Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Printer The Internet

Leading 3D Printing Site Bans Firearm Files (theregister.com) 91

Posted by BeauHD from the voluntarily-cooperating dept.
Thingiverse, a popular 3D printing file repository, has agreed to remove downloadable gun designs following pressure from Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, who is pushing for stricter moderation and voluntary cooperation across the 3D printing industry. "However, it's unlikely to slow the proliferation of 3D printed weapons, as many other sites offer downloadable gun designs and parts," reports The Register. From the report: Earlier this year, Bragg wrote to 3D printing companies, asking them to ensure their services can't be used to create firearms. On Saturday, Bragg announced that one such company, Thingiverse, would remove working gun models from its site. The company operates a popular free library of 3D design files and had already banned weapons in its terms of use, but is now promising to improve its moderation procedures and technology. "Following discussions with the Manhattan District Attorney's Office about concerns around untraceable firearms, we are taking additional steps to improve our content moderation efforts," Thingiverse said in a statement. "As always, we encourage our users to report any content that may be harmful." [...]

At any rate, while Thingiverse may be popular among 3D printing mavens, people who like to build their own guns look to other options. [...] Bragg's approach to 3D printing sites and 3D printer manufacturers is to seek voluntary cooperation. Only Thingiverse and YouTube have taken up his call, others may or may not follow. "While law enforcement has a primary role to play in stopping the rise of 3D-printed weapons, this technology is rapidly changing and evolving, and we need the help and expertise of the private sector to aid our efforts," Bragg said. "We will continue to proactively reach out to and collaborate with others in the industry to reduce gun violence throughout Manhattan and keep everyone safe." But it seems doubtful that the sites where Aranda and other 3D gun makers get their files will be rushing to help Bragg voluntarily.

Leading 3D Printing Site Bans Firearm Files More | Reply

Leading 3D Printing Site Bans Firearm Files

Comments Filter:

  • Only one problem with this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spazmonkey ( 920425 ) on Wednesday July 23, 2025 @07:35PM (#65540810)

    In virtually the entire United States, making firearms for personal use is 100% legal.
    Printing (or machining) your own firearms, like purchasing alcohol, is regulated but not inherently illegal.
    So why is a DA pressing to censor the entire planets access to something that is only illegal in his city?
    We have been down this "community standards" test before, where the DA from the most restrictive village anywhere gets to censor everything for everyone everywhere, and it never turns out well.

    • Yes, these are consenting persons engaged in a legal activity.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by msauve ( 701917 )
      Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is opposed to civil rights.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by leonbev ( 111395 )

      A few of the more progressive states now have "ghost gun" laws that prevent you from making many gun parts without a valid serial number on it. I doubt that these same progressive states are all that eager to issue valid serial numbers to home builders without a lawsuit, so they basically made home 3D printing of most firearms illegal.

      • This, yes.

        If you print a gun (or gun parts, depending on the part), it has to be traceable to an individual (not sure how you'd want to handle that), and have a serial number that gets registered to your gun license, complete with rifling pattern (randomly generated for each print)... of course, the file would have to be secured against being modified (maybe SHA or something).

        Maybe... the registered gun license (which should be tied to an actual gun) has to be entered on a thing to generate the files for th

        • Re:Only one problem with this (Score:4, Insightful)

          by spazmonkey ( 920425 ) on Thursday July 24, 2025 @02:58AM (#65541524)

          This, yes.

          If you print a gun (or gun parts, depending on the part), it has to be traceable to an individual (not sure how you'd want to handle that), and have a serial number that gets registered to your gun license, complete with rifling pattern (randomly generated for each print)... of course, the file would have to be secured against being modified (maybe SHA or something).

          Maybe... the registered gun license (which should be tied to an actual gun) has to be entered on a thing to generate the files for the gun (or parts) which has to have it's serial number entered also, and limit each serial/license linked combo to like one or two uses that are permanently tied to the license/serial linked combo.

          Of course, one might ask... why would you need a gun (or gun parts) without a serial/identifying characteristics unless you're planning a 'big thing' that you don't want traced to you.

          Why? Literally none of this is required for a gun machined from metal, injection molded plastic, or made through any other process.
          If a 3D printed gun meets the legal standards required of every other type of firearm, what is the problem?
          No other guns have rifling patterns logged, or to be registered in a central database, or require any licenses to own most places, so what is your justification for requiring it of -only- these?
             

          • Every gun has rifling patterns logged.
            Maybe you'd be fine if someone shot your kid with a 3D-printed untraceable gun that means you can't ever press charges on that person.

            Why would you need to print 3D printed parts for your gun? Or, a whole gun?
            The barrel in your 9mm Glock should last longer than you. If you're needing a barrel without rifling, WHY? Same with those adapters to make a gun full auto... WHY?
            (Not to mention... what is your 3D printer? Or, what material are you using?)

            • "Every gun has rifling patterns logged"

              Citations please.

              • https://gunmagwarehouse.com/bl... [gunmagwarehouse.com]

                And... why would one need an untraceable gun?

                • I w nothing about living rifling patterns in that link.

                  More to your second point, why should I show a need for any firearm? Only the government's 'need' to know I have one, and what sort oit is.

                  And they need not know of my self-manufactured firearm, unless the create the crime of making my own. Which they ought not do.

                  • Well... if it's a licensed firearm/sidearm, it shouldn't be a problem.

                    Again... why do you need an unregistered firearm/sidearm?
                    I'll overlook all your grammar mistakes... I'm not an ***hole like that.

                    And, if it's "self manufactured", why do you need it?
                    Do you live in an environment that is that hostile?
                    Are there that many 'gators around? Do you need to defend your moonshine still?

          • Literally none of this is required for a gun machined from metal

            Huh? Uniquely identifiable and traceable serial numbers are legally required on all firearms. A link to that number connected to a person and filed with the government is legally required for certain classes of firearms

        • Of course, one might ask... why would you need a gun (or gun parts) without a serial/identifying characteristics unless you're planning a 'big thing' that you don't want traced to you.

          The Second Amendment was written to protect the states from a repeat of what the newly created nation had just gone through, specifically freeing themselves from what they saw as in illegitimate government.

          One argument to support most gun control was that the Second Amendment was a "collective right", a right of the states to arm a police force and/or national defense force. That is a police force or defense force that could be considered the "militia" as mentioned in the Second Amendment. The problem wit

        • If you print a gun (or gun parts, depending on the part), it has to be traceable to an individual (not sure how you'd want to handle that), and have a serial number that gets registered to your gun license, complete with rifling pattern (randomly generated for each print)... of course, the file would have to be secured against being modified (maybe SHA or something).

          Federally this is NOT true....US citizens have had and still have a right to manufacture their own firearms and you do not have to mark them w

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by skam240 ( 789197 )

            Some freedom hating states have put laws in place making this illegal....not sure how that would stand up to a lawsuit, but it is what is it now...but these state laws only apply in a very few blue states.

            It's funny how we get comments like this but we never hear conservatives complain about the loss of freedom from us banning all kinds of other dangerous stuff. That FDA and their freedom hating right? When will this freedom hating tyranny stop!?

            Oh wait, it turns out this isnt an honest argument against gun restrictions after all.

            • It's funny how we get comments like this but we never hear conservatives complain about the loss of freedom from us banning all kinds of other dangerous stuff. That FDA and their freedom hating right?

              Are you trying to argue that the FDA is a constitutionally protected right?

              • No, they are arguing that conservatives are hypocrites, and by extension their arguments are invalid.

                And by that standard, there's no one left to argue with.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        I doubt that these same progressive states are all that eager to issue valid serial numbers

        States don't issue serial numbers. Manufacturers do. And then they record the transfer of the weapons when they are sold to dealers. No sale or transfer. No record of the serial number.

        Serial numbers are pretty useless as a violence prevention tool anyway. Unlike automobile number plates, nobody sees and records the s/n at the scene of a crime. Or can spot a gun without one like a car with no plate (which our cops don't give a rats ass about anyway). They are only useful once the weapon is in police hands

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DrXym ( 126579 )
        And so it's not surprising that some websites don't want to get involved in that shitshow. It's a lawsuit waiting to happen. Same goes for everywhere else in the world where they'd prefer to not run afoul of some local ordinance about manufacturing weapons.

      • A few of the more progressive states now have "ghost gun" laws that prevent you from making many gun parts without a valid serial number on it. I doubt that these same progressive states are all that eager to issue valid serial numbers to home builders without a lawsuit, so they basically made home 3D printing of most firearms illegal.

        And yet I could probably have an entire machine shop delivered directly to the Manhatten DA office, along with a dozen copies of the anarchists cookbook ordered straight from Amazon, and use it to make all manner of mayhem. Because no one is policing machinists. Or raw aluminum alloys. Or 30-year old design documents and CAD files telling us how to make a full-auto-anything.

        Cats been out of the bag. Uninstall the fucking revolving door at the prison if we truly want to address the problem.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by quenda ( 644621 )

      Law is not the only thing that constrains people's actions. There are also moral and ethical considerations.
      You may be aware that "virtually the entire United States" as you put it, has a serious problem with gun violence?

      Given how easy and cheap it is to buy guns there, why would anyone want to 3D print a poor-quality substitute? The fear is that the main reason is to avoid responsibility for their actions. The same reason a person would drive a car without number-plates. Thingiverse chooses not to be a

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        You may be aware that "virtually the entire United States" as you put it, has a serious problem with gun violence?

        Put as a question like that; no. It's primarily a problem in places where possessing a gun is restricted or prohibited and as a consequence, said possession becomes a status symbol in some communities. And once you've got one, and a propensity for violating the law (also a status symbol), you've got to use it to prove your status.

      • Law is not the only thing that constrains people's actions. There are also moral and ethical considerations. You may be aware that "virtually the entire United States" as you put it, has a serious problem with gun violence?

        Legal defensive gun use occurs far more often than criminal or negligent gun use. Keep in mind that defensive use does not necessarily mean a shot had to be fired. The racking of a 12-guage pump shotgun can convince an intruder to immediately leave with great haste. Also many firearms deaths are suicides, gun bans just lead to other methods of suicide.

        Gun bans are security theatre, nothing more than placebos. If you want to talk about proper criminal and mental background checks, mandatory safety trainin

        • So killing yourself with a gun is legal. Good to know.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by drnb ( 2434720 )

            So killing yourself with a gun is legal. Good to know.

            Its a homocide, its just difficult to prosecute.

          • So is some teenage girl overdosing herself on acetaminophen and risking dying a horrific death by liver failure, but I see it at least once or twice a month. We need to ban Tylenol right now! Won't someone think of the children?!

        • If you want to talk about proper criminal and mental background checks, mandatory safety training, mandatory safe storage, ... then we are discussing things that will actually save lives.

          As a Canadian I have no problem with any of those things, they have been law here forever. Don't ever think it will stop the people who want to ban guns though. It will not.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by quenda ( 644621 )

            Don't ever think it [regulation] will stop the people who want to ban guns though. It will not.

            Who are these people? I've not met any. Are they too busy guarding cornfields?

            • In Canada they are called the Liberal party.

            • Don't ever think it [regulation] will stop the people who want to ban guns though. It will not.

              Who are these people? I've not met any. Are they too busy guarding cornfields?

              Never been to California? They banned some guns. The let current owners registers them if they were finger printed and background checked.

              A few years later the State Legislature tried to revoke the registrations and force the guns to be turned in.
              California Bill 2013 AB 174.

              Now the funny thing is, if you look up that bill it will appear to be something completely different, unrelated to firearms. Some boring funding bill. When the bill was brought to the floor the smarter Democrats realized what a PR

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by quenda ( 644621 )

                Never been to California? They banned some guns.

                "some guns" ? You mean assault rifles? sub-machine guns?
                Surely everywhere bans "some guns"? Googling ... no, apparently in Texas you can buy a 50-cal machine gun, or even a 155mm howitzer.
                However an M982 Excalibur Round is not available for civilian purchase, nor is the W48 nuclear shell. If you do manage to find one, there is a $200 stamp tax. Per round. Congratulations on your liberties.

                Meanwhile California is awash with guns. My friends lived in the US for a bit, and their kids told us about the "a

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by quenda ( 644621 )

          If you want to talk about proper criminal and mental background checks, mandatory safety training, mandatory safe storage, ... then we are discussing things that will actually save lives.

          I do. Who said "gun bans"? There are plenty of countries where these measures seem to work. Add to this that like cars, guns should be registered, with serial numbers. The primary purpose of 3D printing gun parts seems to be to circumvent such safety measures.

          There may however be a partial technological solution. Maybe. Colour printers often put invisible tracking codes on output in order to combat counterfeiting (and help the NSA). Perhaps 3D printers might be require to do something similar?

          • The primary purpose of 3D printing gun parts seems to be to circumvent such safety measures.

            I actually doubt that. I expect if the law required a serial number folks would add one. I have friends that purchased a couple of 80% lower receivers, which are not considered a firearm and have no serial numbers. However when they processed that last 20% they put serial numbers on them. ABC123 and XYZ123. Now they can take these to the range and go plinking and not worry about a passing cop who wants to see a serial number ("in plain view" and all that). They are compliant. The serial number does not need

        • Gun bans are security theatre, nothing more than placebos. If you want to talk about proper criminal and mental background checks, mandatory safety training, mandatory safe storage, ... then we are discussing things that will actually save lives.

          I'd argue that the suggested means to save lives are as much security theater as gun bans.

          Just how much training is "enough" to be considered someone that can be trusted to own a firearm? For many states the required training for a concealed carry permit is having taken a hunter safety course. For some states this is inadequate. Take Illinois as an example, they require 16 hours of training, and this training costs something like $200. That can be a considerable investment for working class people, and

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by drnb ( 2434720 )

            Gun bans are security theatre, nothing more than placebos. If you want to talk about proper criminal and mental background checks, mandatory safety training, mandatory safe storage, ... then we are discussing things that will actually save lives.

            I'd argue that the suggested means to save lives are as much security theater as gun bans.

            History shows otherwise. Consider mandatory hunter safety training. I have only been through hunter safety training in three states, but in all of those the classes were mostly general purpose firearms safety. Including safe handling and safe storage. Google reports that these classes have reduced hunting related incidents and accidents by about 80%. I think it is a safe bet non-hunters would benefit from similar instruction. Google reports that both mandatory and voluntary safety classes have been credited

            • History shows otherwise. Consider mandatory hunter safety training. I have only been through hunter safety training in three states, but in all of those the classes were mostly general purpose firearms safety. Including safe handling and safe storage. Google reports that these classes have reduced hunting related incidents and accidents by about 80%. I think it is a safe bet non-hunters would benefit from similar instruction. Google reports that both mandatory and voluntary safety classes have been credited with reducing incidents and injuries by researchers.

              I'd expect a great many laws that could be sown to improve public safety, that doesn't make them constitutional. We could make the world safer by ignoring the right to remain silent under police interrogation. We could have a study showing the world is a safer place if we remove the protections on being free from search and seizure without a warrant or probable cause. Even though a hunter safety course is a very low bar to clear on demonstrating safety there's an inherent problem to placing conditions on

      • Law is not the only thing that constrains people's actions. There are also moral and ethical considerations.

        That's true but people lacking morals and ethics are not bound by such constraints.

        You may be aware that "virtually the entire United States" as you put it, has a serious problem with gun violence?

        Can you define "gun violence"? I've seen how the Brady Campaign defines "gun violence" and they had to shoehorn suicide into the definition to make their numbers look like there was a problem of "gun violence" in the USA. Their "logic" was that any action involving a firearm was inherently violent, or some other bullshit.

        As most people would define "violence" is use of force against an innocent person. For the Brady Campai

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by quenda ( 644621 )

          Can you define "gun violence"? I've seen how the Brady Campaign defines "gun violence" and they had to shoehorn suicide into the definition to make their numbers look like there was a problem of "gun violence" in the USA.

          Violence is ... stop playing dumb. Use of force to harm, or more broadly including the threat of force.

          Their "logic" was that any action involving a firearm was inherently violent, or some other bullshit.

          Why are you getting bogged down in semantics? Is hunting violence? Not in this context. People can refer to an earthquake as violent. Just pick a definition, make it clear, and don't whinge that others use a different one. Yes homicide and suicide should be treated as separate issues.

          As most people would define "violence" is use of force against an innocent person.

          WTF does "innocent" have to do with it? Aside form innocence being subjective. Are gang wars or Palestine non-violen

      • Law is not the only thing that constrains people's actions. There are also moral and ethical considerations.
        You may be aware that "virtually the entire United States" as you put it, has a serious problem with gun violence?

        How is this relevant?
        First, it is a District Attorneys job to deal with criminal law, nothing more. It is not a DA's place to use his offices power enforce his personal moral considerations upon anyone, not in his district and certainly not the world at large. To do that is an abuse of office and both corrupt and arguably a criminal act itself.
        Secondly, I do not disagree we have a problem with gun violence. We have tools to deal with that, and we should be using them. Censorship is not a valid, or legal, solution to any problem.
        We have many problems in our society. What other topics do you advocate solving through censorship?
        By extension, do you believe eliminating the First Amendment would solve all societies problems then?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by quenda ( 644621 )

          First, it is a District Attorneys job to deal with criminal law, nothing more.

          Oh I agree. Sorry I was not more clear that with "morality" I was referring to the website choosing not to host gun parts. Not the DA.

          The question of whether the government should attempt to censor gun plans is a separate one. It does seem like a bad idea, if it is anything like the "war on drugs" or the DMCA.

    • Pretty sure the solution is always that someone, somewhere, will host the files.

      • Pretty sure the solution is always that someone, somewhere, will host the files.

        Is that excusing the actions of a government official because, "you can't stop the signal"? I hope not.

        There is some truth to the internet treating censorship as damage and routing around it. While I see this as something the government is unable to stop there should be some kind of punishment, or at least some admonishment, for this DA making an attempt at censorship. If that doesn't happen then that only emboldens government officials to try more censorship.

        There's almost certainly going to be a lesson

        • Not excusing them. However, of all the awful things happening in the US state and local governments, this one doesn't really rate. Not many people can 3D print, and even fewer will choose to print guns. If those that want to print guns are mildly determined, they'll be able to get the files to do so. So this is a great evil, but microscopic impact. It needs to be fixed, but not at huge cost. if I had to bargain with the other side, I'd give this up in favor of something more important.

          By comparison, allowin

    • Re:Only one problem with this (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MacMann ( 7518492 ) on Wednesday July 23, 2025 @09:34PM (#65541042)

      So why is a DA pressing to censor the entire planets access to something that is only illegal in his city?

      Because the DA sees guns as the problem than anything the DA's office is doing to prevent crime.

      This has been litigated before, restricting access to 3D printer files for firearms is a First Amendment issue.

      Because this has the impact of restricting access to weapons this is also a Second Amendment issue.

      If some office or agent of the government is searching for and removing "papers and effects" without some kind of warrant then this is a Fourth Amendment issue. To be clear, anyone acting upon a request from some government official becomes an agent of the government, as in Thingiverse taking down files from their file servers because the some DA in New York asked them to then the people at Thingiverse become government agents. If Thingiverse is compelled to remove the files because of some warrant, court order, or similar action of the government then they are not government agents. There's a fine line here and I'm no lawyer so there can be room for interpretation. I'm some rando on the internet so don't take my word for it, look to legislation and precedent on where this line is drawn.

      Perhaps the Fifth Amendment comes into play as there should be some "due process" (with due process having room for interpretation) for any kind of order coming from the government that denies people property, and digital files are intellectual property. Do I need to mention again that I'm a rando on the internet trying to understand what is written in law?

      If there is any kind of punishment for failing to comply with the DA's request then this can be a Sixth, Seventh, and/or Eighth Amendment issue for not having a trial by jury or such.

      By the DA claiming to have any authority to make such a request there's a Ninth and/or Tenth Amendment issue.

      There's all kinds of wrong with a DA simply asking Thingiverse to take down any files, this gets worse for the DA because Thingiverse complied with the request. With this impacting people's access to digital files throughout the USA there could be standing for the citizens outside New York to take this DA to court. I'd guess this would be foremost argued as a First Amendment issue, not just because this is an infringement on something akin to speaking or publishing but also because anything taken to court on Second Amendment grounds tends to take a beating in the courts because we have too many judges that can't read what is clearly stated in the US Constitution as amended.

      If some DA can order the taking down of files that they find offensive then where does this end? What other kinds of files could be taken off the internet, therefore restricting access to people around the world, because some DA asked file sharing services to take these files down?

      If people are asking where the slippery slope is on this then I'd suggest looking behind them.

    • I look at this as the modern equivalent of book banning. Just because a right or concept is unpopular with one group does not mean that you need to walk into the library and pull all the books about it.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      Yes it is. But selling those parts to somebody else is illegal. Maybe Thingiverse just doesn't want to be dragged into lawsuits.

    • NY is literally experimenting with socialism, and will basically get it with their next mayor.

      Some people are wringing their hands, I sort of look forward to the experiment. It was a human-packed shit hole already, might as well lean into it and make it a full blown Calhounian "universe 26".

  • Problems with printing fire arms (Score:3)

    by gurps_npc ( 621217 ) on Wednesday July 23, 2025 @08:22PM (#65540894) Homepage

    The problem is not just that it is hard to regulate/stop. The problem is that the people doing it are not being responsible.

    You see, you can print the guns out of any color. And multi-colors. It is totally possible to print it out of black plastic. Those look like guns.

    But it is also totally possible to print it out of neon colored plastic.
    And it is totally possible to add embellishments to the printed gun to make it look like a sci-fi blaster.

    And people do this. They have competitions for best printed gun and for most fantastical. So people walk around with real guns that have minimal metal in them and look like a toy gun. You can walk in a comic book convention with these things. You can walk down the street after shooting someone and the cops will ignore you.

    I am not saying I have a solution, I am saying that printed guns are a problem. I do not even know if it is possible to solve the problem. But the people that ignore these issues are fools.

    • Here is a picture of a real, printed gun with the word "Nerf" printed on it, from: https://defcad.com/library/reb... [defcad.com]

      https://media.defcad.com/entityimages/888c94e4dca849148a73fcbf5547ff8b.png [defcad.com]

    • For what it's worth, simply painting a normal gun to look like a toy [kold.com] has been attempted before, too. But I agree that conversions like this [wcnc.com] must be pretty spooky if you're in law enforcement. Still, toy gun form factors needn't be the only gimmick; consider the chaos a briefcase gun [popularmechanics.com] could unleash without scrutiny. The sky is the limit for designing concealed weapons if one is sufficiently imaginative and determined.

      • Very true.

        As long as you can fit a round or a clip of ammo in it along with the mechanisms, you could turn basically anything into a gun... an old foldy phone, a thicker laptop, a computer mouse. Basically, as long as you can fit a suitable barrel and mechanism, it'd work. The plastic ones would only be good for one or two shots, if you use the graphite or metallic extruded material or resins, that'll show up on any scans.
        Unfortunately, the plans have been out in the wild for so long that even if Thingive

    • The problem is not just that it is hard to regulate/stop.

      Here are my replica parts files. Intended for gunsmith training with respect to assembly and disassembly. The printed barrel is solid so that a round cannot be chambered.

    • The real farking problem are the upcoming lasers.

      You have a laser gun with 10 to 20 shots that actually indeed looks like a SciFi gun, or like a simple torch light.

      Don't get me wrong: they exist already. The last big trade event when they tried to sell them in big quantities on Temu, Lazada and such got shut down over two nights or so.

      Look on youtube, you find videos about them all over ...

    • Re:Problems with printing fire arms (Score:4, Insightful)

      by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Thursday July 24, 2025 @07:14AM (#65541830)

      The problem is not just that it is hard to regulate/stop. The problem is that the people doing it are not being responsible.

      You see, you can print the guns out of any color. And multi-colors. It is totally possible to print it out of black plastic. Those look like guns.

      But it is also totally possible to print it out of neon colored plastic. And it is totally possible to add embellishments to the printed gun to make it look like a sci-fi blaster.

      And people do this. They have competitions for best printed gun and for most fantastical. So people walk around with real guns that have minimal metal in them and look like a toy gun. You can walk in a comic book convention with these things. You can walk down the street after shooting someone and the cops will ignore you.

      I am not saying I have a solution, I am saying that printed guns are a problem. I do not even know if it is possible to solve the problem. But the people that ignore these issues are fools.

      Go back 50 years in rural America and you’ll find a high school senior pulling into the school parking lot with a real 12-gauge shotgun hanging in the rear window. With the teacher hanging outside smoking saying ”Hey, you have any luck in the blind this weekend?”

      No SWAT team was activated. No parents were admonished and villified in the public square by a rabid gaggle of Karens. No child was kicked out of school and robbed of a future. No child even felt threatened.

      You tell me what the hell changed. Because the answer isn’t toy guns are too colorful and popular. Had those as kids too.

      • I remember in high school having a shotgun or .30-06 in the rear window of the pickup - in the school parking lot! There was NEVER any problems.

        If two people had an issue they would duke it out on the playground. And 2 hours later they would be best of friends. They didn't shoot up the school.

        The problem is all the darn drugs they are shoving down kids throats that are making them go psycho. Look up the affects of the drugs they are giving kids these days, it will scare you.

      • You seem to be replying to someone else. You ignored my point entirely and made up a new one, not understanding what I am concerned about at all.

        I am not saying toy guns are bad, I am saying real guns designed to look like toy guns are bad.

    • The only problem is that not enough people are doing it. Can't stop the signal, baby.

      • I never said you could stop it, I said that the people doing it are irresponsible.

        You replies that more people should do it... being irresponsible. Without any reason at all.

        You appear think saying yay for my side is an argument. It only makes you look foolish.

          You want to convince someone, trying making a claim that something is a good idea, not just that you can't stop it.

  • That could hit against my benign hobby (Score:3)

    by Misagon ( 1135 ) on Thursday July 24, 2025 @03:42AM (#65541572)

    I'm afraid that that could turn against my hobby: which is the total opposite.

    I like movies, and objects in movies (called "props"), and building/collecting my own replicas of them.
    And in action and sci-fi movies the most prominent, most recognisable movie props are not always, but often guns. Examples include Deckard's gun from Blade Runner, the Pulse Rifle from Aliens and Han Solo's blaster from Star Wars -- all based on actual real-world fire-arms with embellishments.

    And I live in a country with strict gun control. So I have to build them out of plastic: sometimes a mix of a store-bought toy gun, 3D-printed parts and parts scratch-built from pipes and plastic card.
    Then I paint them in realistic colour schemes, often trying to replicate the exact rust and wear patterns of the original object.
    I often describe it as "model building in scale 1:1", because it is using the same materials and techniques.

    I actually really detest guns in real life. What I like is delving deep into research and the build process itself. I don't even have a movie prop gun on display right now.

  • A mini mill and a lathe could manufacture. So can metal powder and a casting. And then there's the whole "shall not be infringed" part of the Constitution to deal with. Not saying I know the answer to gun violence. But this ain't it.
  • Wrongful death suits would take care of this issue, tout suite!
  • It's not only adults who use Thingiverse.
    When I was a teenager, I knew someone who paralyzed his friend with a .38 pistol. Back in 1980, it was the very first wheelchair ramp I had ever seen in real life. If he is still alive, he spent all that time in a wheelchair because someone let a minor use a firearm.

  • So firearms will get their OWN site.

  • None of you are "well-regulated". And NONE of you have risen up to save us from a dictator trying to take control, with his private army of g-ICE-tapo.

    You just want to kill anyone not like you - that's your great dream.

Slashdot Top Deals

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer

Close