Video Should We Print Guns? Cody R. Wilson Says "Yes" (Video) 444
Whether at home or at a local hacker space, lots of people use 3D printers to create either knickknacks, things like figurines or chess pieces or small but useful objects like replacement gears. I spoke this week with Cody R. Wilson. He's a University of Texas Law School student and found of the defense distributed Wiki weapon project. This is not your average use case for 3D printing.
Wilson's part of a small group working to put online as an STL file plans for a working firearm entirely of printable parts. Others have made 3D printable gun parts, even substantial ones, but not the whole thing. The Wiki weapon is partly a thought experiment and partly a philosophical statement about arms. But it's not just theoretical. They're soliciting ideas and designs and offer some down-loadable files already. Wilson wants to use the development and distribution methods of open source software, in other words the things that keep tools like PGP available to everyone, and apply them to a whole different type of weapon.
Cody R. Wilson: Defense distributors Wiki Weapon project is essentially about taking a CAD file or an STL file, downloadable, for a firearm.
Ensuring the possibility that that file would be completely distributed across the internet as much as possible. And at least taking a page out of open source, making sure that it's available to as many people that want to have it as possible. And then that lends to different questions and outcomes regarding gun control, civil society. I mean, we don't intend for there to be conclusions of a certain order or a certain kind because of this, but the project is about making sure this file's out there.
The weapon we're designing is not, it's not fair to really draw an analogy between any other kind of weapon. I think the possibility that this project represents is that, well weapons are now it's kind of a new stage. What is a weapon? Question you, like what is a handgun now? I mean, people keep saying, "I see pundits and these pieces who were brought in for kind of rhetorical balance, well, this might be difficult and the gun might fail." Well of course it might fail. I mean, this is the new possibilities that these represent. Failing is now a feature, not a bug, you know what I'm
saying?
Like, what are all the bizarre designs that guns, firearms, and not just those, not to narrow that down but material objects themselves what will they take on when they are now crowd sourced and distributed across the internet? This is just that possibility extruded like the plastic we're using through the platonic form of the gun. I constantly chide myself for how small I was thinking when we began this. I mean I thought we would do it in house, develop it, but as soon as we announced it there was just an outpouring of support. All over the world, Russian people -- I mean, I
don't know why I went to Russia first -- but I mean just anybody, anywhere, felt free to e-mail me. You know I use my personal e-mail, my school e-
mail. Suggestions, designs.
In fact that's why we came up with the contest itself. We weren't being open sourced and true to the OSI model enough. So we wanted to expand, expand, expand. On every chain of development people are giving legal counsel, people are giving opinions on every chain of the project. It's just like the world, I don't want to say the world wants it to happen. Who do we..? No, I can't say that, but there's a market for it. There's a market for the idea and people are excited about it.
This is the most exciting part of the project so far for me because we're deciding, okay, well how do we accept designs, how do we distribute the designs themselves? If the project's going to stand or fall it will be because we figured out, well what's the right way of licensing this, and now it gets to free software. Or, and that's an important philosophical question. Are these files going to be software? Do we treat them like software? Is that the propaganda essentially or are they art or are they something else? And that determines, that at least, that's how we answer the question, what kind of licensing do we use?
So I was thinking from the very beginning, not thinking deep enough, oh GPL license or just a general OSI. No, I think we need to do something like a BSD. We need to do something like maybe a creative commons license, and thankfully you know paragons like icons of the open source movement have reached out to us just in time to help us answer these questions. Because look man, I just got into law school. I don't know anything about IP, you know what I'm saying? I'm figuring it out as I go.
That's another beautiful part of this project. It's just like, you're
learning so much about the world, so much about, it's the most instructive thing I've ever done, it's the most brilliant period of creation I've ever had the privilege of being able to experience. People begin with fresh assumptions about what is a gun? Kind of like we've talked about already. Well it needs to be able to maintain rigidity and structural form for the bolt thrust and the chamber pressure. Okay, and they have this idea of how to feed a gun. No, we're thinking like break it down to its most irreducible components, right? Something extremely crude like a canister with a hole in it, you know what I'm saying, and a locking block. And the pin is essentially a bang stick model. I mean it can be that basic. It's
still a weapon, it's still a gun, it still fires a .38, a .22. As long as the thing doesn't explode, and sometimes we're beginning to think even if the thing does explode in certain ways, you're not hurt — it's lethal, it's still a gun. The techniques required, that's almost a trap, you know what I mean? And it's almost a benefit that we're beginning from a total amateur background.
I mean we've got engineers, electrical engineers, you know. But students, only students that began with the project. Now we have professional support coming in, but I'm very glad that people aren't saying, "Well, this is how you do it" and "this is how it should be done". No it's like the John
Browning American idea. Like No, we're going to tinker around with it,
we're going to blow up some guns until something works. And is that
terrible? Maybe it is, but it's going to be out there, it just is, it just is.
What does that have to do with law? Man, I don't have a ready answer for that, it's just this is where my mind is, my mind is well what is just, what is? Let's toy with enlightenment ideas. Why not? Let's, like, literally materialize freedom. Let's play around with that. Like, isn't it strange that we can live in a world where we can literally, metaphorically materialize the ideas and the concepts we're playing around with? That's dangerous.
But what this project's really about, fuck your laws, you know what I'm saying? It's stepping up, it's being able to go, you know what, I don't like this legal regime I neatly step outside of it. Now what, you know?
The world is suddenly shaken from its sleep walking, you know, oh my god, I don't want this to happen. And, so what? And the terms aren't finished but I think we're going to use something like a very short form and like a zlib license. I think it's a zlib license. I was looking last night and like derivatives of BSD licensing. I'm getting kind of off topic here. But I'm thinking like we maintain attribution to the original authors, right? So
it's a similar copyleft or copyright in that matter. But then only short terms like, warranties of no guaranteed warranty of useful and you know what I'm saying, like, Okay it could blow up. And then don't misrepresent the modification or who made the modification of the original authorship. And I think that's it.
So people will submit essentially intellectual property but they will
disclaim all rights other than their authorship of that right to
attribution. And it will be, we're not even going to include a no
commercial use, at least you know as of today. I don't think we're even going to flip the no commercial use switch as ESR said. Because I don't want to, people, okay when I talk with my law friends, I know I'm just going everywhere now. But when I talk with my law friends they go, well we need to think about, first, the first priority in licensing is how do we restrict liability? It's not about protecting us or protecting authors, it's about how to best facilitate the distribution, the advancement in modification of this technology, or the sufferance, alright, whatever you want to style it as. It's about how not to chill it. How to really ensure that, because we can put the file out. But if the shark and the courts and everyone decides, the leviathan itself decides, oh we've got a neat trick
for this, shut down. Okay, no then we failed.
Perhaps this is how law comes into it. Knowing the right way to licensing it from the beginning, perhaps best facilitates its immediate distribution. And it's irrevocable distribution. I was talking to someone about PGP. In the beginning, I'm not sure if you're aware. PGP was considered by the government a munition and I think there were statutory authority that's since been kind of tweaked a little bit that was like, well you, there's some arms exports stuff that governs this and you can't share this with
people. I think the analogy is directly there. What they're going to do I think if they do things, and this is why we have to move quickly but, they're going to say, well you're exporting munitions, you're exporting munitions technology. Either that's illegal on an IP front or just straight up you're sharing weapons with the world and you can't do that. Okay, fine, let's do it anyway. Weird things have been happening. I hate to be paranoid about, you know what I'm saying, but I mean, no I don't think the right people know to be angry. And perhaps the right people say they know better
then us and they don't think it can happen. Fine, but we'll surprise them anyway.
There will be software in that when you load this into your — okay, a good analogy is C&C diagrams. You go to C&C guns right now, C&Cguns.com right now get your C&C file, your SCL, and print that right, well not print it but mill it, you know what I mean, immediately. It's almost the same thing, it's just in plastic, so. And that's much more accessible to people now. I'm not going to go buy C&C mill, but I might have one day a $500 Rep-Rap. There's really the only difference because you can get the file, click print, you know run it through your software and then you've got a gun.
We've looked at flare gun concepts, we've looked at match sticks, I mean everything. Anything and everything is on the table right now that's almost, I almost lament it. Because it's at the height, it's at it's most creative stage of possibilities right now because we're still thinking. I mean our product people aren't really working with us until next week, you know what I'm saying? So then we'll have to start getting down to brass tacks and making decisions and sacrifices and creative sacrifices. It's not a matter of years, it's not a matter of many months. I think it's, if it's going to happen and if we're going to do it, the money's there, the
money's coming in, the resources are there, nice, nice printers, nice
resources, engineering talent. If it is at all possible in any form it's
going to happen very soon. I don't think weapons are dangerous is a
compelling argument. I think some weapons are dangerous is a compelling
argument, you know.
I mean, should, and this is a good one. Should everyone be able to have
their own nuclear device? I mean, that's not something I'm even going to
approach. It's not something I want to talk about. But I think armed men
are free men. You know, I'm a proponent of at least these ideas. And I
wanted to be conscious about not just giving people an explicit, you know,
manifesto of just like literally down line by line, this is why and this is
why and this is why. And something that people can pick apart our lives
and be like, well these are lazy armchair philosophers. We just gave the
people a very neat list of quotations and things they can kind of put
together for themselves.
Milton's Areopagitica is essentially the spiritual analog that I'm
holding out for people. Which is more to do not about like why guns are good. It's more about why like speech and information is good. Why like you just must reckon with, you must be free to reckon with whatever ideas
that you can. It isn't enough that a society can just withhold things.
That doesn't befit you as a moral agent. That doesn't allow you to exist or
to, that doesn't allow you to fully exercise your capacity as a human
being, as a moral agent. That's what I want this to be more about. Not to
get stuck in debates about, well we can have semi-automatic rifles but
let's not have automatic rifles. Like Obama said, those belong on the
battlefield. No, no, no, the battlefield is the mind, you know what I'm
saying? Like the battlefield is culture. Let's make people, let's make
individuals reckon with these ideas themselves.
Guns are an extreme case, but not the only case (Score:2, Interesting)
Life also gets interesting when we can print keys. To your house, your car, your safe deposit box....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Life also gets interesting when we can print keys. To your house, your car, your safe deposit box....
It isn't polite to mention it, and people have set up a degree of obfuscation by using blind codes with proprietary conversion books or software; but you can reproduce (basic) keys with just the bitting codes and an appropriate blank. If you want EZ-while-U-wait, you'll need a key cutting machine; but a set of files and some calipers will work, if you don't mind building some character in the process.
If you have physical access to the original(rather than just a photo or set of bitting codes) various seriou
Copying keys with a camera (Score:2)
to actually print a key, you still need to need the original to copy.
For typical residential-grade locks, does one need an original key for any length of time or just a photo of an original?
Re:Guns are an extreme case, but not the only case (Score:5, Funny)
So while you're off fucking chicks in high school / college and enjoying the 5 or so years of your life where you mean a damn, the geeks are busy toiling away in their caves creating something cool. At about the post University level they emerge, get gym memberships, get jobs that require social contact and end up with the *really* good looking girls who were also socially awkward in school that would never have banged you in a million years.
So while you're rotting at the local pub, do spare a thought for those sex starved voyeuristic creeps, and their nice cars, big houses and sexy, intelligent wives.
Re: (Score:2)
If you outlaw printing guns (Score:4, Funny)
Then only outlaws will have printed guns.
No you shouldn't. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I think ti's mostly a US culture thing. American culture towards guns tends to be fairly unique throughout the world - other countries may be fairly casual about them (e.g., Canada) as well, but guns don't usually bring up the huge emotions as they woul
Re: (Score:2)
Whose control? I suspect this is part of what the parent was getting at. BTW, I'll bet the British would have loved to have such education and control.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem lies right there, the fact that you feel that you need to defend yourself
Your problem lies right there, in that you think someone must "feel a need to defend themselves" when looking for a firearm.
What if you feel no such need, you just want to be prepared? It's a precaution like having bottled water on hand, or jumper cables in a car. There is no fear of anything, no imminent threat - it's simply a matter of taking sensible precautions.
And a last through for you. In a world where anyone can
Re: (Score:2)
This thought experiment is mostly pointless as your
Re: (Score:2)
The stupid is strong in this one.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem lies right there, the fact that you feel that you need to defend yourself implies that the system has an underlying issue that should be solved. And it's solved by education and control, not by doing an arms race with your next door neighbor.
Violence simply leads to more violence.
Being prepared for violence to be committed against you != committing violence against another.
Besides, read your Constitution - we are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms so we can defend ourselves against the government, not our neighbors.
That's just the gravy.
Re: (Score:2)
we are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms so we can defend ourselves against the government
Let me know how well that works out for you. I reckon you'll be on the receiving end of something way bigger than you're allowed to own, pretty damn smartish.
Re: (Score:2)
And what soldier do you expect is going to obey the orders to nuke or smart-bomb NYC, for example? I think police would be a bigger problem than the military in such a situation -- not that they don't have some damn large weaponry of their own. But hell, look at the recent situations in the Middle East if you have any doubt of that...specifically Egypt.
Re: (Score:3)
Government itself holds Monopoly on Violence. Your statement is null, Government IS violence, and ignoring that aspect is plainly stupid.
White people are so god-damned naive.
The main threat to freedom is never the government. It's your neighbors.
Slavery? Done by your neighbors, to your other neighbors. Stopped by the Feds. Particularly one jack-booted thug named Bill Sherman.
The imposition of Jim Crow? Done by your neighbors (you think the KKK appeared from thin air?), to your other neighbors. Stopped by the US Army.
The conquest of the Indians? Done by the government but a) the Indians weren't citizens, and b) the government was usually prot
"/." literacy. (Score:2)
There's a transcript (we're finally doing transcripts of selected videos) below the video for those who prefer to read instead of watch.
What is this reading you're talking about?
At last. (Score:4, Interesting)
Transcripts!
Like photocopying currency (Score:2)
I predict that there will be laws (actually, already are) for this, but that as the industry becomes more mature there are going to be soft-safeguards in the commercial printers which actively discourage the fabrication of the most critical gun-like parts (ex: printers will not print cylindroidal parts with inner diameter ranges that match common ammunition).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You buy the printer and print many of the components plus the plans and share them with me so I can get into 3D printing. I take the pl
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Won't matter. The controls are not in the hardware you print, but in the firmware that makes the printer work. If you can change the firmware, there's no need to make a new printer - just re-write the firmware in the old one.
The prohibition isn't in making the parts, the prohibition is in making it easy to make the parts with low cost hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
Printing a screw (ball or other) that is as accurate as the screws in the current printer will be a challenge. / Understatement
Re: (Score:2)
That's what commas are for. :-P
There are already ample laws available... (Score:5, Interesting)
...regulating this behavior. The rules of what you can create and can't are pleasantly explicit in the US. There may be a few new edge cases, but on the whole this won't be anything new to the ATF. Simply, with modern tools, zip guns are no longer hard to make.
Where these people will run into trouble is the attitude ~5:30 minutes into the video, the statement "Fuck your laws." Does not show the kind of safe-and-sane experimenter spirit to which the courts are often forgiving. It's more of a "make an example of me" invitation.
I hope everyone inspired to experiment with these toys takes the opposite approach. Last I read about them, the jail sentences that come with full-auto weapons manufacture were 10 years per gun.
The ATF has no problem with good amateur gunsmithing, nor experimenting with new technologies to make better guns. Kel-Tec is a great example. My first Kel-Tec (the Grendel) was painful to shoot, but cheap and reliable, and now they are a thriving business.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kel-Tec [wikipedia.org]
Re:There are already ample laws available... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly - it looks like the US already has laws about the manufacture of illegal weapons and weapon components. Whether you make it with a 3D printer or high-tech CNC mill, or if you make it with a Dremel and hand files, it's still an illegal part.
There are plenty of things in the world that are technically easy, but still illegal. It's incredibly easy for me to jump in my van and go for a blast up the high street at 90mph, but it's still illegal to do so.
Also people need to learn more about it (Score:3)
All these "OMG print gunz!" types seem to think that it is some amazing tech where you'll be able to stamp out a whole gun in your house. Ummm, no. What has been printed is a lower receiver of an AR-15. Now while that is legally the "gun" part, it is also by far the simplest part, and also one of the few that doesn't take a lot of stress and thus can be plastic. This is not printing a fully functional weapon, barrel, chamber, firing pin, and all.
For a functional firearm, you are going to need a metal barrel
Re:There are already ample laws available... (Score:5, Informative)
Also please stop talking about about high velocity rounds and walls before you actually read something on the subject.
http://how-i-did-it.org/drywall/ammunition.html
Re: (Score:3)
It would be easy to make a full auto lower (Score:3)
eventually (Score:3, Insightful)
Eventually you'll be able to print the whole thing, and synthesize the charge/primer too. The same equipment will be able to make food and medicine. Who do you want controlling that?
Re: (Score:3)
people can already make firearms. it can be done legally. as for charge, you can legally buy many, many different powders and primers and cases and bullets, and legally hand load your own ammo. this doesn't raise any new questions that didn't exist for decades already.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have mental images of ordering asparin out of my replicator and getting LSD because some script kiddy managed to get a virus onto it. Hilarity will ensue no doubt.
Re: (Score:2)
Synthesizing primers (e.g. fulminates and azides) is best left to the competent. I have no problem with letting the incompetent try, provided they're sufficiently far away.
Re: (Score:2)
existing laws already cover that, already regulated. this 3d printing business adds nothing new
Ugh. (Score:2)
copier analogy might be relevant (Score:2)
I have heard that at least some copiers had built in block for reproduction of banknotes. If this is true, it is probably result of some regulation.
I wonder if something similar will be done for the 3D printers.
Digital Sand Casting (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a moot point (Score:2)
Outlaw what people _do_ with guns, which has plenty of room for some re-work. Simply making one, whether printing it, or otherwise, should be perfectly legal. Otherwise, you may as well outlaw making knives, screwdrivers, hammers, rope and anything else which could be used to do something illegal.
not a good idea (Score:2)
The guy mentions "armed men are free men"... it's a good sound bite, but it really doesn't mean anything. You can have a kitchen knife, and you will be considered armed... it's is not going to help defend you against someone with a gun.
Even the best fully automatic firearm you can print is nothing but a kitchen knife compared to the destructive power a modern military has at its disposal. You don't have tanks, planes, bombs, rockets, missiles, artillery, drones, gunships, submarines, helicopters, radars
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:5, Interesting)
That's an interesting use of "field day" :)
It does raise lots of questions about the current registration / tracking regime, though. For people who want to home-build a (legal, personal) gun, the BATFE has provisions for applying for a serial number to then inscribe/afix to the result. The details are eluding my memory right now, though, perhaps someone with more recent steeping will be able to expand ...
Re: (Score:3)
You don't have to put a serial on them unless you are selling them.
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:4, Interesting)
Last I looked into it, everyone suggested you do anyway. Right now law enforcement looks at a firearm without a serial and assumes it has been removed, which is a felony. It's probably best to avoid that altogether. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's because that's the form for Short Barreled Rifles, Any Other Weapons, &c. which require a $200 ``tax'' (which felons are exempt from paying).
``c. Firearm. The term “firearm” means: (1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:5, Insightful)
No tracking system is going to deal with the question of home made / under the counter gun sales or construction.
It has ALWAYS been possible (and fairly easy) to make a lower receiver in the comfort and privacy of your own machine shop. Making it on a 3D printer doesn't change a thing except for requiring a different skill set.
In fact, if you wanted to create a race-to-the-finish between aficionados of 3D gun printing and the old boring machine shop way, I'm going to bet that the folks with the 3 axis Bridgeports are going to win hands down. You can teach anyone with an IQ of about 110 to use a milling machine / lathe well enough to make a simple gun in about a month. High school shops do it all the time.
By the time that the 3D folks have figured out the plans, figured out the materials and debugged the system to make a .22 popgun that won't literally melt after the third round, I'm well on my way to fabricating a raft of AK-47 clones [weaponscombat.com].
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:4, Insightful)
As best I can tell, the enthusiasm over 'zOMG 3d printing!!!' is a combination of (optimistic) speculation about what they'll be capable of in the future, genuine enthusiasm for certain quite handy functions right now, and the fact that a lot of the people buzzing about them(especially, though not exclusively, the people who write about the subject but aren't too deeply immersed in it) really have no idea what sorts of fabrication techniques are on the table...
In a way, I suppose it really shouldn't be too surprising. With the dramatic gutting(not total extermination; but the relative decline has been massive) of the skilled-blue-collar/manufacturing sector, there are a lot fewer people out there who have a parent, friend, etc. who is a machinist or works with machinists. Anybody who doesn't go full-vocational-track-at-regional-school-for-that-purpose probably won't encounter much shop class in high school, either.
I don't wish to suggest that 3d printing isn't a genuinely interesting and novel class of techniques: the serious kit can achieve some geometry that you'd be hard pressed to get in other ways, or put out parts that are very similar to injection moulded; but in quantity one and less than a day; but part of its perceived novelty really seems to have to do with the fact that hobbyist 3d printing exists largely outside an environment where knowledge of machine tools really doesn't exist in a serious way.
Re: (Score:3)
I think that is the attraction of these devices - having someone of minimal experience download a file, stick in some spools of plastic and print a gun, but I doubt that this is going to represent a functional reality. And yes, I have a CNC machine in my basement / cave / study - a little Sherline based unit that could easily make a small gun. Of course, I'm not exactly normal but then again, the guy with a fully functional 3D printer isn't much better....
And yeah, I think a big part of the buzz here is
Re:Mechanical knowledge (Score:4, Insightful)
In fairness a lack of manual skills (and/or confidence in them) is hardly a trivial problem to overcome - mastery of physical skills is no less demanding than intellectual skills even if the pool of "potential masters" is arguably considerably larger. For a programmer, engineer, etc. to acquire the skills to make a reasonably precise component would hundreds or thousands of hours of experience. What's the general estimate? 10,000 hours to achieve mastery of a subject? That's ~5 years @40 hours per week, time which could alternately be spent extending their expertise into areas where their existing skills translate - a much better proposition in a culture where specialization is the norm, unless you draw pleasure from the act of creating the components of course, but that's an orthogonal question.
That leaves hiring a machinist or time on a CNC machine - both of which are typically expensive and incur significant delays, especially if you're not lucky enough to know someone personally who's willing to squeeze you in during slack time. And either route will probably require you to provide plans about as accurate as needed for 3D printing anyway (often more so in the case of milling machines). Given that I'd say there's actually a pretty considerable market niche for 3D printing for the foreseeable future among hobbyist tinkerers, and it will only grow as the quality and speed improves. Personally I know plenty of people that don't consider themselves to have artistic or hands-on skills, but probably wouldn't hesitate to download and add personal touches to lots of things like custom clothes hooks, door-knobs, costume jewlery, etc. if their $50 3D printer could quickly turn it into a quality solid object. Now that probably won't be a reality n the next 5-10 years, but it's nice to see it in the pipeline considering the average Joe no longer has ready access to the machinists and other custom craftsmen that were once common a part of the cultural landscape.
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:4, Insightful)
"figured out the materials and debugged the system to make a .22 popgun that won't literally melt after the third round,"
There are tons of people who would melt the weapon anyway after the second shot, so it doesn't matter.
40 years ago, a friend of mine built a .22 gun made completely out of nylon, barrel included. I saw him shoot several dozen rounds without any problem. Fairly accurate up to 5 yards, enough for a hit.
But anyway, the first thing they will print will be silencers for their old guns, no doubt.
Re: (Score:3)
It has ALWAYS been possible (and fairly easy) to make a lower receiver in the comfort and privacy of your own machine shop. Making it on a 3D printer doesn't change a thing except for requiring a different skill set.
That is true enough. The difference being that owning your own machine shop is expensive and knowing how to use your machines to build a gun is a complicated process that takes skill. Even though you can't currently build a real gun in a 3D printer, if you ever could you would need nothing other than the printer and the file. That greatly expands the number and sort of people who can build a gun at home. Not saying it is good or bad. Just saying that there is a big difference between a kid downloading
Re: (Score:3)
The guy with a 3d printed plastic gun is more of a danger to himself than anyone else. No need to worry.
Re: (Score:2)
For people who want to home-build a (legal, personal) gun, the BATFE has provisions for applying for a serial number to then inscribe/afix to the result.
It's perfectly legal to build a firearm at home without a serial number of any sort, as long as you never sell the gun. If you want to sell guns that you manufacture, then you need to jump through the additional hoops with the BATFE.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Blacksmithing? I took a blacksmithing class at SIU in the '70s. The only expensive part is the anvil, the rest of the tools you can make yourself. Getting coal for the forge might be problematic these days, though. You need coal or you can't make coke, and you can't blacksmith without coke.
It was one of the more fun classes I took (the physics class with lasers and holograms was a lot cooler).
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:5, Insightful)
Police are going to have a field day with printed guns, which by nature won't have/need serial numbers or registration (except possibly for conceal and carry)
*re-reads the Second Amendment*
Hmm, don't see the clause where it requires all my firearms to be registered with the government...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Doesn't say they don't have to be either. It'll be another one of those things they didn't foresee back then; no serial numbers on muskets in part because mass production hadn't been invented yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't say they don't have to be either. It'll be another one of those things they didn't foresee back then; no serial numbers on muskets in part because mass production hadn't been invented yet.
Well, considering that the registration process is intended to keep certain guns out of the People's hands, AKA "infringe" on our right to keep and bear them...
Not that I think everyone should have access to automatic rifles - crazy folks and government agents have a long history of irresponsibility when it comes to firearm ownership, so I do think there should be some restrictions for those types of cases.
Re: (Score:3)
I am what a lot of people might call a gun nut. But I don't have any problem with things like registration, training requirements, background checks or (minor) delays.
People should be allowed to own and use rifles, shotguns and pistols with minimal requirements.
People should be allowed to conceal-carry pistols after demonstrating a sufficient knowledge of safe and responsible firearm usage and state self defense law.
People should be allowed to own and use (though not necessarily public carry) fully automati
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
The definition of "arms" has changed greatly in the last 200+ years. I don't think the government even today has any restrictions (no background check, no license, no registration) on possession of breech-loading muskets for those people who haven't lost their rights through due process (i.e. conviction).
So this comes down to whether you think the Constitution is a static document, written exactly how the authors pictured things in their time, or if it's designed to change and adapt as culture and language
Re: (Score:2)
What about a marijuana or hash gun? If you made one, would the 2nd amendment cover it and its ammunition? Would the NRA pay for your defense if some socialist commie marxist Obama-appointed judge tried to pry your Ganjagun(tm) from your warm, live hands?
GANJAGUNS FOR AMERICA!!!
Shifting definitions? (Score:3)
The definition of "arms" may have shifted somewhat, but a modern combat rifle still bears a much closer relation to a musket than to a pot plant. If I get your meaning right, you're saying that because modern firearms are more effective than their predecessors that they shouldn't be afforded the same protection under the constitution? Let's explore that a bit.
At the time of the U.S. Revolution it was common for private vessels to have cannons mounted for defense against would-be boarders. They were expen
Re: (Score:3)
So this comes down to whether you think the Constitution is a static document, written exactly how the authors pictured things in their time, or if it's designed to change and adapt as culture and language change around it.
Change was built into it, but it was deliberately made to be a hard task. It is indeed static, until amended, which it has been several times. And I see no language in it that has changed meaning since then; most words don't change meaning. I mean hell, you still dial the phone even thoug
Re: (Score:2)
In the USA, we create laws that are ostentiably within the bounds of the Constitution, despite not being explicitly stated in the document.
In the rest of the world, they amend and rewrite their Constitution (on average) once a generation.
The USA has an odd Constitutional fetishism that does not exist anywhere else in the world.
Without that fetishism, we wouldn't have idiots pointing at every law about guns or seatbelts and saying "that's not in the Constitution!!11!1"
Re: (Score:2)
In the rest of the world, they amend and rewrite their Constitution (on average) once a generation.
Right. Amend it. Sadly, the US government would rather flagrantly disobey it and use whatever interpretation method that will benefit them at the moment.
Without that fetishism, we wouldn't have idiots pointing at every law about guns or seatbelts and saying "that's not in the Constitution!!11!1"
I wish these people would do that in regards to things such as the TSA or the Patriot Act. That would be nice.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Considering the Colonial government required people to register their firearms, it's a good bet the Constitution they were using is the same one we're using (with minor adjustments). After all, if you're going to call up the militia, you need to know who has a gun and who doesn't so those who don't have a gun can be supplied with one.
Which is exactly what happened when militia drills were held.
Re: (Score:3)
The Militia Act of 1792 [constitution.org]. It required every able-bodied white male citizen (interesting distinction) above the age of 18 to be registered within the militia. It also specified what equipment they should have.
There are also records from Philadelphia showing how many firearms were owned by private citizens.
You could also reference this article [guncite.com] done by Playboy in 2001 which talks to a person who is an avid trapshooter who found, during the research for his book, that the
Re: (Score:2)
"*re-reads the Second Amendment*
Hmm, don't see the clause where it requires all my firearms to be registered with the government..."
You should start reading it from the beginning rather than the end. Your actions as part of our militia are to be "well regulated", part of regulating "well" can easily be tracking weapons. You DO know you are likely part of the militia as defined by laws right? That same regulation is why you can't have NBC weapons, if you read closely you should note the word GUN never app
Re: (Score:3)
I'm all for the Second Amendment (I almost agree with the talk.politics.guns poster who opined that handguns should be sold in vending machines next to the cig
Re: (Score:2)
I also don't see the part where the Second Amendment says you can own whatever sort of weapon you want free from any regulations whatsoever.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Criminal Investigation (Score:5, Insightful)
My issue with the organizations like the NRA is that they tend to promote the toys, but not the well regulated malitia that would stand between the populous and foreign or domestic raiding force. Where is the support of rocketry clubs that could actually provide a real defense against helicopters that would place boots on the ground? Clustering a few E engines in a simple shell could deliver enough reactant to be seriously annoying. But all they talk about is how a few pop guns are going to fend off the tanks and hummers.
Anything more than this gets you a one-way ticket to a federal prison as a domestic terrorist. The US Government and national media successfully turned the notion of a militia into a slur during the Clinton years. Just saying you belonged to a militia meant you were at least a right-wing kook and more likely a dangerous terrorist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A ludicrously expansive view of the 2nd Amendment. No one seems to disagree with limiting convicted felons rights to bear arms, but wow , an amendment is needed to stop people with a history of mental illness?
Re: (Score:2)
Full disclosure - I am not a gun owner but probably will be some day because it's fun to go to a range and shoot stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
There is a procedure to deal with constitutional amendments that you believe are "out of date". It would be nice if it was followed for a change.
Re: (Score:3)
Did you happen to see the clause where it even allows for private ownership or guns in the first place that don't have any connection to a well-regulated militia?
Well-regulated == properly functioning
militia == armed force of regular civilians, not employed by the government (such as cops and soldiers)
Essentially, every private citizen is a member of their respective state militia, and thus is allowed private armament ownership.
Just because the Second Amendment doesn't explicitly state that guns need to be serieled or registered doesn't mean it's unconstitutional for a state to pass laws requiring that guns be serieled and registered.
If we were talking about the states requiring firearm registration, you would be correct; however, this discussion is in regard to federal registration requirements, which stink of unconstitutionality.
After all, no where in the constitution does it state that cars traveling on public roads have to be serieled and registered and yet somehow they are. So unless you're going to tell me that license plates are unconstitutional then you can't tell me that gun registration is unconstitutional.
Riddle: Why do state license plates f
Re: (Score:3)
Police are going to have a field day with printed guns, which by nature won't have/need serial numbers or registration (except possibly for conceal and carry)
*re-reads the Second Amendment* Hmm, don't see the clause where it requires all my firearms to be registered with the government...
Hmmm...you better reread the whole fucking document, dude -- quoting the 2nd Amendment out of context like you just did doesn't score you any credibility points..
Except that I didn't quote shit; perhaps you should consider reading posts before you give your obviously emotional response, lest you make yourself appear the jackass, as you have done here. Congrats on that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Would turning it in for a 'gun buy back' be considered sales?
Cause I can make a zip gun for much less then they are offering for them.
Re: (Score:3)
Because we have to have some means of tracking all those guns out there committing crimes. Do you know where your guns is when you are asleep at night? Perhaps it sneaks out and holds up a few all night markets on its own.
I don't give a damn about fully automatic weapons. The primary issue that printing (or CNC manufacturing) guns is the impact that has on registering and controlling guns. Not the people holding the guns, but the guns themselves.
Lets worry more about who is carrying a gun, some guns, many
nonsense (Score:2)
people already change the stocks and receivers of their guns, you can buy them legally. there is a serial number on the barrel. by the way, people also change barrels legally, and so the serial number changes.
do you imagine that forensics retrieves a bullet from a body, and says "oh, we need to find gun with serial number xxxxxx?" no, they don't. they look for a barrel that produces "matching" lands and grooves on bullet if from a rifled barrel firearm.
Re:Technology (Score:5, Insightful)
The Chinese were so ignorant they thought gunpowder was useful for making delightful colors in the sky to amuse people.
You call that ignorant. I call that bliss. They used the technology for centuries to delight and entertain people...and nothing more. Call my cynical, but I wish more technologies followed that pattern.
Re:Technology (Score:5, Informative)
On the contrary, they started making weapons out of it in fairly short order.
This, on the other hand, is true. Guns and cannon were not an obvious application. The Chinese used it for flamethrowers, rockets and bombs. The first guns *were* produced by Chinese, about three or four centuries after gunpowder was invented.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a myth. The Chinese were making weapons that used gunpowder centuries before the Europeans figured it out. In fact, at one point in the 17th century Japan was the largest manufacturer of firearms in the world, but it was curtailed by the Shogunate for fear it would destabilize the country? That is until Commodore Perry shot some cannons in Tokyo Bay.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll admit that I know very little of the gun side of the CFR, but I suspect that these guys will find their downfall in the sale of these items. It's one thing to play around with 3D printing, but the temptation (especially for the young entrepreneur) is to start selling to friends. Once those personal hobby items go commercial, that's when you can plan on a ton of bricks for a hat.
Re: (Score:2)
is this dude someone famous that I've never heard of before? I'm just wondering why I should care what he thinks about printing guns at home. TFS doesn't even mention him other than in the title...
He's running Defense Distributed's "3D Printed Gun Contest" the article is about, so yea, probably bears mentioning.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Somebody print this AC a tin foil hat (Score:2)
I'm getting worried his old one might be wearing out.