Close



Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Super Moderator curious aardvark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    8,818
    Quote Originally Posted by LambdaFF View Post
    Engineering teachers have access to lathes and mills : they could make actual working weapons faar less dangerous to the user. Yet somehow they have refrained from it, no ?

    Anyone can buy a mill and lathe. I haven't seen a ban on those. I don't expect there will be a ban on 3D printers anytime soon. This is just hype piling on hype.

    There is no need for ammo shells to build a projectile weapon, you can rig a very effective induction rail gun for less than 400$. We're not banning car batteries or mosfets either are we ?

    So let's stop with the nonsense already.
    The difference is in the skill level required to make the weapon.
    Any non-metal parts can be made from plastic.

    Anyone with a metal 3d printer can probably acquire the cad files for an ak47 and print the parts.
    To manufacture those same parts in a more conventional manner requires a lot of skill and knowlege.

    That's the difference.

    So yeah, 3d printed guns will be a problem when metal printers get cheap and criminals realise how easy it is to make untraceable guns that don't have to be transported over national borders.

    And no the problem is NOT the same in the states - you already have far more guns than people. But in the rest of the world where guns are tools and not an inalienable right - it will be a growing and serious issue.

    Also to make ammunition you just need the casing and bullet (both can easily be printed) a couple of youtube videos to walk you through making the propellant and ignitors.
    So yeah becasue the technology of 3d printing takes the skill away from making complex parts - it is going to be a major issue in the next decade or two.
    Last edited by curious aardvark; 04-26-2015 at 11:35 AM.

  2. #22
    Technician postmahomeson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    85
    Add postmahomeson on Facebook Add postmahomeson on Google+
    and even then you know unless you print it out of metal/carbon fiber it really is a one use gun and would be a waste of money imagine every time you shot of a cheap plastic gun for $20 and every time he shot it , the overall cost would an alert to the guys ( unless he's rich ) also you could easily comment an embedded google analysis tracking code and watch the traffic and besides 3d printing gave us a lot of miracles and it's not like a 3d printer can make chemicals , i don't know if you are aware of
    the cost of cyber foot prints see i am from Canada so one of the things that is currently part of the mandatory part of education is how much people could easily discard there life , i am not trying to sound like a hater but there are results for actions in regards to social nature. nature is reflective so good things build up and so does trouble

  3. #23
    Engineer-in-Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI / Ft Walton Beach, FL
    Posts
    398
    Add Wolfie on Thingiverse
    Clearly many people are unaware of a lot of things surrounding guns and their manufacture.

    1. "Its a one use gun". Not entirely true and only true in some of the situations. Yes, the first design is for all practical purposes a single use weapon. Many of the current and later designs are not. In fact most currently available designs are not.

    2. "Its not detectible by a metal detector". Again, only partially true. Some of it would not be and only if it were printed from plastic. The ammo certainly is detectible. Any springs or metal barrels are. Most metal detectors are capable of finding a quarter in your pocket let alone a bullet or spring. If not properly aligned or maintained, yes some metal detectors may miss the small stuff. So, is that the fault of the 3D printer or the fault of the scanner/maintenance company/operator?

    3. "Anyone can 3D print a gun". No, not everyone can. Yall know how long it takes for you to become proficient at making good prints of common things. Now imagine how long it takes to get proficient to print parts that can contain the pressures involved in firearms (+30k psi). Should be self evident that not everyone is going to easily download a STL and press the print button and end up with a printed weapon that will actually work. Self evident unless you have been feeding at the trough of political BS. Could most people eventually do it? Yea, possibly. Likely not and most would give up after a couple attempts and obtain an illegal firearm on the street corner for $50 from another criminal.

    4. "It takes skill to make a gun but not to print one". No, not entirely true. In fact under some circumstances, there is MORE skill involved in printing a gun part than making a gun using conventional materials. For example, you can purchase what is called an 80% lower for an AR that has no serial number and is not a gun according to all current laws. Then you buy the jig and drill bits, again, just hardware, nothing illegal. If you can operate a drill, you can finish the remaining 20% lower receiver of an AR, most likely in less time that it takes to 3D print one. THAT takes less skill than 3D printing one. I know, I have done both. I have yet to produce a usable lower by 3D printing it and have mostly given up trying.

    5. "The only reason to 3D print a gun is for criminal activity". No, not so either. Many people wish to manufacture their own firearm for many reasons, the least of which is for criminal use. Personal knowledge. Modified design. Keeping the gov out of our bidness. R & D. Etc.

    6. "The government tracks guns so its illegal to make them yourself". Zero truth. The government doesn't track guns. They track serial numbers. In the case of an AR (scary black assault rifles for yall unaware), only the lower portion of the receiver carries a serial number. No other part is tracked by any agency. You can purchase barrels, uppers, bolts, firing pins, triggers, stocks etc all perfectly legal with no involvement of an FFL or registration in any way. Buying the lower requires a FFL transfer and registration of the serial number if its a commercial purchase. Personal transfers vary state to state. No its not illegal to make guns for your own use. You can make guns all day and have no serial numbers on them, not register them and be perfectly legal doing so. You, however, can NOT sell them, give them away or otherwise transfer them to another person. That part IS illegal.

    7. "By printing an unlicensed gun, it means they intend to use it illegally". So if I go fill up a jerry can with diesel fuel, then run to the hardware store and grab some pipe and fittings, then run down to a farm supply and buy some fertilizer, at that point I should be arrested? Those are all the main parts for a pipe bomb. By the same logic as printing a gun that it must be intended to be used illegally, then they should track all those things too and arrest anyone buying them because they intend to make a bomb. Maybe I just needed fuel for my tractor, needed to fix a water pipe and needed some fertilizer for the old ladies flowers. And could it be that the printed gun was going to be used at a legal range to experiment with?

    Sorry, but some of you need to stop drinking the koolaid. There are FAR more dangerous technologies out there ALREADY in the hands of criminals and being used daily by them than their potential use of 3D printers to make a gun. Plexiglass can be cut with simple tools and formed into a totally undetectable weapon. Are we banning it? NO. Cell phones are used all freaking day by criminals to make drug deals, coordinate robberies, and to take/make illegal sports bets. Are we banning those? NO. Various chemicals commonly available at a local grocery store can be combined for various illegal uses, explosives being only one of those. Are they banned? NO. Any 8yr old has the skills to use the internet to find plans for bombs ranging from simple firecrackers to a nuclear device. Are we banning the internet? NO. Computers are used daily to hack into networks to steal large sums of money and personal information. Are we banning computers? NO. All of those things CAN be used for criminal use. Are they? Should they too be regulated, banned and controlled? Now Orwellian do you want to get? Get a freaking grip people. There are far bigger fish to fry to curtail criminal activity than worrying whether one of them is gonna use a printed gun.

  4. #24
    Technologist
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    eezitec.com
    Posts
    130
    Follow raysspl On Twitter Add raysspl on Facebook
    The growing obvious hype of 3D printing matched with precedence & superlatives -- whether good or bad -- will only continue to bring attention. The best way is to ignore most dumbfounded critics & focus on the meaningful work. I agree that there far worse things than a 3D printed gun, as noted by a few of you here, but it's still a valid concern, albeit an overblown one.

  5. #25
    Engineer-in-Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI / Ft Walton Beach, FL
    Posts
    398
    Add Wolfie on Thingiverse
    Concern is one thing. Paranoia is a whole different level. Wait until the first printed weapon is used in a crime. It will be a media firestorm for weeks. Mark my words.

    While at the same time, nothing but crickets from the media when a 3D printed limb or brace is made to aid an injured person or animal.

  6. #26
    I agree with Wolfie on pretty much all points. The people who are freaking out about being able to print guns are mostly lacking the knowledge on what is readily available to the public in terms of 3D printing capabilities, and/or lacking the knowledge on how firearms work.

    This reminds me a lot of the time Glocks became popular back in the 1980's. Glocks were the first mass-produced guns made with polymer frames and the media immediately went BONKERS over "plastic guns" that could get through metal detectors and all hell broke loose. This is, of course, completely ridiculous as only the grip and frame of the gun were plastic; the slide, barrel, firing mechanism and ammunition were made of steel just like every other gun. This media firestorm brought us the Undetectable Firearms Act and is the very reason why guns are required by law to contain at least 3.7oz of metal today. It was completely ridiculous then, and it's completely ridiculous now.

  7. #27
    Did you know of test fired AR-15 printed by FOSSCAD members and it's designed to be the lightest available, another that includes a printed stock and grip. Awesome right!!!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •