3D gun printing

[Jackalope]

So you are generaly not concerned about a subject until it shows to have consequences rather than trying to preven these potential consequences?

No, of course not. It's that I don't see an effective way to prevent those consequences with prior restraint. Perhaps you could propose one, and we could discuss that.

[Anomalocaris]

There are limits to what types of material can be used in 3D printing. I think the technical difficulties in using resin that can be 3D printed to create a gun that won't explode in the user's hand is still to be overcome.

So I am guessing 3D printed guns won't proliforate yet.

If you must make a gun from scrath, you might be better off making a single shot smooth bore weapon using real sheet metal and a simple metal shop. People have done it before. In WW2 the US produced a one shot handgun that cost 5 cents to make, using equipment for stamping the bowl shaped headlights on 1940s era cars.

[Something completely different]

So you are generaly not concerned about a subject until it shows to have consequences rather than trying to preven these potential consequences?

No, of course not. It's that I don't see an effective way to prevent those consequences with prior restraint. Perhaps you could propose one, and we could discuss that.

I dont know, I am still reading through the proposals made by others on youtube. And was hoping to actualy read some here.


Material restriction? Meaning that only materials can be used for printing which makes a firearm printed of those useless?
Legal restriction? I think that is out of question since it would cost to much and wont solve anything.
Forbidding mass production? I wouldnt know how to effectively inforce that.
Surveilance of the dataflow used for printing? Is that even possible? and isnt that to big a violation of the right to privacy?

[Ryantology]

The irony of this is that the NRA and gun manufacturers will lose their lobbying power if people can manufacture their own firearms, opening the door to much stricter gun control laws, even if the only way to really make those laws effective is to make the penalties draconian.

[Tiberius]

I know your kind likes to use the word "goverment" because it has almoust established itself to be a swearword in the liberterian circles.
Yet in this case the correct term to be used is Law Inforcement which probably is nowhere (but can be) privat.

Firstly, don't call me "your kind". I'm a person here, and I'm speaking as a person.

Secondly, Law Enforcement is part of the government. The government both creates and enforces laws. Indeed, often it is illegal for private citizens to enforce the law.

If law inforcement would stop registering guns it would only create a legal relaim for those who give arms to illegal circles. A gun bought and registered at the local magistrate, which is later found at a murder scene, can be traced back to the owner with the registration number, who than has to stand responsibility and explain why the firearm he purchased was found at a murder scene.

I'm not arguing that we should stop registering guns; never have. All I said was that there are already unregistered guns out there; the government knows nothing about them because they are unregistered. Printing guns would add to that problem, yes, but honest citizens would follow laws and register any guns that they made themselves. I also believe that you currently need a gun manufacturing license in order to print a gun anyway.

Banning the registration of firearms will create a legal relaim in which people who should own firearms can easily come to those via third persons.

Again, I never said we should ban the registration of firearms. Are you putting words in my mouth?

Simply stating that "criminals will do crimes anyway" is not a viable exuse to deregulate laws to create a legal relaim. It is actualy a really childish way of seing things.

Lets legalise murder because murderers will murder anyway!
Lets legalise rape because rapists will rape anyway!
Lets legalise speeding because speeders will speed anyway!

It is the purpose of laws to make criminal behavior as difficult as possible, and not to give potential criminals a legal relaim to act within.

I'm not using it as an excuse to deregulate laws. I'm using it as an excuse not to create further laws which serve no actual purpose. It is not illegal to manufacture guns. Whilst that is true, there should be no restriction on the methods made to manufacture guns, as long as such methods comply with related legislation (i.e. work safety, etc.).

Printing guns might actually be a more efficient way of producing guns in the future. We should not restrict it; doing such would only impede progress.

Who is talking about banning?!?!

Can you show me who is doing that?!

I do simply think that this is troubling and could have dangerous consequences and that therefor: debate should exist over responsible use and how abuse can be prevented.
You should try for once not to think in extremes!

If you don't think the anti-gun crowd aren't talking about banning these methods of producing guns, you are having a laugh. Can I show you who is doing that? Yes, but next time, why not do a quick Google search?

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera...-20130220/
http://boingboing.net/2012/12/09/congres...-on-3.html

I'm not thinking in extremes; I'm reacting to the action and calls for action already being taken. It makes no sense to ban a method of production; it makes lots of sense to require registration for printed guns, and for people who want to print them to have a gun manufacturing license.

[Tonus]

What happens if you're printing a gun and the printer jams?

[Something completely different]

Secondly, Law Enforcement is part of the government. The government both creates and enforces laws. Indeed, often it is illegal for private citizens to enforce the law.

Laws may be created and mostly inforced by the goverment or better put the goverment - yet the inforcement is not necesserely a goverment thing.

I'm not arguing that we should stop registering guns; never have. All I said was that there are already unregistered guns out there; the government knows nothing about them because they are unregistered. Printing guns would add to that problem, yes, but honest citizens would follow laws and register any guns that they made themselves. I also believe that you currently need a gun manufacturing license in order to print a gun anyway.

To rely on the supposed "honesty of citizens" is like hoping a fire stops burning rather than calling the fire brigade.
And how does one ensure that peopleactualy aquire a license first before printing guns, which can be done without anyone actualy taking notice?

Again, I never said we should ban the registration of firearms. Are you putting words in my mouth?

?

and there:

And who will ensure that you registere them, without the people who do it screaming "opression"?

Nobody, but then, the point of registering them is to keep track of all the legally owned guns. The government doesn't know about the illegally owned guns; if they did, they would arrest those who had them.

I guess my point is, criminals don't care about laws in the first place. If you make printing guns illegal, the only people who will do it are criminals, so you don't solve any problem.

arent you just practicaly declaring registration useless?

I'm not using it as an excuse to deregulate laws. I'm using it as an excuse not to create further laws which serve no actual purpose.

And who has the authority to declare potential new laws useless before the subject under debate has even reached any kind of legal conclusions?

You?

It is not illegal to manufacture guns. Whilst that is true, there should be no restriction on the methods made to manufacture guns, as long as such methods comply with related legislation (i.e. work safety, etc.).

The manufacturing of guns without licence is illegal.

And that does not help to prevent mass production for criminals or others.

Printing guns might actually be a more efficient way of producing guns in the future. We should not restrict it; doing such would only impede progress.

Printing guns will damage the arms market by making it possible for backwards morons to print low qualety versions of high qualety copyrighted rifles which still have the capacity of fireing 800 rounds beore breaking.
The 3D printer has it`s future in printing other stuff such as surgic material for hospitals and little things for a home in private use like dishes, cups and bla bla.
3D printers are not yet capable of producing highly sufisticated materials which can function over a long period of time.
And if they should one day be capable to do so, they will be nothing but a goldmine for parasites who dont give a damn about copyright.

If you don't think the anti-gun crowd aren't talking about banning these methods of producing guns, you are having a laugh. Can I show you who is doing that? Yes, but next time, why not do a quick Google search?

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera...-20130220/
http://boingboing.net/2012/12/09/congres...-on-3.html

What has that to do with me?

I'm not thinking in extremes; I'm reacting to the action and calls for action already being taken. It makes no sense to ban a method of production; it makes lots of sense to require registration for printed guns, and for people who want to print them to have a gun manufacturing license.

I am not calling for the ban of 3D printing!!!

Who is putting words into whos mouth!

And since we are talking about something which can be done over the internet, people will by in large not give a fuck about registration.

And people who own a methlab, believe 72 virgins are waiting for them, scream white power or want to overthrow the goverment in any way, will certainly not give a shit about a licence!

[popeyespappy]

The manufacturing of guns without licence is illegal.

No it is not. I mentioned this earlier but I'll repeat it because it looks like you missed it. The manufacturer of non-automatic firearms of less than 50 caliber for personal use is perfectly legal in the US. No license is required. You just aren’t allowed to sell the guns you make.

(NFA rules apply)

BTW, Copyrights expire rather quickly on firearms over here. Everybody and their brother makes AR-15 type rifles legally without paying royalties.

[Something completely different]

The manufacturing of guns without licence is illegal.

No it is not. I mentioned this earlier but I'll repeat it because it looks like you missed it. The manufacturer of non-automatic firearms of less than 50 caliber for personal use is perfectly legal in the US. No license is required. You just aren’t allowed to sell the guns you make.

(NFA rules apply)

BTW, Copyrights expire rather quickly on firearms over here. Everybody and their brother makes AR-15 type rifles legally without paying royalties.

And hat about manufacturing and then distributing them without payment?

Like would be in the case I am fearing - the arming of a terror group or criminal organisation.

[popeyespappy]

No it is not. I mentioned this earlier but I'll repeat it because it looks like you missed it. The manufacturer of non-automatic firearms of less than 50 caliber for personal use is perfectly legal in the US. No license is required. You just aren’t allowed to sell the guns you make.

(NFA rules apply)

BTW, Copyrights expire rather quickly on firearms over here. Everybody and their brother makes AR-15 type rifles legally without paying royalties.

And hat about manufacturing and then distributing them without payment?

Like would be in the case I am fearing - the arming of a terror group or criminal organisation.

All the information required to manufacture your own guns in the form of both 2d and 3d CAD files have been available freely for years.

http://www.cncguns.com/downloads.html