. Liquids have never been a danger, except in the hollywood-addled minds of people who make too much money for too little work to ever grow a working understanding of how the real world actually fucking works as opposed to their gilded fantasies.
There's no real danger from liquid explosives so I'm not shocked the agents don't much give a shit. That's not a "oh the terr'rists aren't going to use them", that's a "oh, no, sorry but unless that liquid is magic it's not dangerous to anyone but you"
explosives explode because they break apart chemical bonds and form gases that occupy a larger area, by far, than the original stuff -- and get quite hot in the process, which also means more expanding. liquids aren't as dense as solids, there just isn't the energy density available to do much of anything dangerous with liquid explosives.
LIQUID EXPLOSIVES ARE NOT AND WERE NEVER A DANGER, THEY ARE FAR LESS ENERGETIC THAN SOLID EXPLOSIVES AND FAR MORE DANGEROUS TO TRANSPORT.
Anyone trying to blow up a plane with a liquid explosive is either going to blow up on the way to the airport, or do just enough damage to hurt themselves and no one else.
The whole liquid restriction bullshit is just that, bullshit. And furthermore Susan I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn that it was encouraged by the vendors on the 'safe' side of the security checkpoints. I can't fathom how much their sales of beverages must have increased..
The glass is the only dangerous part, booze really isn't very flammable. Unless you're talking real high-proof stuff, it's more likely to extinguish a flame than get caught on fire
It's not really flammable. Yeah, no. Until you start getting to high-proof stuff, it *won't* burn (unless you throw it into a hot skillet and light it, the heat will evaporate it quickly and the alcohol VAPOR will light, but the liquid form? no dice brah, you can't light your shot of bourbon on fire). 151 will burn if lit, and pure grain alcohol obviously burns REALLY well, but 80 proof? 90? That won't burn.
Throw it in my face, go ahead. The only thing that'll hurt is possibly a stinging in my eyes. Now, try to light it, and while you're fumbling with a tiny lighter thinking that just by bringing it near me that I'll combust like in the movies?... haha, well, go ahead, that would be fucking hilarious.
I get cicada killer wasps in my yard, last 4 years or so.
Yeah, it's kinda scary when they all come out. They swarm the lawn, very literally. They tend to not actually hit you, they're pretty agile, fast too.. but JESUS! SWARM OF BEES CIRCLING MY HOUSE! Yeah, little scary.
I let them go, though. They're just gettin their chow on, helpin me keep the cicadas in line (my dog helps with that too...), and to get rid of the wasps would take all kinds of nasty shit I don't want to dump in my lawn if I can help it (fleas one year, couldn't help it. beh).
Stand in middle of lawn surrounded by swarm of buzzing scary bees, pretend you're a super villain. Awesome.
Actually, y'know, I could actually see that. Personally, at least. There is no way that right now I'd eat one (my dog LOVES them, but he's free to them..)..
but once I get good and drunk, well. There is not much that I won't put in my mouth. It doesn't make me proud to say that, but there it is. Only way I'll eat crawfish or sushi, and sometimes maybe I buy beer for the singular purpose of drinking them and eating a can of sardines once I'm a little tipsy, because sardines are actually pretty damn good and healthy once you're too addled to think about what they look and smell like.
There is nothing finer in life than a good mint julep, sitting in the shade of a warm summer day as a calm breeze works its way across the porch and you.
Those types of guns actually really aren't used in many crimes. Too low caliber, too little power, too little reliability... if someone was trying to mug you with a.22 Short derringer, you'd probably not take it too seriously (even though it could potentially kill you).
Those super cheap little guns like that? Usually bought for self defense, usually by people with not a lot of money to spare, who feel a need for some kind of personal defense.
Yep, exactly the sort of people that we should shit on, thanks media. Low income people are SCARY AND DANGEROUS! There could be no possible legitimate purpose for a cheap handgun, none at all, why anyone who can't afford a goddamned Beretta probably *uses drugs*!
Yeah the whole term "Saturday Night Special" was coined by the Dems to stir up fear among Americans, fear of the poor. Also a great way for them to tell the poor that, hey, we know you've got it rough. Stop trying to do anything for yourself. Simply put all your trust in us! That easy! And look, we'll remove your one option for personal protection from the crime in your economically impoverished area! In time you'll understand that the government is responsible for you, and no one else!
You watch too much TV. Guns aren't exactly "traceable", I have to be careful because such things sometimes CAN be done -- but generally there's no actual, reliable way to match a recovered bullet to a specific firearm. Maybe firearm type, and maybe if you're lucky a specific firearm, but generally the only result is a gross list of POSSIBILITIES. Guns are not fingerprints.
Further, there's nothing at all that can be accomplished with a 3D printed gun that can't be done cheaper and easier by some other way that the ATF can't control. That's the long and short of it. There's no situation, at all, ever, where someone would say "I need a gun!" and 3D printed receiver would be their answer.
Slashdot Mirror
.... no. you are wrong. jesus, you don't even have to be a gun guy to figure this out.
you're transferring chemical energy into kinetic energy. a more dense object will lose less energy en route than a less dense object, because if you assume the same mass, the less dense object will have a greater surface area / frontal area, causing much more drag.
lead is also useful thanks to its terminal performance, that is, it deforms so that more of that kinetic energy is delivered to the target, rather than being conserved as the projectile travels through the target. Terminal performance is less about poking holes in things and more about delivering considerable destructive energy to specific areas.
bullet striations do not uniquely identify a firearm.
the only occasions where that CAN be used to uniquely identify a firearm involve some sort of marring in the chamber/barrel unique to that gun (that is, actual physical damage), or if the firearm was shoddily manufactured (that would more or less count as physical damage).
thing about modern manufacturing techniques is that one barrel is pretty much identical to another barrel off the same line.
now, you can use those striations to shorten the list of possible firearms -- the direction of the rifling can be determined, if you're clever you can find the rifling rate, and obviously the type of rifling (number of leads/lands, their shape etc). but.. to narrow it down any more than a list of firearm types?
That's voodoo.
You can say "this bullet may have been fired from that gun", but you can't say "this bullet WAS fired from that gun". It's a huge difference, one being circumstantial and the other conclusive.
POWDERED SINTERED METAL?
First of all, no, that'd shatter and fall apart when it hit something.
Second of all, is it REALLY that hard to melt lead and pour it into a round mould?
No, no it's not, it's lightyears more simple to do than 3D print a vastly inferior final product. Do you even know why lead is used for bullets? It's dense. Lots of energy, little volume. How dense is powdered sintered metal? Not very? It's a shitty projectile.
That still won't work for a barrel. This plastic.. mess.. I wouldn't trust it as a barrel. The inner surface of the bore WILL melt and deform, on the first shot. Stuff gets hot!
There's many, many different kinds of "strength" in a material. Plastic isn't a good choice for a high-temperature/pressure/friction environment.. and forget about rifling. Aluminum would have some pretty awful spalling I'd imagine, porcelain won't take the pressure.
The problem is that a 3-D printed gun is completely unremarkable.
It's not the easiest way to make a gun. It's not the best way to make a gun. It's not the simplest way to make a gun. It's not the cheapest way to make a gun.
The gun won't be the strongest, most accurate, safest.. nothing.
Guns ARE accessible to anyone. Hell, Kirk made one by himself on an alien planet!.. but more realistically, this is ancient-fucking-tech here. I could cobble a gun together from shit in my basement in a day or two, if I needed to. Making it go BANG! would take a little longer, but, gosh. Here's the thing about that part.... it's pretty damned easy to make yourself some blackpowder. Hard part is just measuring things well, honestly.. well, that, and exactly how primitive you have to get. The sulfur may be hard to find.... but potassium nitrate? Lotta ways to make that.. and charcoal, well, that's ubiquitous.
Er, I'm pretty sure what Bloomberg is actually getting at is that:
Security is going to be more invasive and pervasive than in the "olden days", because TERRORISM!
It'll be unconstitutional, and that'll have to change, because GUNS ARE BAD!
We're not going to just focus on Muslims, because THE CONSTITUTION!
In short, Bloomberg is just being his assholish self again, saying a whole lot of nothing. I'd wager he was upset the bomber wasn't a right-wing white middle-aged American male mad about health care or our black President. He made that prediction about the Times Square bomber almost immediately, I can only imagine he's just waiting for his prophecy to come true so he can howl and scream about these horrible right-wing evil hicks out there.
everyone in tennessee believes they are a professional driver on a closed course
It's still better than the prequel trilogy -- Super Mario Bros is at least so disjointedly fucking confusing as to keep you wondering. Still better writing than Lucas's terrible "romantic" banter. Just.. awful.
You arbitrarily change the definition of a word to what you deem it should be, and then when confronted, you argue that your definition is the broadly accepted usage of the word (which is news to at least a few of us) and that since language is a living thing that anyone who disagrees with your new invented definition is a dinosaur who just needs to like, get with the times, daddy-o.
I mean I don't what I.. wow.
Though, to be fair, some animal crap is delicious, I rather like honey
And they, too immigrated onto this hunk of land. Maybe they were first, but there's really no such thing as a non-immigrant anywhere but, well, a little bit of Africa and/or the Middle East. Everywhere else? The people living there came from somewhere else, it's just a matter of how long ago it happened.
50% oxygen? well.. people on oxygen get that, so i'll assume it wouldn't be fatal..
it would make the 4th of July a little more interesting.
and i'd probably kill myself the first time i saw a hawk-sized mosquito.
The cabin is a fairly large area and can take in air from the exterior. The risk isn't nearly what you make it out to be, unless someone's carrying a few gallon jugs onto the plane -- but realistically, without TSA and their liquid restrictions, *someone carrying several gallons of shit would never get on a plane anyway*.
Because it's strange, and someone would ask "why are you carrying 3 gallons of liquid" and the game would be over.
But, yeah. Cabin air isn't enclosed, it's not a tight space. There is air exchange taking place at all times during the flight.. just not much when at cruising altitude. It can be adjusted, though, and there's always those wonderful oxygen masks that can fall from the overhead bins.
Liquids have never been a danger, except in the hollywood-addled minds of people who make too much money for too little work to ever grow a working understanding of how the real world actually fucking works as opposed to their gilded fantasies.
There's no real danger from liquid explosives so I'm not shocked the agents don't much give a shit.
That's not a "oh the terr'rists aren't going to use them", that's a "oh, no, sorry but unless that liquid is magic it's not dangerous to anyone but you"
explosives explode because they break apart chemical bonds and form gases that occupy a larger area, by far, than the original stuff -- and get quite hot in the process, which also means more expanding. liquids aren't as dense as solids, there just isn't the energy density available to do much of anything dangerous with liquid explosives.
REALLY? VALIDITY?
aaaghhhh my head.
LIQUID EXPLOSIVES ARE NOT AND WERE NEVER A DANGER, THEY ARE FAR LESS ENERGETIC THAN SOLID EXPLOSIVES AND FAR MORE DANGEROUS TO TRANSPORT.
Anyone trying to blow up a plane with a liquid explosive is either going to blow up on the way to the airport, or do just enough damage to hurt themselves and no one else.
The whole liquid restriction bullshit is just that, bullshit. And furthermore Susan I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn that it was encouraged by the vendors on the 'safe' side of the security checkpoints. I can't fathom how much their sales of beverages must have increased..
The glass is the only dangerous part, booze really isn't very flammable. Unless you're talking real high-proof stuff, it's more likely to extinguish a flame than get caught on fire
You've never been around liquor, have you?
It's not really flammable. Yeah, no. Until you start getting to high-proof stuff, it *won't* burn (unless you throw it into a hot skillet and light it, the heat will evaporate it quickly and the alcohol VAPOR will light, but the liquid form? no dice brah, you can't light your shot of bourbon on fire). 151 will burn if lit, and pure grain alcohol obviously burns REALLY well, but 80 proof? 90? That won't burn.
Throw it in my face, go ahead. The only thing that'll hurt is possibly a stinging in my eyes. Now, try to light it, and while you're fumbling with a tiny lighter thinking that just by bringing it near me that I'll combust like in the movies?... haha, well, go ahead, that would be fucking hilarious.
I get cicada killer wasps in my yard, last 4 years or so.
Yeah, it's kinda scary when they all come out. They swarm the lawn, very literally. They tend to not actually hit you, they're pretty agile, fast too.. but JESUS! SWARM OF BEES CIRCLING MY HOUSE! Yeah, little scary.
I let them go, though. They're just gettin their chow on, helpin me keep the cicadas in line (my dog helps with that too...), and to get rid of the wasps would take all kinds of nasty shit I don't want to dump in my lawn if I can help it (fleas one year, couldn't help it. beh).
Stand in middle of lawn surrounded by swarm of buzzing scary bees, pretend you're a super villain. Awesome.
Actually, y'know, I could actually see that. Personally, at least. There is no way that right now I'd eat one (my dog LOVES them, but he's free to them..)..
but once I get good and drunk, well. There is not much that I won't put in my mouth. It doesn't make me proud to say that, but there it is.
Only way I'll eat crawfish or sushi, and sometimes maybe I buy beer for the singular purpose of drinking them and eating a can of sardines once I'm a little tipsy, because sardines are actually pretty damn good and healthy once you're too addled to think about what they look and smell like.
That's all fine and good, and I agree wholeheartedly.
That said, I'm.. I'm full. I ate earlier, at home. Naw, really. Thanks but no thanks. I suddenly developed a severe allergy.
There is nothing finer in life than a good mint julep, sitting in the shade of a warm summer day as a calm breeze works its way across the porch and you.
Bullet striations are about as reliable as a lie detector test.
You may as well consult an astrologist.
Those types of guns actually really aren't used in many crimes. Too low caliber, too little power, too little reliability... if someone was trying to mug you with a .22 Short derringer, you'd probably not take it too seriously (even though it could potentially kill you).
Those super cheap little guns like that? Usually bought for self defense, usually by people with not a lot of money to spare, who feel a need for some kind of personal defense.
Yep, exactly the sort of people that we should shit on, thanks media. Low income people are SCARY AND DANGEROUS! There could be no possible legitimate purpose for a cheap handgun, none at all, why anyone who can't afford a goddamned Beretta probably *uses drugs*!
Yeah the whole term "Saturday Night Special" was coined by the Dems to stir up fear among Americans, fear of the poor. Also a great way for them to tell the poor that, hey, we know you've got it rough. Stop trying to do anything for yourself. Simply put all your trust in us! That easy! And look, we'll remove your one option for personal protection from the crime in your economically impoverished area! In time you'll understand that the government is responsible for you, and no one else!
You watch too much TV. Guns aren't exactly "traceable", I have to be careful because such things sometimes CAN be done -- but generally there's no actual, reliable way to match a recovered bullet to a specific firearm. Maybe firearm type, and maybe if you're lucky a specific firearm, but generally the only result is a gross list of POSSIBILITIES. Guns are not fingerprints.
Further, there's nothing at all that can be accomplished with a 3D printed gun that can't be done cheaper and easier by some other way that the ATF can't control. That's the long and short of it. There's no situation, at all, ever, where someone would say "I need a gun!" and 3D printed receiver would be their answer.
It's a curiosity, nothing more.
All these worlds are yours except Europa