You can make single shot weapons from pretty much 100% plastic with just like a nail as the firing pin. But those aren’t really effective weapons at all, and you can make a better shotgun with some pipes from the hardware store.
Even if you could make fully functional firearms with 3D printers, this is still stupid. 3D printers for hobbyists were originally all hand built with common electronic parts and if more states pass regulations like this, DIY is going to be the new trend again where everybody builds their own printers instead of buying one and it’ll just get easier and easier and the government won’t be able to regulate that at all.
And, honestly, I’m all for that future, and sort of excited for it. The regulations are moronic and dumb, but just like digital surveillance and information suppression laws like age verification, it’s just going to make the darknet and none regulatable things more popular, which is great, in my opinion. I yearn for the day where the commoner gets online and Tor or I2P is their first choice of connection. Where the government has no control over the citizen and what they think, do, or say online or in their own private life.
While 100% is currently impractical, you can actually print 95% of a gun for 22lr. You need a nail for a fireing pin a barrel insert, and spings you can get from a nerf gun. That said, you could use the same to convert a nerf gun.
I’m also not talking about the single shot proto gun you’ve seen, I’m talking about a scaled model of a 1911. Guns are so fucking simple and regulation is like trying to prevent lock picking.
No, you cannot have a firing chamber made of plastic, unless you use engineering grade plastics, in which case, it’s cheaper to just buy a gun, not like they are expensive or difficult to get.
For the same reason that it would be better to regulate polluters than to expect individuals to recycle their waste en masse. Regulating this at an individual level is demonstrably less effective, given that the recovery of self-created guns used in crimes has increased significantly in recent years.
Whether anti-gun 3D-printing algorithms will even work isn’t certain yet, but I’m all for giving it a try and forcing people to risk acquiring said weapons via legit manufacturers and shops which may be more traceable or risk the black market.
My printer is not connected, its firmware is opensource, and use a VPN. I’m pretty sure whoever has bad intents will have no issue figuring out how to get a model and print it.
I believe this regulation would mostly impact casual 3D-printing enthusiasts who minds their privacy, and set a precedent to regulate what can be printed. I wouldn’t be surprised if some people were watching this closely, thinking about banning spare parts models to repair appliances under an “IP” excuse.
There are so many precedent where freedom restrictions passed under the excuse of “terrorism”, “protect the children”, now “prevent murders” and later there is almost never a review of their efficiency, because when there is… the conclusion is appalling.
We’re just slowly moving towards more control and less freedom.
This is so stupid.
My understanding is that you can’t make a gun from 100% 3D printed plastic parts. Why don’t you just regulate those final parts makers?
You can if you want to blow your hand off. A 3D printer is just a tool of gun smithing. This is like banning circular saws or nail guns.
Because it’s isn’t about guns
You can make single shot weapons from pretty much 100% plastic with just like a nail as the firing pin. But those aren’t really effective weapons at all, and you can make a better shotgun with some pipes from the hardware store.
Even if you could make fully functional firearms with 3D printers, this is still stupid. 3D printers for hobbyists were originally all hand built with common electronic parts and if more states pass regulations like this, DIY is going to be the new trend again where everybody builds their own printers instead of buying one and it’ll just get easier and easier and the government won’t be able to regulate that at all.
And, honestly, I’m all for that future, and sort of excited for it. The regulations are moronic and dumb, but just like digital surveillance and information suppression laws like age verification, it’s just going to make the darknet and none regulatable things more popular, which is great, in my opinion. I yearn for the day where the commoner gets online and Tor or I2P is their first choice of connection. Where the government has no control over the citizen and what they think, do, or say online or in their own private life.
Try buying indoor plant lights in bulk, the DEA will come to your door.
While 100% is currently impractical, you can actually print 95% of a gun for 22lr. You need a nail for a fireing pin a barrel insert, and spings you can get from a nerf gun. That said, you could use the same to convert a nerf gun.
I’m also not talking about the single shot proto gun you’ve seen, I’m talking about a scaled model of a 1911. Guns are so fucking simple and regulation is like trying to prevent lock picking.
No, you cannot have a firing chamber made of plastic, unless you use engineering grade plastics, in which case, it’s cheaper to just buy a gun, not like they are expensive or difficult to get.
Its a silly strawman.
For the same reason that it would be better to regulate polluters than to expect individuals to recycle their waste en masse. Regulating this at an individual level is demonstrably less effective, given that the recovery of self-created guns used in crimes has increased significantly in recent years.
Whether anti-gun 3D-printing algorithms will even work isn’t certain yet, but I’m all for giving it a try and forcing people to risk acquiring said weapons via legit manufacturers and shops which may be more traceable or risk the black market.
My printer is not connected, its firmware is opensource, and use a VPN. I’m pretty sure whoever has bad intents will have no issue figuring out how to get a model and print it.
I believe this regulation would mostly impact casual 3D-printing enthusiasts who minds their privacy, and set a precedent to regulate what can be printed. I wouldn’t be surprised if some people were watching this closely, thinking about banning spare parts models to repair appliances under an “IP” excuse.
There are so many precedent where freedom restrictions passed under the excuse of “terrorism”, “protect the children”, now “prevent murders” and later there is almost never a review of their efficiency, because when there is… the conclusion is appalling.
We’re just slowly moving towards more control and less freedom.