Ya, good luck getting anything to go through congress, good or otherwise. Banning what you can make on your printer, wow, what a judicial nightmare that will be.
This will be interesting to monitor forward on many levels. Thank you, Sayak.
Without getting into a polilitical debate about the 2nd amendment.
From an historical perspective, I find it very interesting that the original inventor named his design "The Liberator." Guide Lamp (General Motors) gave the same moniker to an almost identical gun in WWII. That gun's intended purpose was to be used by resistance fighters against the Nazi occupation. I wonder if the current designer purposely used the same name and/or if he is trying to make a statement there.
As far as "banning what you can make on your printer" isn't it already a law that you are required to possess a firearms manufacturing license to make gun parts? (as in from metal for a "real" gun) If so, why doesn't this already fall under that law?
No. You can manufacture complete firearms for your own use without any licensing as long as it is for your personal use only. As long as it falls within NFA rules for overall length, barrel length, caliber etc.., you can build it, possess it, but you can not sell it or otherwise transfer it. You have to build 80% of it yourself, so you can actually buy castings or forgings and complete them. This is how the 80% AR-15 lowers and 1911 lowers are legal to build without BATF interference.
Bunny Boots and Bearcats: Utility Sled Mayhem
What's so wrong about making a primitive single shot like that probably won't last many shots (even through high tech means) and then posting the plans on the Internet?
I mean, if that's illegal, then wouldn't it be illegal for me to go online right now and shop for plans on how to build a full sized black powder cannon? But I could, but no one has a problem with those, their carriages weighing in at 100 - 2000 pounds each - have been the ones I've seen.
How could they pass a law against the plastic single shots printed the high tech way without preventing legal buying and selling of BP cannon plans?
Fear mongering fools, wait they're not fear mongering 'cause they're giving it away for free.
I may be slow, but I get where I'm going!
Thanks, Doug. I was unclear of how that worked.
Perhaps the issue is in the traceability. If you buy the castings etc to manufacture your own AR or whatever, are you required to serialize it?
The article mentioned "possible" violation of firearms export act. Maybe the issue is in the design/software being exported to another country. Seems to me that being able to download those files in another country is not unlike shipping a gun production facility to that country.
you don't have to buy castings to be legal. You can start from scratch. And no serial number.
I see several problems here: 1) Plastic guns, if you made one, and had kids would pose a safety issue if they mistake it for a toy. My kids know the difference. 2) Plastic guns several years ago were given orange plastic tips so the police didn't shoot you by mistake if you had one. Do you want the police to act as all plastic guns can kill? How many dead kids do you want?
See it is not really a question of can you make one, anyone can make a zip gun without a $5000 3d printer. The question is why excite folks to try. Bad press is the last thing we need.
As to why make one? Why do we do lots of the things we do?! It's called the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Also, it's just darn cool to make things from absolute scratch. I will never be able to afford one of these printers, but if I could, I would love to make a gun just for the heck of it.
Your guns are metal and wood for a reason. Ok, some today are polymer but the division is still there. Do you want someone being killed because the line is blurred once again? No.
I agree with this statement," It's called the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness". Until Oliver Wendell Homes with the fire in a crowed theater. If your "pursuit of life, liberty and happiness" is drinking and driving, drinking and shooting firearms, fireworks, and petrochemicals around kids.... The list is endless. Is it a neat idea, seeing what you and a high tech toy can make, Yes. I just see this as a flash point.....
I think another issue might be the idea that, since those printers will one day be in every home-just like computers that were once 5 grand each, ANYONE will soon be able to make their own gun-including those legally prohibited from buying a gun. (I know, criminals don't follow laws, that's why they're criminals.)
Maybe the answer should be regulating the sale and/or distribution of those electronic design files as though thew were the sale of a gun.
Wait, never mind. Then you have all of the copyright and duplication issues that music and other media have. For example: I buy a rifle from Sportsman's and there's only ONE rifle. If I sell it, I can only sell the ONE. I buy those files and print my ONE gun, but then I can just keep printing more and more.
Yup, the only way to regulate this type of gun is going to be on the possession side. I doubt they'll be able to regulate it from the electronic file/duplication/distribution side.
I have to admit, I'm on the fence on this one. I think, for the long term,this is a very very bad thing, but I do like the idea of a law abiding citizen being able to print a gun that would otherwise be legal to own if it were commercially made.
Ron cops shooting unarmed kids is not new and no plastic guns involved.
Now left only to be a turd in the forrest and the circle will be complete.Use me as I have used you
People who are sensible need to practice sensibility. Being stupid or allowing others to be stupid can indeed get one in big trouble or killed (I won't get into a recent FLA court case regarding this). Everyone looks for a way to scapegoat their own stupidity upon others rather than accept responsibility for what they do.
Here is a somewhat related aside: in the early 1980s, my 4 year son, fully outfitted as a cowboy including two shiny six shooters on his belt, boarded a SeaAirmotive propjet in Dillingham, bound for Anchorage. No one said a thing, everyone smiled, and the pilots invited him up to the cockpit to see how they flew that big bird. My, how times have changed... and not for the better IMHO.
Lots of stuff floating in this thread..
Plastic receivers already exist. They are quite popular in AR's: Carbon 15's, Cavalier Arms, Frontier Arms, etc make them.
Most likely the U.S. Gov't is using ITAR (look it up) regulations to prohibit the distribution of firearms planes. ITAR covers the export of all kinds of things like scopes, accessories, actual firearms, even firearms training.
Bunny Boots and Bearcats: Utility Sled Mayhem
I'm thinking, why should I care if a law abiding citizen makes a gun or gun part with his printer? It doesn't make any difference to me if a law-abiding citizen has a home-made gun or a hundred home-made guns or three safes of store-bought guns. Why is it any of my business?
Why would it be any of the government's business? Beyond the loss of tax revenue from the sale of firearms in the store, I'm assuming the government would argue that the main problem would be that ANYONE could make a gun from the internet in their own home, e.g., teenagers, felons taking advantage of the "internet printer loop-hole", etc.
I'd better stop here or I'll start throwing out more quotes...