‘World’s first 3-D printable handgun’ under fire
Source: Yahoo News
The creator of what's being called the world's first 3-D-printed handgun is coming under fire from lawmakers concerned that anyone with a 3-D printer and an Internet connection will be able to print an untraceable arsenal.
Cody Wilson, the 25-year-old founder of Defense Distributed, is expected to release his controversial blueprint for the gun—called the "Liberator"—online this week, according to Forbes.
“Security checkpoints, background checks and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print plastic firearms at home and bring those firearms through metal detectors with no one the wiser," Israel said in a statement on Friday. "When I started talking about the issue of plastic firearms months ago, I was told the idea of a plastic gun is science-fiction. Now that this technology is proven, we need to act now."
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/3d-printable-gun-153109290.html
Oops, forgot the link, fixed.
So far the media seems to be missing a key aspect of this story: Once a person can print their own gun, they don't need to buy one from the gun manufacturers. This means that the NRA will soon have to shift gears and come out against 3-D guns at the behest of their masters, Colt, Armalite, et al. Coming out AGAINST guns is something the NRA has never done, and I don't see the average 2nd Amendment extremist being very forgiving about any nuanced argument the NRA will offer up.
In order to protect its profits, gun makers will have to forcefully and vocally oppose 3-D guns.
Then there are all the other troubling aspects of this technology:
1) Guns will have no serial numbers.
2) Guns will be easy to destroy, thus eliminating ballistics comparisons. Print your gun, kill your target, melt the gun down.
3) Guns will be able to pass through metal detectors easily (though you will still have to get the bullets through).
4) Plastic bullets are next on the list (though I don't think it is possible, at least not now, to make usable plastic casing) further reducing the weapons magnetic signature. (Taggants in the gun powder would seem the only possible way of tracing such a weapon).
5) How reliable will these weapons be? A "misprint" could mean the safety does not work.
These are just a few of the ramifications, I am sure I am overlooking quite a few others.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Blandocyte
(1,231 posts)
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)3-D Printers don't kill people, people with 3-D Printers who print guns kill people . . . my head is going to start spinning soon!
Gin
(7,212 posts)That can kill......
Heather MC
(8,084 posts)
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)LBN stories need to have a link to article
Whoopdedoo
(60 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)
Turborama
(22,109 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)thought I had pasted in it in.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/3d-printable-gun-153109290.html
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)
Turborama
(22,109 posts)
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Detectable.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)but that will change as more elaborate composites come into play.
NickB79
(19,257 posts)snip
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Earlier reports had them laying up polymer around a metal barrel in order to be rendered detectable and legal, it appears that was speculation.
If they made a pistol entirely out of polymer, they would definitely be breaking the law.
Nice way to lose a hand or a face, though.
If they used a high-string polymer filament spiral-wound on a bias for the barrel and fabricated it separately and then laid up polymer around it instead of printing the frame/barrel as a piece, they might get the thing to work without killing its operator after a few firings.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)made for WW2 by the US. The idea was to drop these cheap guns over occupied areas, for those being occupied to use them against their captors once, just to get the captor's real gun.
tinrobot
(10,909 posts)You can walk into a Home Depot and buy everything you need to create a firearm as good or better than this 3D printed device.
My big concern is that fear of guns will be used as a reason to limit consumer use of 3D printers.
When you can print out cheap plastic stuff at home, why would you need a company like Wal Mart to import it from China? Large companies are going to get very protective of their distribution channels and will do everything they can to shut down home 3D printing. If they can use fear of guns to do that, they will.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)You can walk into a Home Depot and buy everything you need to create a firearm as good or better than this 3D printed device.
It still takes specialized tools and skills to knock off a gun. Using a 3-D printer eliminates the need for those tools and skills.
When you can print out cheap plastic stuff at home, why would you need a company like Wal Mart to import it from China? Large companies are going to get very protective of their distribution channels and will do everything they can to shut down home 3D printing. If they can use fear of guns to do that, they will.
Yes, you put your finger on the other problem facing our corporate masters. This thing is going to give patent holders fits, not to mention the purveyors of Chinese crap of the world.
tinrobot
(10,909 posts)...with a rubber band and a nail to set if off.
The 3D printer is also a "specialized" tool. One that can print this gun costs a few grand, minimum and requires a bit of experience to use properly. Of course, prices will go down, but I doubt people will be buying 3D printers to make plastic guns in the foreseeable future. If that was your goal, you could easily get a small CNC machine today for the same price and make your gun out of metal instead of plastic.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I am seeing them under a $2,000 within five years.
Reminds me of a conversation I had with a Compugraphics salesman in 1989. Compugraphic sold photo-digital typesetters, state of the art stuff that ran $50,000 and up and required an elaborate developing process and expensive ($1 a page) photo paper. I asked him what was the company's strategy now that LASERs were coming on strong and cheap (a nickel a page). His response is that his product line was safe because:
1) LASERs didn't have anywhere near the resolution of typesetters (true at the time, 300 dpi versus 2400 dpi).
2) LASERs were too slow.
3) People were not going to dump equipment they had invested hundreds of thousands of dollars, or even millions, for "tinker toys" run by "unreliable" PCs.
I pointed out to him that:
1) 600 dpi printers were due out the next year and that most people not in the trade couldn't tell the difference between 600 and 2400dpi without a magnifying glass, especially when printed on newsprint.
2) This was only true when you left the developing process out of the equation, and again, faster printers were coming next year.
3) People would dump expensive equipment despite the investment when they were spending a similar amount on consumables, a price that would drop 95% with LaserJet printers. Also, given the choice between $250,000 workstations which could only set type and $10,000 PCs that could set type and much more, getting rid of the equipment would be a no-brainer.
In fact, we dumped all our equipment within 18 months, and he lost his job shortly after that as the typesetting division scaled back.
All the points you make are completely true, but as I keep explaining we deal in fact, they deal in "perception". The allure of a "unregistered", "untraceable" gun will be too much for these folks, and ultimately, 3-D guns is not something the gun makers can let stand.
tinrobot
(10,909 posts)...and you can print in plastic up to about 8 inches square. Almost enough to print a one-time use gun.
But again... big deal. There are much easier ways to get guns in this country.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Very little skill involved beyond a basic understanding of the mechanics involved and fabricating.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)than simply hooking up a printer, loading a file and pressing "Print".
People have been able to make zip guns in shop class for ages, but then, these days few schools have shop class anymore.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Which would be the biggest stumbling block for most, not the skills needed.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I am betting under $2,000 in 5 years. People already have the PCs.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)jtuck004
(15,882 posts)by people who "earn" the right to be locked up in maximum security state prisons, with nothing but time and imagination, and common shop tools. Yet they still seem to manufacture freakin' guns.
I've seen those in Oklahoma at McCalester, and virtually every other state has the same thing.
Don't need no stinkin' specialized tools. The 3D printers just make it faster and more available.Even the gunpower is just made from common elements. (I know, because I was making my own gunpowder when I was shooting model rockets at 10 years old, and made more than one single-shooter cannon with a handle).
What takes more specialized equipment is making light 30 round semi-auto guns. Heavier, but the gatling gun was available in the Civil War, and they had nothing even close to the technology we have now.
It's not as hard as people would like to make others believe.
Response to tinrobot (Reply #9)
cui bono This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Schumer announces support to make 3D printed guns illegal
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022802992
Edited subject line to fix typo.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)but that will hardly stop the "patriots" from making them.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)And producers of it are social pariahs. Same should be done for the pigs who design, distribute & make printable plastic guns.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Schumer: U.S. needs to block 3D plastic guns like ‘The Liberator’ from Defense Distributed
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/schumer-stop-plastic-guns-article-1.1335599?localLinksEnabled=false&utm_source=feedly
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
Orrex
(63,218 posts)Something like this:
We recognize firearm ownership to be a sacred right and duty, but law abiding gun owners must take care to use only those firearms that are safely designed and built by experts. A homemade 3D printed gun simply can't compare to the safety and reliability of a professionally designed and manufactured firearm.
Blah blah blah
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)The NRA hasn't spoken up about the Remington 700, which has a horrific design flaw, and can go off with no warning, or actions of the shooter. It has killed several people, and is a well known design flaw, and has been known as a design flaw for more than sixty years. Yet, the rifle is still manufactured today, with the same design flaw, and the NRA has never issued a warning about the rifle, or called upon Remington to stop making it.
Safety of the firearm, doesn't matter. If it did, then the NRA would have pressured Remington to change the design of the rifle, and recalled and repaired the existing rifles. That's never been done, and that proves that the NRA could care less about safety.
Orrex
(63,218 posts)That's why they'll attack the 3D-printed guns, because there's no money to be made on them.
Safety is irrelevant, but they will be happy to pretend to be concerned about safety if it serves their masters.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)They oppose any regulations, and they'll oppose this too. The reason is if they claim a gun, any gun, is unsafe. Then that opens dozens of lawsuits about guns with questionable safety records, and using the NRA statements on this one being "unsafe" they'll be able to ban the guns under safety regulations like they did with Lawn Darts. The NRA knows this, which is why they have always said gun safety should be determined by litigation by individual consumers, not class action lawsuits, and not government regulations.
If they support banning this pistol thing, due to safety, then they'll find that someone else has safety complaints about a different pistol that is not well made, then the NRA finds itself being the BBB of the gun trade, and they don't want that.
Orrex
(63,218 posts)Given that the NRA serves its corporate masters over all, how do you think that they will respond to this?
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)But not too loudly, not as loudly as they did over the most recent legislative attempt. Then they will issue a statement supporting the Government, and the nation, and the legislative process. That way when someone does use one of those plastic guns to murder someone else, they NRA can say we need to enforce existing laws. Laws that they support fully.
Then they'll up the fundraising to fight the batch of laws that come next.
Sadly, that sounds all too likely.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)You know,....because nothing is better for a woman to protect herself than a teeny gun that will blow up in her hand.
tinrobot
(10,909 posts)3D printed guns could take away their business as easily as gun legislation.
The NRA's goal is to sell as many guns as possible. It is not to protect the second amendment or ensure public safety. They are basically a marketing arm of the gun manufacturers.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)from their ends.
Kablooie
(18,637 posts)The lobbyists will simply order their Congress people to make it illegal and it will be so.
Nothing has to be said publicly except by the politicians.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)"responsible" 3-D printer owners.
Orrex
(63,218 posts)Damn gun-fondlers!
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)Orrex
(63,218 posts)LEGO is famous for its laser-precise tooling. Wait until 3D printing gets to that level before you invest and disappoint yourself with the results!
Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)are being used to manufacture liver tissue as I write this, there are plenty of "good things" this technology can do. However, it is one of those "revolutionary" techs that is going to have LOT of unforeseen consequences. The press is just harping on its one bad use (for the moment).
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Just to make sure I understand the situation. Technology exists that makes it possible to manufacture an untraceable gun in the privacy of your home. A gun that would be undetectable and apparently too much like the one used in the movies a decade or so ago. Then it was fiction, now unfortunately, it is reality. So we have this technology, and there aren't any laws that cover this sort of thing, other than we trust the guy who prints to gun to include a bit of metal in it?
So after Crazed Lunatic tries to buy a gun at a gun store, and is turned down, instead he buys a printer, and makes one at home. Then he purchases the ammunition, if someone doesn't come up with a way to print the ammunition, and is able to shoot anyone he wants.
The job of the police, in convicting him is nearly impossible, because crazed lunatic can toss the gun onto his gas BBQ and melt it down destroying the evidence.
Then if we're really lucky, the crazed lunatic will take another day, or two, to print up another one.
Someone wake me up, because this is a nightmare.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)
kentauros
(29,414 posts)Samir: No, not again. I... why does it say paper jam when there is no paper jam? I swear to God, one of these days, I just kick this piece of shit out the window.
Michael Bolton: You and me both, man. That thing is lucky I'm not armed.
Samir: Piece of shit.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)I know it won't stop them from doing so, but make a penalty for doing so. You need the internet to use it, so the address can be traced, and they will have evidence on you from your computer. Steal music you get caught. This may only scrutinize the internet more to find the gun makers. And I never thought about the NRA connection of being against these gun printers, but I can see that happening if the government doesn't make it a felony to print a gun.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)eliminate the trail.
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)One that can either block weapons or alert the BATF.
Pterodactyl
(1,687 posts)First, you'd have to have printers that can understand what the parts are for. Most gun parts would be indistinguishable from machine parts to a casual review.
Second, alerting the government could be overcome simply by disconnecting the device from the internet, or writing software to overcome it.
marble falls
(57,136 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)if the gun still exists.
marble falls
(57,136 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)is a hell of lot easier to destroy utterly than one made of steel.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)May 06, 2013, 2:24 PM — 3D printers are taking another step in the long haul toward the mainstream, with a little help from Staples.
On Friday, the office supply retailer began selling the Cube 3D Printer online for $1300, becoming the first major U.S. retailer to sell a 3D printer. Staples says it will offer the printer in "a limited number" of retail stores by the end of June.
Cube 3D Printer
The Cube, made by 3D systems, can create items measuring up to 5.5 inches in any dimension, using ABS and PLA plastic cartridges in 16 colors. Staples will also sell replacement cartridges, stabilizers, and print pads.
Other features include Wi-Fi connectivity, plug-and-play support and 25 free design templates.
MORE...
http://www.itworld.com/hardware/355257/3d-printer-staples-says-yeah-weve-got
I thought they would be more expensive than this. In a couple of years they be a couple hundred bucks...
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)even the morons at TSA would probably notice.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)From ABC:
"According to one report, undercover TSA agents testing security at a Newark airport terminal on one day in 2006 found that TSA screeners failed to detect concealed bombs and guns 20 out of 22 times. A 2007 government audit leaked to USA Today revealed that undercover agents were successful slipping simulated explosives and bomb parts through Los Angeles's LAX airport in 50 out of 70 attempts, and at Chicago's O'Hare airport agents made 75 attempts and succeeded in getting through undetected 45 times."
XVI_Eyes
(29 posts)But as tech gets better, it may be a losing battle trying to keep weapons out of people's hands.
Paladin
(28,267 posts)...against better and better gun-tracing technology.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)If a customer of these sets of plans for printing a plastic gun goes and shoots up a plane, will the person that made the plans now be liable?
And whether or not they are indeed liable, will they feel guilty for what their gun plans have wrought?
hack89
(39,171 posts)just like a gun dealer who obeys all the laws would not be liable if a gun he sold was used in a crime.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)I do still wonder about their conscience, though...
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)The person making the current plans has a federal license to manufacture firearms. The Bush administration put through a number of laws granting immunity from liability to gun makers. So, the answer would seem to be, no one can sue you if you have a license. Whether they can sue you if you don't is an open question.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)That is a good observation about those without licenses. The plans would have to be electronic (whatever file-type the printer uses, plus a PDF for assembly) so, unless the buyer knows how to modify those files, they'll remain traceable back to the original creator of the design.
Now, if the printer-file is something like a CNC-file, then you can open them in AutoCAD or Solidworks, and make adjustments...
sofa king
(10,857 posts)From last summer:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1003805
It won't be long before someone creates a 3D printer which can recreate some or all of itself, meaning it will be simple to set up a miniature armory anywhere, one which can grow exponentially to meet demand, one which can make firearms from classic designs, or from new ones, with nearly impossible to identify machining marks (the illicit manufacturer can simply interchange parts in the printers so that none bear the same machining marks).
Others have pointed out the similarity to the "zip gun epidemic" of the first half of the 20th Century, when poor urban populations were effectively forcibly disarmed except for the firearms that they could and did create for themselves.
But that historical comparison does not take into account the hyperbolic mathematics that will underlie the proliferation of these devices.
Again I implore my fellow readers to recognize that gun control will never return the value that reducing poverty, providing inexpensive mental health, and better educating citizens will offer. Control of firearms may now be impossible; those other things are not impossible and now MUST be achieved if our society is to avoid upheaval.
Turbineguy
(37,359 posts)Wake up every morning and make things just a little bit worse.
Snake Plissken
(4,103 posts)It's probably not a bad idea to thin out the herd of the idiots who try to shoot this gun
orleans
(34,068 posts)i thought it was cute and a bit sci-fi
but an actual gun? omg!
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I thought to myself, "WOW! If I had this when I was a kid I could have made a phaser."