Comments, anyone, about 3D printed guns?

All i can say is – Oy vey!

The print revolution + the gunpowder revolution = Sounds like an explosive combination!

@bookish1 Ba-dum-chhh!

The printer costs $8000, it is not like this will make guns more available. With a budget of $8000 I could take out half a city with home made nasty things.

I don’t think there will be many people rushing off to get one of those printers. It may have some small effect on gang crime in areas where you can’t get a gun all that easy, maybe a big organized gang would invest in a printer.

Personally, I would not trust a plastic gun to protect me as the shooter from malfunction while I’m using it, so I would not use a printed gun myself.

Really, trying to stop this is a bit silly though, it is almost like trying to outlaw creativity. If people are creative enough, they can find many ways of making weapons.

I think this is a totally new playing field… More than anything i think that if 3D printing weapons becomes really easy, it is more likely to end up in a ban on selling 3D printers to private citizens than anything else…

A revolution in manufacturing that could bring new advances in science, technology, and art and one of the first things we do with it is make things to kill people.

We (Humanity) are bloody morons.

I’m pretty sure the Constitution says that nothing shall abridge our right to bear 3-D Printers. I just can’t find the clause right now.

Believe it or not, the NRA will be all for stopping 3-D printing of firearms by private parties. Their real constituency is not gun owners, it’s gun manufacturers. The manufacturers the NRA is really funded by will be fine with printing guns themselves, but they don’t want it to be easy for a do-it-yourselfer to crank out hundreds or thousands of handguns.

@ETpro Exactly! The 3D printer could safely be outlawed until it was capable of printing guns. Now, taking it off the market would be a clear violation of the 2nd amendment. Anyone can see that.

Meh. Kids have been making zip guns out of wood, rubber bands, and car antennas for 60 years. They fire .22s with a range of a mile. This 3D gun is not get worth getting nervous about. The existing laws already cover firearms. If a determined person wanted a weapon they would most likely buy one on the street – where they get their illegal drugs now.

The big legal challenge in the works now is not for 3D printed guns. Nope. It’s for making Yoda heads and Micky Mouse figures without paying the royalty. Now that’s serious!

Agree, @ETPro. That was my second thought. My first thought was, just what the world needs is a new, easier way to manufacture guns.

3D guns don’t kill people: 3D people kill people!

I’m more worried about people printing parts that convert semi-auto AR-15’s into fully auto weapons of war. All the more reason to ban assault rifles IMO.

Thanks for your in-depth analysis, @janbb.

Anytime, Pachy!

@ETpro “Believe it or not, the NRA will be all for stopping 3-D printing of firearms by private parties. Their real constituency is not gun owners, it’s gun manufacturers”.

Really? How can you discount over 5 million people who believe in their cause? I trust you have a link that minimizes these people because it would be unlike you to make a statement like that without backing.

The NRA news hasn’t made a statement one way or the other about plastic guns lately so you have made conjecture. I think gun dealers would dislike the idea the most because they are on the point of direct sales. The equipment needed to make these sketchy firearms costs more than most people can afford. You can buy a lot of guns for 8–10 grand

I think when you demonize a group of law abiding working class people it diminishes your argument greatly. You must think that liberals who own guns are bad people.

“What you’re missing is that the vast portion of the NRA’s funds come not through corporate donors, but through contributions from average Americans. It was not a coincidence that between December 2012 and January 2013 the NRA grew 10,000 members every day, adding a full quarter-million new contributors to their roster since gun control reappeared in the national discussion last year. That’s just what happens when a populace that cares a lot about something gets mobilized. But the NRA – by which the Democratic party should mean “the American citizens who comprise the NRA because they believe in gun rights” – has consistently been characterized as the heartless, monolithic boogeyman.”
from: KONTRADICTIONS

Probably need to fine tune the designs a little so we can put metal bushings in key points so they don’t wear out so fast. Until they make a metallic depositing 3d printer. heh heh heh…..

@woodcutter I said nothing that discounted their membership’s numbers or commitment to their cause. What I truthfully said is you members are not who the NRA works for or listens to. The manufacturers give them boatloads of cash for dong their bidding and acting so loony that all the heat from incidents like Sandy Hook gets focused on the NRA and not the people who made the weapons used there.

The NRA can count on you and their other 5 million members paying dues come hell or high water. They only get the manufacturers many millions of dollars if they expressly do their bidding, stoking paranoia in their loyal 5 million members. This is vital because while the overall number of guns in America is rising rapidly, the number of households owing even one gun is falling rapidly. Only by stoking your paranoia can they deliver ever increasing profits to their real constituents, the manufacturers. And that’s what it’s all about. Profit! Gold pressed latinum.

Huh, less than a year after I asked this question: http://www.fluther.com/147975/a-world-without-gun-control-what-will-happen-when-anyone-can/

@phaedryx And as I remember, the consensus was “won’t never happen sic”.

First off, if any of you here have not read Makers, download it for free and read it now. Just click the link and you will see why it’s relevant. You will also see that @LuckyGuy points out the real “danger” of 3D printing; a weakening of copyright laws.

@ETpro I didn’t know there was a consensus. I remember my own skepticism that it would happen in the near future, partly because of the state of materials, but largely because all prior attempts had been to print pieces for existing guns as opposed to parts that were designed from the ground up to account for the weaker material.
The Liberator is different as it was designed for 3D printing and thus is a first step towards actually embracing a new technology; instead of perpetuating the old unaltered, it is acknowledging that new technology requires adaptation.

@poisonedantidote The printer used by Defense Distributed costs $8000. Makerbot offers machines that can easily hold the same tolerances for closer to $2000, and a well-made RepRap can be built for under $500 (possibly even under $200). Then again, machine shops can do much of the same stuff, yet there hasn’t been a serious problem with DIY gunsmiths despite the legality of having a milling machine and/or lathe in your garage.

@ETpro You still have not provided us with any proof as to how much the NRA gets from gun makers compared to the amount contributed by ordinary Americans, (and foreigners), and small businesses. Where do you think gun makers get their money to contribute? Not from the govt. So where? It really looks like its your disgruntled opinion, and will continue to be here, unless you dig those numbers up. Sound fair? You seem distressed because people that you disagree with can mobilize. Thats fine, maybe even normal. But you don’t seem too bent when billionaires George Soros and Micheal Bloomberg and probably others give millions of their own money for anti gun causes, combine their monies with their other efforts as well as the msm almost never doing anything but portraying guns and their owners in a negative light, I can really see why you are ok with that. But that’s how it works for better or worse.

Plastic guns are probably going nowhere because they will kill you if you use them. Guns have to have metal parts in them if you want to use them more than a couple times. I don’t see much of a market demand for such a thing. Why is it that people focus on the tiny fraction of instances that most everybody admits have such a small impact to the point of being nearly immeasurable? Because they are told to do it.

@woodcutter http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-industry-funds-nra-2013-1

This argument about where money comes from is utterly moronic. Money is fungible. Whether it is taken in taxes, wages, purchased goods, or you name it, it ultimately comes form all who hold money. And that includes you and I, federal, state and local governments, small businesses and massive multinational corporations. There is no magic that makes money we pay to or earn from one entity utterly different from, and pouring from a different wellspring, than money we pay to or earn from some other entity. It’s a piece of paper, for chrissake. It’s not magic.

”This argument about where money comes from is utterly moronic.”

thank you

But how do the numbers compare to the amount over 5 million people collectively contribute. Is there a way to even know?

Josh Sugarman….really?

Wow! check this out! printed lower receiver. Probably not real durable.. yet.

@majorrich I know, isn’t it so exciting!?!? Just think of all of the people that will be slaughtered when the next round of Jihaders can print out machine guns that can go through metal detectors! This is wonderful news for gun owners, Republicans and all patriots of the USA!!!

Right now, they’re going for 100 rounds without failure .., and pretty close

Bear in mind that they are replicating a part that isn’t exactly tough in the first place; using inferior materials to replicate a part that was under-engineered to begin with rarely ends well.

Note also that at least one person made an upper receiver for an AK-47 from a shovel. A fucking shovel!

I’m pretty sure printed receivers would still show in the x-ray part of check-in at airports. I know ammunition won’t make it so no need to fear @gorillapaws I am more impressed by the technology than actual function. Let’s not turn this into an anti-gun rant/flame-war. Digital prototyping is the actualization of dreams. To be able to create something that has fairly fight tolerances and need for a certain amount of strength is really highlighted in firearms manufacture.

Now an AK upper from a shovel? That’s pretty impressive too! Shadetree engineering at it’s finest!

@majorrich Who said anything about an X-ray? It’s the metal detector that won’t pick up plastic. And I have a feeling that someone will figure out ammunition too, maybe with some type of glass, or lab-created diamonds. If you’re a terrorist hell-bent on killing Americans, there’s no technology more exciting for you right now than people posting free schematics that can be used to replicate an unlimited number of weapons that can’t be detected with a metal detector.

Just because you slap a plastic AR15 lower on a real AR that is made of steel and other alloys it will still be caught my metal detectors, as if anyone will get on on a plane or federal bldg anywhere. Bushmaster has been producing rifles with non metal lowers for years. It hasn’t made the weapon any more lethal than an all metal one. Most people who are into AR’s don’t want a plastic AR when the non plastic is not that much more money or weight. This is not a new idea. The govt has already confiscated the original program from its author so this deal is dead,except for all the ones who have already downloaded it
http://www.bushmaster.com/firearms/carbon_15.asp

There is also a legal way. The lower by itself is legal. Print it first, stick some metal in there, and then any weapon using that lower receiver is detectable, allowing you to print the other parts to complete the weapon. And so long as it’s for personal use and not for sale, it’s totally legal.

Hey, remember the big scare about the Glock a few years back? The alleged “invisible gun”? Turns out that the real problem was that, while much of the gun showed up in X-rays, the people operating the X-ray scanners were too blind to see the shadow of the frame, and too ignorant to question the rest of what they saw (slide, barrel….). In other words, the scare was because of untrained security personnel.

I cant see a working printed plastic AR upper receiver. The lower half gets by because there isn’t the force on it. Unless you count the hammer pin when the carrier comes to the rear to cock the hammer back. And possibly the neck of the receiver extension (buffer tube) containing the buffer spring force. The upper contains the explosion and the barrel as well as critical fast reciprocating parts that get very hot. It’s where your face is if the plastic goes south. A .22 could work but not full power ammo. I’ll let others try it first, I’ll stay with metal guns.

@woodcutter Always remember this; just because you can, that doesn’t mean you should. I’m with you on preferring metal for certain things.

@woodcutter “I cant see a working printed plastic AR upper receiver.”

I agree, but if you can print out the barrel and then use carbon nanotubes to reinforce it, you could have something much stronger and able to tolerate explosive forces than steel.

I’m not making the argument that this is a threat today (well the liberator already is), but this whole concept is a huge pandora’s box, and is the beginning of a new epoch in humanity over the next 5 to 15 years—the age when anyone on the planet with a 3d printer and some ammunition can get their hands on an untraceable firearm that is immune to metal detectors. It doesn’t matter if they’re a convicted felon, someone with severe mental problems, or a terrorist. I’m astonished how short-sited the supporters of this technology are.

@gorillapaws By that time, I think full-on nanomachine warfare would be a larger threat. That said, there are technologies other than 3D printers that could achieve the same results; technologies that were mature before I was born. Hell, the shit Shovel AK-47 proves that! And it’s not like the IEDs on iraqi roadsides require 3D printers either.

I think that what you are worried about more is partly the inability of the law to handle new technologies and the resulting societal change, and partly your own short-sightedness that this stuff has already been thought of. See, just about any technology can be put to nefarious uses, and anybody who knows enough about technology to support any particular advance already knows that, as does anybody who has read any sci-fi. Honestly, I am astonished that you are astonished.

You are correct that it’s a Pandora’s Box. So were computers. So was the wheel. And if you are worried about what 3D printers can do in the future, you should really worry about what a machinist like me could do as of a century ago. If you want to get fancy/pricey, you could get one of these and crank out just about anything out of metal, and it wouldn’t take much more skill than using a 3D printer does. If home machining centers haven’t caused a gun proliferation in the past, I don’t see 3D printers really adding much to the issue in the future.

@jerv I’m surprised you can’t appreciate how this is a very different kind of pandora’s box from wheels and computers. And there’s a big difference between being able to individually manufacture machine guns by hand, and hitting “print”, “number of copies: 50”, on your 3d printer.

Your shit shovel can be detected by metal detectors, and the TSA porno scanners
aren’t going to be available to secure facilities like metal detectors are. Hell it looks like they start at around $40 for the handheld ones, vs the $180K per machine that the porno scanners cost. How will they secure schools? The olympics? The Superbowl? Courtrooms? Nuclear power plants and other major infrastructure targets? Think about assassinations (not just here but all over the world) that this technology will enable. How will poor countries be able to maintain law and order in places like Latin America, Africa and the Middle East?

“If home machining centers haven’t caused a gun proliferation in the past, I don’t see 3D printers really adding much to the issue in the future.”

You need to have experience and skills to manufacture weapons in a machine shop, It takes time, and is detectable (by parents, neighbors, surveillance, etc.) in the sense that other people will know you have a machine shop with tools and are buying lots of metal with plenty of physical evidence. In contrast, hitting the print key can be done by anyone, takes very little time to produce an arsenal, and the weapons will theoretically be undetectable by most available technology likely in the near future.

@gorillapaws In other words, you distrust people enough that we should never allow technology to advance.
Trust me, 3D printers aren’t that simple, especially not for people who are barely computer literate like most Americans. How manyddecades do you have dealing with manufacturing technologies? Yes, it’s easier when somebody else has already done the CAD work and run the model through a slicer… but G-code programs can be shared too.
Plus, do you think that the printing filaments for a 3D printer are that untraceable? Or that a tabletop machining center is that obvious? You know, not all machining is done on a machine the size of the OKK 50-taper I use at work. I have a Dremel that makes about as much noise as a tabletop mill, which is far quieter than a vacuum. Plus, plastic can be machined too, so I could make a plastic gun out of type of plastic that doesn’t melt at high temperatures the way the stuff in a 3D printer has to in order to print.
Turn down the hyperbole, learn the technology, and you’ll see that things aren’t quite as bad as they seem… largely because the current situation is worse than you think it is.

Relevant

@gorillapaws You also overlook the tolerance issue. Any printer that qualifies as remotely affordable cannot hold a tight tolerance the way the printer used by Defense Distributed can. Plus, even a 3D printed gun requires some QA inspection to make sure it doesn’t explode upon firing. Guess what? That requires skill as well.

But you really ought to see what they do around the world already. In parts of India, the improvised firearms industry is just… WOW! If you knew how things were already, then you wouldn’t worry about 3D printers. It’s all scare tactics, trying to demonize an emerging technology because we cannot handle the implications of technologies that already exist and actions that have been taking place for decades (if not centuries).

Whats with all the hype with untraceable firearms? They are the best kind to own if you think about it. If somebody wants to kill someone they won’t give two shits if the gun they use is traceable.

“OMG, this gun has a serial number on it so therefore Imma gonna have to cancel this heinous crime!”

said no criminal…ever.

@woodcutter There is that too, but i think the, “Ermagerd!” factor of plastic guns really freaks out people who don’t know about guns. Besides, the real giveaway that something is a gun is the “smell” of the propellant. A simple, cheap sensor (or a trained dog) can detect a gun even if is disguised as a cellphone.

It seems we may be discussing hi- tech, high end professional killers who do high value targets. Spy shit. Why again, do we poop in our pants about the shit that almost never ever happens? Because that’s what scares us?. City fucktards with Highpoints are who do the real damage. We should be more concerned with “Zamak”

I also wish to note that any restrictions on 3D printers as a result of this will have an adverse effect on the manufacturing industry as a whole, with ripple effects spreading all over the economy.

Objects made by 3D printers have many legitimate uses. For instance, I work at a foundry that uses the “lost wax” method of casting. The thing is, we don’t always use wax to make the ceramic molds we pour the metal into; sometimes we use plastic objects made on a 3D printer. An SLA (a plastic object made using Stereolithography, a form of 3D printing) can be printed in shapes that would be time-consuming/difficult/impossible to make by other means. Do you really want to drive up the cost of castings, and thus the costs of many consumer goods and services? If you knew how many things were made of castings, you probably wouldn’t. If my employer has to raise it’s prices because of restrictions on 3D printing, that would affect (among other things) water bills, oil prices, coffee prices, medical costs, and quite a few other things. Other manufacturers will have similar effects as their expenses go up.

Is it worth all that just because you are worried about something that we’ve been able to do by other means with almost equal ease for decades?

I have confidence that technology will follow this technology and make plastic firearms detectable. People see stuff in Hollywood movies and take it too much to heart. Remember, pretty much everything these people make will be from the point of view of people/writers/directors who think guns are mostly bad anyway so take it with a grain of salt.

3D printing affects pretty much anything that would be die cast. I almost forgot you worked with that stuff @jerv A company I worked with gave me the opportunity to go to KaoLun to the casting houses we used there for Golf Clubs heads. Pretty neat operation! And the tolerances are pretty tight with those too. (Angles and depth of grooves, weight etc..)
I know my Glock prints pretty large on the walk-through scanners. On the capture screen, the entire grip is clearly discernible, I’m sure Anti’s are chasing ghosts just as they did when Wonder-9’s were introduced. I wonder if and how high strength ceramics will affect the firearms industry going forward. They would be able to take significant punishment,