|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to mention that they still have to have certain metal parts which are within the guidelines currently in effect for minimum amount of metal in a gun for detection purposes.
Also a gun that fires 6 times before becoming unusable that is printed from a printer costing between 5k and 10k really isn't something I find to be a horrible problem.
Even if this develops into a real issue (which may be an eventuality rather than a possibility, if 3d printing really takes off), it's nothing legislation can't address. We already restrict what can be printed on paper (see: printers which will automatically refuse to print full-size images of circulating currency).
Does building a self-made gun in your garage make gun laws obsolete (see zip guns)? This isn't the first time it's been possible to build your own gun.
Very easy to make a gun in your garage Owen Sub Machine-gun.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Long answer: Sometimes things happen that make certain laws harder to enforce, but those things don't usually negate the reasons that those laws came to exist in the first place. In this case, it definitely doesn't do that—in fact, some would argue that anything that makes it easier for people to own guns is all the more reason to have well-thought-out, well-written laws about owning and using them.
Short answer: no.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do homemade bombs make bomb laws obsolete?
Obsolete? No far from it, but it is troubling much in the same way a home made bomb is. I am less concerned about the individual and more with criminal organizations though. For a modest investment a small group of guys could get into the untracable and disposable small arms business, and no the firing pin alone won't set off a metal detector in most cases. The design in the story included extra, unneeded metal to pass minimum legal requirements.
The reality is legislation much like a lot of of the current gun laws will be useful in preventing accidents and crimes of passion...but dedicated criminals will certainly be abusing this...just like they do currently with black market fire arms and the like.
How robust would a printed gun be? Could it sustain being fired more than once? What are the chances of a misfire?
How expensive are 3D printers anyway?
Early designs had one or two fires at best...the one making the news today alleged it could fire a six round Mag using a new heat resistant polymer.
Most states track fire arms by serial number, have a background check and accumulate that in a data base going forward should the firearm be sold.
|
|
Not to mention that they still have to have certain metal parts which are within the guidelines currently in effect for minimum amount of metal in a gun for detection purposes.
Also a gun that fires 6 times before becoming unusable that is printed from a printer costing between 5k and 10k really isn't something I find to be a horrible problem.The 6 times will probably improve.
And the firing pin is sufficient to detect?
It isn't just the firing pin. In another article about this gun it mentioned metal used for several parts including the firing pin. I would assume that part of the barrel and where the actual firing happens in the gun is metal to be able to withstand the pressure of the bullet being triggered. This is really not very different from the old glocks that were made of mostly plastic, except that instead of buying it from a shop (or off the street) for a grand you would print it out of your 10,000k printer and still need a few extra metal parts to install in it to make it fire.
I would like to see a way to make them traceable though. I would feel more confident that thugs wouldn't have a local disposable gun seller on the block if they could be traced back to the printer.
|
Guns are the least of the concerns 3D printers raise. Anybody who wants a firearm in the US can already obtain one fairly easily on the street or at a local flea market. Cash transaction, no questions asked.
The true upheaval comes with intellectual property. Combine a 3D printer with a 3D scanner or downloaded schematics and you will be able to make copies of virtually anything. Think Napster for commercial goods.
Games Workshop has already filed lawsuits.
Link
Not to mention that they still have to have certain metal parts which are within the guidelines currently in effect for minimum amount of metal in a gun for detection purposes.
Also a gun that fires 6 times before becoming unusable that is printed from a printer costing between 5k and 10k really isn't something I find to be a horrible problem.The 6 times will probably improve.
And the firing pin is sufficient to detect?
It isn't just the firing pin. In another article about this gun it mentioned metal used for several parts including the firing pin. I would assume that part of the barrel and where the actual firing happens in the gun is metal to be able to withstand the pressure of the bullet being triggered. This is really not very different from the old glocks that were made of mostly plastic, except that instead of buying it from a shop (or off the street) for a grand you would print it out of your 10,000k printer and still need a few extra metal parts to install in it to make it fire.
I would like to see a way to make them traceable though. I would feel more confident that thugs wouldn't have a local disposable gun seller on the block if they could be traced back to the printer.
That is not true. The creator clearly stated he added a metal part that was not needed to the reciever to ensure that his design was legal. By law a firearm must contain enough metal to be picked up on a standard metal detector. The plastics do infact hold up to the heat and pressure and for the record is of little issue in any part of the weapons save the barrel which is in fact made of plastic in this case. This is completely different from a glock which has a plastic grip and body but has an all metal reciever and barrel assembly as well as trigger and firing pin. This gun can be printed lock, stock and barrel except the firing pin which can be crafted in minutes from a standard finishing nail. There is also absolutely no way to make these traceable...the cat is really out of the bag here.
Any small but well organized gang that can scratch together enough money can now print their own untraceable guns cheaply and effectively after the initial investment. I am a gun enthusiast and own several firearms....and let me tell you, this is a very scary proposition, and there is really no way to legislate it away. These things will be used in gun crime and probably in the next two years.
|
|
It's still going to be quite a while before you can scan and print anything that isn't just a blob of plastic. Or a couple of easily assembled blobs of plastic.
Sure, gaming miniatures will be easy.Computer chips less so.
They've been printing electronics for years now. It no longer makes the news.
Items of biological complexity are already being printed.
Link
Guns are the least of the concerns 3D printers raise. Anybody who wants a firearm in the US can already obtain one fairly easily on the street or at a local flea market. Cash transaction, no questions asked.
The true upheaval comes with intellectual property. Combine a 3D printer with a 3D scanner or downloaded schematics and you will be able to make copies of virtually anything. Think Napster for commercial goods.
Games Workshop has already filed lawsuits.
Link
Its not that you can get a gun...its that you can now get a gun that walks through any metal detector assuming non-magentic shell casings, and is compeltely untracable. No serial number at all...you could literally walk into a court house pop off six shots wihout getting caught in screening and then drop the thing on the ground because nobody would know where it came from.
|
|
Its not that you can get a gun...its that you can now get a gun that walks through any metal detector assuming non-magentic shell casings, and is compeltely untracable. No serial number at all...you could literally walk into a court house pop off six shots wihout getting caught in screening and then drop the thing on the ground because nobody would know where it came from.
A gun bought with cash on the street has enough holes punched in the paperwork trail to prevent the government from identifying the end user. The paperwork will most likely dead end with a private sale or stolen weapon, possibly years prior to the crime.
Non-magnetic weapons are a different matter. At this point in time anybody with the resources to print one most likely has the resources to manufacture one by other means. (casting with high performance resins for example.)
My guess: the issues will be addressed, to a certain extent, as a side effect of DRM implementation.
I support "common sense" 3-D printer legislation. There is no need for anybody to have high capacity plastic magazines for their printer. All 3-D printers should be registered and their owners on a list. Barrel shrouds and thumbhole stocks should be illegal for printers, as it makes it easier for mass printings to take place.
|
|
I support "common sense" 3-D printer legislation. There is no need for anybody to have high capacity plastic magazines for their printer. All 3-D printers should be registered and their owners on a list. Barrel shrouds and thumbhole stocks should be illegal for printers, as it makes it easier for mass printings to take place.
I'm sure most manufacturers will fully support your opinion.
I'm sure most individuals wanting freedom to produce their own goods will not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So some dork figured out how to make a really crappy gun that is worse then almost any gun made in the last few hundred years, and this is some sort of technological revolution?
Someone needs to tell this guy (and the media) it has been possible to make stuff WITHOUT a 3d printer for a long time now.
I support "common sense" 3-D printer legislation. There is no need for anybody to have high capacity plastic magazines for their printer. All 3-D printers should be registered and their owners on a list. Barrel shrouds and thumbhole stocks should be illegal for printers, as it makes it easier for mass printings to take place.I'm sure most manufacturers will fully support your opinion.
I'm sure most individuals wanting freedom to produce their own goods will not.
#sarcasm
|
The BATFE has allowed for individuals to manufacture their own firearms for a long time now. And while they suggest that one add a serial number for identification purposes, it is not a requirement (unless one plans to sell the firearm)...
For your information, per provisions of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, an unlicensed individual may make a “firearm” as defined in the GCA for his own personal use, but not for sale or distribution...
Further...
Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also, the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully transferred in the future
|
Well, the beauty of 3d printers is that you just don't have use them to make guns; you can use them to manufacture (for very cheap) large capacity clips - invalidating ammo/magazine restrictions on weapons.
The diagrams are already out there for extended magazines for the standard M16/AR model magazine receiver - so Pandora's Box has already been opened. I plan on picking up a 3d printer soon (not to make mags but to make monsters and molds for film) and the prices are already very accessible so this will be a reality.
As far as being able to make a fully automatic reliable assault/battle rifle - that's down the line and very doable. Comes down to schematics, materials used and stress testing for realiability. Weight of the weapon could also be an issue but that can be augmented easily during testing.
One thing that hasn’t been addressed is how much more untraceable crimes will be. Make a disposable weapon, use said weapon and discard or melt down the weapon. Why is that different than what could already be done? Well, first off you would not be buying an existing weapon – which in theory could have its barrel rifling already be marked and registered. There is also no history of weapon ownership, and once the weapon is used and gone there is nothing to track it back to the person unless you catch them in the act or shortly after they committed the crime.
The next thing to do would be to track ammo, but ammo is even easier to make then weapons (and I for one am very pleased at that). The biggest issue with the ammo would be how long you could recycle the brass to make rounds, again though – brass isn’t how the rounds are generally traced in a criminal investigation and brass can even be recycled (if you remember to pick it up).
People will have, seek out or create the freedom they want. It's that simple.
Did local blacksmiths being able in past centuries to create proper guns from the stuff that local blacksmiths typically worked with, or just about anyone in more recent decades being able to create home-made guns using stuff found in pretty much any hardware or plumbing shop make gun laws obsolete?
The technology used to make guns has changed a little, but that's only a small change.
Indeed, in prisons, where gun laws are the absolute strongest, and where access to things like forges, machine shops, and 3D printers is heavily controlled, prisoners still find ways to manufacture "zip" guns and even ghastlier weapons to cause grief to each other and their guards.
In spite of the hype and panic, 3D printers aren't really going to introduce anything wildly new into the mix, as far as the practicality (or lack of practicality) of gun laws goes.
What does change, is that this century's Kalashnikov, Browning, Colt, or Smith & Wesson could be an RPG and computer geek like you or me, creating the next revolutionary gun design in the comfort of our own bedrooms, on our computers in between posting on Facebook and killing a few goblins on a MMORPG, and instantly sharing open-source gun designs with like-minded hobbyists who can almost immediately identify design flaws and introduce improvements of their own. The next legendary gun design could be the equivalent of Linux, or shareware.
The coming centuries should be an exciting time for gunsmithing, and pretty much any other technology and industry out there as well (for example, everything from publishing and manufacturing new generations of best-selling high-quality fantasy miniatures and board games, to creating the next generation of computers and machines and spacecraft, to producing revolutionary life-saving medical equipment, can be just as easily done by someone just like you using exactly the same machinery!)
|
|
The next thing to do would be to track ammo, but ammo is even easier to make then weapons (and I for one am very pleased at that). The biggest issue with the ammo would be how long you could recycle the brass to make rounds, again though – brass isn’t how the rounds are generally traced in a criminal investigation and brass can even be recycled (if you remember to pick it up).Is ammo still easy to make if you restrict the gunpowder? There's also been talk of using taggants to help track gunpowder.
I think taggents in gunpowder would be ineffective - residue is at very short range (the gun, hands, clothing and victim if at pb range), and you would have to prove that a round fired from a batch would = equal round used. Circumstantial at best. I suppose they could do trace testing on the actual spent round but that would be mean creating a unique tag for each batch? Doesn't seem feasible with current technology. So it might work for easy, over-the counter purchases of gp, but if you are going to go that far to make a gun - why would you buy gunpowder to make rounds with traceable elements in it?
No, gunpowder and black powder explosives in general are too easy to make (charcoal, pot nitrate and sulfur) - testing them out is the hard part. But for small amounts (say used in rounds) it would be very easy to test fire a bullet with relative safety to the user and even the test weapon. Once you find the right mix, you're done. It isn't a guessing game; it just comes down to ease of use. At the current inflated rate that ammo is being sold at and with such a huge demand + scarcity, it wouldn’t surprise me if people started doing more hand loading. And if you want to put trace elements in gunpowder people will find a way around that also.
It really would come down to tracking the actually printers and their users and holding them accountable for what they manufacture with their printers. Stopping the production would be impossible unless you stop the sale and use of the printers – and if they can’t currently ban fake-ass assault rifles (like the AR-15, which isn’t a real assault weapon) in most states then I highly doubt they will be able to regulate and control the sale and use of 3-d printers for their potential to make weapons.
The genie cannot be put back in the bottle, it’s like trying to undo the knowledge of atomic/nuclear weapons – but in this case you do not need radioactive material to make a deadly weapon. Just the plans, printer and will to make the things.
It does mean a criminal organization can set up their own, portable, easily concealed, gun manufacturing...
But then, they always could have done that, using the readily-available materials to build their own forges or machine shops...
The only difference is that instead of buying metal, fuel, hammers, bellows, lathes, and so on in Ye Olde Dayes, the modern version would buy expensive electronics and raw plastic.
Criminal organizations might get involved in gun manufacturing in the future in ways they didn't bother with in the past, though, for the same reasons they got involved in making alcohol during Prohibition, or in the manufacture of illegal drugs now: legal and government regulation and oversight chokes out supply, leaving a demand to be filled with cheap bootleg/moonshine alternatives that can be produced without licensing fees, restrictions, duties, taxes, and so on.
We've seen organized crime syndicates cooking various types of bathtub gin to feed a thirsty American public demand against the best efforts of government Prohibition in the past - that, too, will be nothing new.
Is ammo still easy to make if you restrict the gunpowder? There's also been talk of using taggants to help track gunpowder.
The next thing to do would be to track ammo, but ammo is even easier to make then weapons (and I for one am very pleased at that). The biggest issue with the ammo would be how long you could recycle the brass to make rounds, again though – brass isn’t how the rounds are generally traced in a criminal investigation and brass can even be recycled (if you remember to pick it up).
Keep in mind, too, that gunpowder is a fairly ancient technology, originally produced with a fairly naive and young version of the science of chemistry centuries ago, without the benefit of instant mass communication, the printing press, public education, and so on.
Try going to a grocery store to buy things like cold medicine or lighter fluid today - I usually have to jump through all kinds of hoops to buy many seemingly simple, common, house-hold things, because clever people have found ways to turn those common items into dangerous weapons or illegal drugs, and have shared that information on the internet until people everywhere can find the formulae pretty easily using the common smart phone.
Gunpowder, or alternatives to gunpowder, can easily be developed, and will always be commonly available. The ability to disguise the chemical fingerprints of commercial gunpowder will similarly be undermined in pretty much the same way that digital copy protection is routinely undermined.
Furthermore, gunpowder is one of the more successful technolgies, but not the only technology that has been discovered for use in making weapons - bows and crossbows and slings, for example, predated gunpowder, and younger technologies such as airguns, flamethrowers, chemical weapons, electromagnetic "rail guns", x-ray lasers, tasers, EMP weapons, and more have been developed in the centuries since the discovery of gunpowder.
In the absence of cheap gunpowder, creative weapons makers will improve the practicality of those technologies, or discover other, perhaps more effective technologies, disseminate those ideas instantly over the internet, and build the frameworks to deliver those weapons on 3D printers and their successor technologies.
As someone else said, the genies are out of the bottle. We can try to silence the modern Copernicuses and burn their books and try to flee back into the comfort of the dark ages, but when our generation passes, younger generations will pick up where our victims left off, and move on for better or worse in spite of our best efforts.
|
|
Actual manufactured guns will still be cheaper and/or better quality. And still legally available. And you'll actually be able to use them, not just hide in a bunker with them.
Actually no - once the techniques are perfected why would you go through the effort to replicate something you can easily steal or buy in a store? Once they get a reliable method down, what's to stop them from making real assault weapons? Not talking about the scary looking semi-automatic rifles that politicians are afraid of, but fully automatic rifles and smgs?
It's not going to be a big deal for most people. Even small-time criminal groups will still find it easier to pick up guns illegally than to make them. Nor will most of the responsible gun owners care since they'll still be able to buy guns. The real crazy "government is going to take our guns and turn into a fascist/socialist dictatorship" types will buy the printers and be happy with easy access to more guns. No one else will really care.
The ability to produce unlimited and un-trackable military performing (if not in grade or quality) would be a violent organization/revolutionary (subjective) dream device. Remember - you are not limited to what is commercial available but to what you can get plans for and design (or modify) - including some heavy weaponry,... again, once you get the technique and performance and reliability down.
A violent extremist isn't going to replicate a .22 hunting rifle or a 12 gauge pump shotgun, he's going to try to figure out how to make a fully functioning light machine gun - even if it's just machining components for the parts of the gun. I think the materials needed are a long way off to do this with a 3-d printer, but it will be an eventuality.
The government already has banned some gun types and magazines - they are also (in my city) going to make owning (not selling) a high-cap clip a crime. Which means if you legally owned one you are now a criminal. This is the best way for people to say "no" to these kinds of measures.
This video has some cool work that was done by the same guy making a lower receiver. Wouldn't take much to make a fully automatic rifle using the AR platform.
|
|
Wouldn't take much to make a fully automatic rifle using the AR platform
Which is dangerous (to the user), if that person does not know the differences between a fully automatic AR platform firearm and a semi-automatic AR platform firearm...
Dangerous because if done incorrectly, it often results in an "out of battery discharge", which causes the firearm to literally blow up in the user's face...
|
|
Wouldn't take much to make a fully automatic rifle using the AR platformWhich is dangerous (to the user), if that person does not know the differences between a fully automatic AR platform firearm and a semi-automatic AR platform firearm...
Dangerous because if done incorrectly, it often results in an "out of battery discharge", which causes the firearm to literally blow up in the user's face...
Of course you would have to test it properly - the guy in the video I linked is actually not playing it too smart by stress firing these guns in person for dramatic effect. Stock could have easily given way (the last failure they showed I think) while the bottom and top receiver are still functioning. Which is a live gun/live ammo not being controlled or possibly being dropped with the barrel facing up at the shooter (from recoil).
Doesn't mean it can't be made. These guys created a gun with a lower receiver which fired 600 rounds without fail. No big lab or technicians, just home made and tested for the most part. He does seem to cut plenty of corners though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It does mean a criminal organization can set up their own, portable, easily concealed, gun manufacturing...But then, they always could have done that, using the readily-available materials to build their own forges or machine shops...
The only difference is that instead of buying metal, fuel, hammers, bellows, lathes, and so on in Ye Olde Dayes, the modern version would buy expensive electronics and raw plastic.
Criminal organizations might get involved in gun manufacturing in the future in ways they didn't bother with in the past, though, for the same reasons they got involved in making alcohol during Prohibition, or in the manufacture of illegal drugs now: legal and government regulation and oversight chokes out supply, leaving a demand to be filled with cheap bootleg/moonshine alternatives that can be produced without licensing fees, restrictions, duties, taxes, and so on.
We've seen organized crime syndicates cooking various types of bathtub gin to feed a thirsty American public demand against the best efforts of government Prohibition in the past - that, too, will be nothing new.
I think you very strongly over estimate the gunsmithing skills of the average criminal. The difference here is that an idiot could mass produce these with only Internet access and a few hours of training on the machine. I can count on one hand the number of people I know who could build more than a single shot zip gun...everyone I know could print one of these with a few hours of training.
@Thejeff
Cost of high resolution printers is currently an issue for most people. However, we already have largely self replicating, open source, 3-d printers out in the wild. They have resolution issues currently, but it wouldn't take much in the age of crowd funding to fund significant improvements to such systems. Such improvements would also likely mean entirely self replicating devices.
@at everyone
The only thing that surprises me about this development is it took so long.
Laws will never be able to stop or prevent criminals. You want peace, laws are the wrong tree to bark at.
Go tell that to japan ;)
As above, people have been able to make guns in their garare since the invention of bullets, the old Saturday Night Special or Zip Gun is nothing new, its old as paint. The only thing here is that now you have another way to make the same thing and because it is linked to new technology theres all of a sudden some wailing and gnashing of teeth by sensationalist media wowsers.
Move on, this is a non subject.
People have been cobbling together munitions in garages for years, and will continue to do so.
Do they plan on banning or controlling the sale of pressure cookers next week?
The ability to produce unlimited and un-trackable military performing (if not in grade or quality) would be a violent organization/revolutionary (subjective) dream device.
It's been done, all hail Mr Kalashnikov.