Firing an AR-15 with a printed lower.

[GreenStormCloud]

The lower part is the part that the BATFE says is the gun.

Technology marches on. These guys (Distributed Defense) are making the CAD file available for download for free.

Aggrevation. He calls the magazine a "clip". He should know better. Anyway, they are making progress towards printed guns.

[catbyte]

1. NPR had a story about printer guns last night. It scared the hell out of me.

[SQUEE]

3. This ship has sailed, long ago in fact.

There is a video that shows a gunsmith making an AK receiver out of a shovel and improvising many other parts to make a functioning semi auto rifle. Anybody with a mill and a lathe can legally manufacture a semiauto fire arm, as long as it is not sold and does not violate NFA restrictions, it is within the law, both in letter and spirit.

[denverbill]

4. 99% of Americans, especially idiots like James Holmes, would never learn how to use a metal lathe.

Yes, I suppose occasionally you might get someone patient and far-sighted enough to learn the craft and build his own weapon, but most mass murderers don't fit that mold, IMO. They'll use what they can buy, or make easily like small bombs.

[SQUEE]

11. Then we best ban gasoline, sawdust, model rockets and water proof matches just as a start.....

because when people decide to kill, they will.
Worst school massacre in US history didn't involve a gun.
Worst mass murder in us history, also no gun...

[denverbill]

15. Worst school massacre in US history involved dynamite, which is also 'arms'.

Try buying that at your hardware store now.

I don't know why we banned unregulated use of dynamite. It only hurtful lawful dynamite users. Instead of whining about how we want to ban assault weapons, why not rail for the unrestricted availability of dynamite.

[Callisto32]

20. There is a world of differnece between a firearm and explosive ordnance....

[denverbill]

23. There's also a world of difference between an AR15 and a colonial musket.

But since the Constitution didn't specify muzzle-loading muskets, some gun owners claim the right to any size of clip, any caliber, and any weapon, up to and including fully automatic machine guns. If the Constitution doesn't specifically forbid those weapons, then why does the government have the right to exclude explosives?

[jmg257]

24. 'Cause no one else confuses dynamite with arms that could be kept and born by

the people, as were prescribed by Congress for Militia service, or as secured in the 2nd?

It's not about "weapons", its about "arms" the people were expected to be able to supply themselves, and keep and bear for defense of themselves and the state, just as had occurred and was well-understood for decades & decades in the colonies, and in other States around the world.

Like "Militia", "the people", "well-regulated", "the right of", "arming", "organizing", "disarming", etc. - "arms" as used in the 2nd was a well understood term.

[Callisto32]

44. Hint:

Magazine-fed repeating rifles existed at the time of the ratification of the constitution.

[denverbill]

45. Which founding father owned one, or had seen one?

If nobody who signed or debated the Constitution had any inkling such a weapon existed, what does it matter if one existed? None was in widespread use or production until the 1850s and even those were bolt action, not semi-automatic. Do you seriously think a gun with multiple barrels that took about 5 minutes to reload in any way resembles an AR15 in it's deadliness?

[gejohnston]

46. The Austrians used a single barrel semi auto from 1780 to around 1815.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/498312/repeating-rifle
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=30125
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookson_repeater

[denverbill]

48. #1, there is still no proof that the Founding Fathers had ever seen or heard of that gun.

#2, even assuming they had, there is still no comparison between that gun and an AR15. It may have been faster to reload than a musket, but the fact that, as the article states, it took a highly trained person to use it, and it had to be pointed upright to reload, make it unlikely any average person could get off more than a handful of shots in a minute.

I would have also though an effective repeating rifle would have dominated any early 1800's battlefield, but the Austrians weren't particularly impressive against Napoleon.

[gejohnston]

49. of course they knew

just like Jefferson knew what a Koran is, since he owned one. Lewis and Clark carried at least one.
Most of the world's militaries continued to use bolt actions into the 1950s, what's your point?

Speculating if the founders would take a different view if they thought the AR would be invented is not relevant and is absurd. It's nice for psudointellectuals to ponder at the Starbucks roundtable, but isn't logical.

[denverbill]

55. 'of course they knew'?

That sounds like the kind of proof 'psudointellectuals' might use at Starbucks. 'He had a Koran for God's sakes, of course he knew about the Girandoni.' It's perfectly ok for you to speculate about what the Founding Fathers knew in 1787 without any proof whatsoever but 'psudointellectual' of me to speculate that the Founding Fathers might have felt differently about the right to bear any weapon if an AR15 had existed in 1787.

You need to get out more. Find a topic you might agree with other liberals such as yourself on.

Number of posts, last 90 days: 1960
Favorite forum: General Discussion, 13 posts in the last 90 days (1% of total posts)
Favorite group: Gun Control & RKBA, 1917 posts in the last 90 days (98% of total posts)

[gejohnston]

56. I read a lot more than I post

but I am not into "me too" kind of posts. If I have something to say, I say it.

[GreenStormCloud]

64. Who made you the DU zampolit?

Please show the DU rule that says that posts have to be even distributed among the forums and groups.

[GreenStormCloud]

63. Neither could the FFs have dreamed about the internet, or TV, or CDs.

Does that mean that the 1A doesn't apply to them? We frequently get people down here who think that they are being brilliant by trying to claim that the 2A only applies to guns available at the time it was adopted. If that argument is ever accepted as a legal doctrine, then 1A will be dead the next day as the same reasoning can apply.

[bluesbassman]

68. Who owns tanks and fighter jets that are "armed"?

Why in the world would a private citizen need to own an armed tank or fighter? I can certainly see the value in owning a tank or fighter from a historical/collection POV, but are you seriously suggesting that there are live munitions carried on some of these privately held weapons?

[bluesbassman]

74. So your argument hinges on an amusement company...

that charges a fee and supervises the firing of a machine gun and cannon as "private" ownership that somehow validates your positition the these weapons have never been used to commit a crime? Dude, you're stretching here. There is absolutely no comparison. Try harder.

[NYC_SKP]

78. Why don't more people fight the MSM, the press, the Internet, the equivalent "Quill"?

Just thinking out loud.

[NYC_SKP]

83. In agreement with you.

Point being, that those who say that the second amendment envisions 18th century weaponry could equally argue that modern press technologies somehow aren't covered.

Better?

[SQUEE]

30. I am not whinning..

Just pointing out salient facts.. Hardware stores hold the makings of cheaper and far more deadly attacks, I don't ask they be regulated either.
I accept the world is not safe, take responsibility for my own safety, and don't need or want the government to treat me as a dependent or protectee. Others feel the same, others disagree... hence the need for a constructive, and educated dialog, not a dog and pony show from hysterics on both side.

[denverbill]

50. OK, here are some other salient facts.

In 1927, a man used dynamite to kill 38 children. Dynamite is now highly regulated.
In 1995, right wing idol Terry McVeigh used ammonium nitrate fertilizer and fuel oil to blow up the Federal Building in OKC, killing 168 people. Ammonium fertilizer is now regulated as well.

Do you agree with the government's decision to regulate dynamite and ammonium nitrate? Or should we just let anyone buy them and use them freely and just say 'Oh well' when an occasional massacre occurs? After all, regulating dynamite and ammonium nitrate just imposes a burden on the vast majority of people who want to use them legally.

[gejohnston]

51. they did?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing#Legislation
When were explosive regulations passed after the Bath bombing?

[denverbill]

53. Are you saying dynamite is unregulated? I said dynamite is now regulated.

What the hell 'they did?' references I don't know, unless you are giving an answer to a question you think I should have asked, instead of replying to what I actually said.

[gejohnston]

54. I know it is

I'm just asking the regulations began because of that massacre as you implied.

[holdencaufield]

32. You don't even need a mill or a lathe ...

... to manufacture a fully-automatic weapon similar to those used in the Second World War. Automatic weapons are easier to produce than are the semi-automatic variety. In fact, weapons like the MP-40 and the STEN were specifically designed to be manufactured using stock materials and tools available in a 1940's bicycle shop.



Israelis made weapons like these back in '48 using hand tools and discarded plumping supplies.

Prohibition is a fool's dream.

[denverbill]

47. Has anyone in the US ever committed a mass shooting with a home-made weapon like that?

If not, you have not disproven my point. Most mass murderers are social misfits with few life skills, and are unlikely to be skilled craftsmen. In the time it would have taken James Holmes time to learn to build a gun like the above, maybe he would have actually changed his mind about going on a murderous rampage. More likely, he would have given up long before he figured it out.

I find it rather ironic that someone with a Star of David as his icon (not to mention holdencaufield as his user name) is saying that prohibition is a fool's dream. Israel does everything in it's power to prohibit Palestinians from getting weapons. Don't they know prohibition is a fool's dream?

[holdencaufield]

58. If prohibition were about stopping mass shootings...

... I might agree with you. But, it is not. Prohibition on guns won't stop mass shootings any more than prohibitions on alcohol stopped drinking, prohibitions on drugs stopped pot smoking or prohibitions on books in the classroom stopped kids from reading "Catcher in the Rye". The OP is about how insane the notion is that prohibition will stop anyone -- particularly those inclined to use them illegally -- from getting weapons.

No, prohibition isn't about public safety or crime reduction or any social good. It is about taking something that you (the prohibitionist) think is personally distasteful and making sure that no one else has the ability to do it (at least legally). It doesn't matter if it's guns, alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, gay sex, or reading "Huckleberry Finn" -- if they don't like it they're going to make darn sure no one else gets to like it either.

Most mass murderers are social misfits -- I will grant you that. But, if you think social misfits aren't intelligent or creative I can assume you've never been to Comic Con. A social misfit named Tim McVeigh made a bomb capable of leveling a building out of fertilizer and diesel fuel. A social misfit named Mohammed Atta learned to fly a plane and then used that skill to fly a jet into an office tower. Social misfits brought us "Star Trek", Quantum Physics, the Internet and Apple Computers. Like duct tape and The Force -- there are two sides to being socially awkward -- sometimes it's creative, sometimes it's dangerous -- only circumstances can predict which.

If you find it ironic that, as a Jew, I use the Mogen David as my icon because of Israel then you obviously don't know much about either Jews or Israel. As for my user name -- yes, that IS ironic, but in the way that J.D Salinger actually meant it to be ironic and not in the way you probably imagine.

[SQUEE]

59. Not having the Moshen David,

But having my little candelabra, I feel I can comment.
Despite public opinion we Jews are not some monolithic organization that is represented by our co-religionists in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. In fact for me the internal and external policies of the Israeli government is why I live in the States, and not with my relatives in Eretz Yisrael.

[madville]

2. 3D printers are really cool

Jay Leno has had some good articles about them the last couple of years and owns one. He makes obsolete parts for his antique cars with it, knobs, ducts, vents, emblems, etc.

Guns are easy (and legal) to make, the hardest part would be a rifled barrel but those are just considered parts and can be ordered online. Guns are after all just pieces of metal and plastic.

[guardian]

8. "Guns are after all just pieces of metal and plastic."

After reading some of the posts in this forum you'd think some people believe guns are made from equal parts demon's marrow, baby blood, and pestilence. And the components assembled together under the dark of the new moon while chanting Satanic incantations.

[SQUEE]

12. I assumed all the new ones were,

considering how unbelievably expensive just about every firearm has become lately.

BTW, You forgot, the new barrels are quenched in unicorn blood....

[Kolesar]

79. Really? eom

[BigAlanMac]

9. The technology to rifle a barrel

has been around for centuries.
Much longer than cartridge firing weapons, and definitely longer than repeating firearms.
The tricky part is drilling the long, relatively narrow hole down a steel bar.
There is a reason why the tool used is called a gun drill.

I had a classmate that machined all the parts, including rifling the barrel, of a working 1911 .45 cal pistol using a UniMat bench lathe.

[davepc]

14. They hand build AK clones in the moutains of Pakistan using child labor.

http://www.vice.com/the-vice-guide-to-travel/the-gun-markets-of-pakistan

[rdharma]

29. .45 cal pistol using a UniMat bench lathe.

"I had a classmate that machined all the parts, including rifling the barrel, of a working 1911 .45 cal pistol using a UniMat bench lathe."

Sure you did!

[davepc]

5. There's a video floating arround of somebody putting 600+ rounds through one

Not bad for something you can make in your basement.

[davepc]

6. 600 rounds through a printed lower. Nothing broke.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-02/watch-guy-fire-600-rounds-partially-3-d-printed-gun

&feature=player_embedded

[GreenStormCloud]

7. DAMN! That barrel has to be HOT!! N/T

[rdharma]

10. Errrrr merrrr Gerrrrd! Time to panic...... right?!!!!!

The rightie gun nutters are really running with this one. They'd have you believe that this is something any hobbyist can and will do.

But you have to ask yourself what a 3-D additive manufacturing "printer" (one capable of producing a lower AR-15 receiver of suitable material) would cost. I wonder how many quality milling machines you could buy for the price of one of these gizmos.

[davepc]

13. They start at about $2,000. A decent mid-range one will set you back about $5k.

http://www.studica.com/us/en/Alibre/3d-touch/bfbpro.html?utm_source=pricegrabber&utm_medium=ppc

Not cheap, but not prohibitively expensive for a dedicated hobbyist. It's no more expensive then people who hand build car engines or spend a few K a year on golf clubs & golf vacations.

[rdharma]

16. They start at about $2,000

Show me that $2,000 3-D "printer". Who makes it, what is the model number, and is it capable of reproducing an AR-15 lower receiver of suitable material?

[GreenStormCloud]

18. Moore's Law.

Computers and asssociated equipment double in capacity every 18 months and come down in price. In 1988 a 286 computer with 1 Meg memory, 40 Meg Hd, dot matrix printer, and CRT color monitor was about $4,000.00. Given a few years, the price of 3-D printers will come down while their capabilities will increase.

[rdharma]

19. price will come down

No doubt prices will come down. But it's going to be a quite a while before these specialized tools become affordable enough to replace milling machines and casting technology for firearms production.

The firearms manufacturers with the deep pockets will be the first ones to get on board when that happens. Until then............

[GreenStormCloud]

22. Doesn't work that way.

The CAD files are available online for free. All you need is a 3-D printer. The printer can print lots of other stuff besides AR-15 lower halves. So at a few hundred dollars for a printer it could become something that most homes would have. Remember, it wasn't long ago that there was no need for anyone to have a home computer.

[rdharma]

25. All you need is a 3-D printer.

It's not a simple "3-D printer".......... it's an "additive manufacturing device"!

A few hundred dolars? Riiiiiight!

[clffrdjk]

26. Did you miss my reply or are you being obtuse?

[rdharma]

27. Did you miss my reply

ABS plastic?!!!!!

[clffrdjk]

28. Your knowledge of the subject is lacking

Polymer AR lowers have been around for quite a while. The portion that is considered a firearm takes very little strain.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&biw=1024&bih=672&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=polymer+lower+receiver&oq=polimer+lower+receiver&gs_l=img.1.0.0i10i24.30618.35456.0.37522.16.15.1.0.0.0.181.1888.1j14.15.0...0.0...1ac.1.4.img.Zj4_Hx8f2SU

If the abs breaks 20 min adding a little reenforcement to the original plan gets me one better than the previous.

Now if you really want to be an ass and demand titanium sintering well then just wait a decade.

[rdharma]

31. "Polymer AR lowers have been around for quite a while"

I'm well aware of that. Bushmaster used to sell them.

But nobody is making them with this "new miracle" 3-D "printer" process. I wonder why that is?

And ... I wonder why these lightweight receivers didn't sell like hotcakes!

A really cool idea...... why didn't it work?

[clffrdjk]

33. If bushmaster sold them they were re-branded

The number one issue is that the ATF confiscated the equipment from the number one seller of the polymer lowers.
As for 3d printing not being used for large scale operations well I think you can understand how molding is a far more efficient process when making large quantities. The 3d market will cater to a few small groups: tinkerers who like to do things at home, rapid prototyping and the rare complex things that can't be made any other way.

But how do either of those relate to the possibility of me making an AR lower at home without having to purchase expensive metal working equipment?

[rdharma]

34. If bushmaster sold them

Riiiiiiight!

http://www.bushmaster.com/firearms/carbon_15.asp

[clffrdjk]

35. Oh look something I haven't seen

Great I like learning new things. So just how does that counter the rest of my points or prove yours up thread?

[rdharma]

36. "Great I like learning new things."

Sorry......... don't believe you!

[clffrdjk]

38. Wow, at least I admit my failings. You have a little growing to do

[GreenStormCloud]

37. The point is that the Feds can't control it.

Anybody with a 3-D printer can make a lower for themselves. They won't need Bushmaster for that. CAD file is available free, online. There have been over 30,000 downloads already for the magazine CAD file.

[rdharma]

39. "Anybody with a 3-D printer can make a lower for themselves."

Well, then ......... We should see a flood of them produced on those $500 3-D printers, eh?!!!!!

[clffrdjk]

40. Absolutely

And as a mater of fact I suggest you buy one or two of the machines and start selling the lowers out of your garage it will be a great cash business. Hurry up and get in on the ground floor of this untapped opportunity. Be sure to set up a web page that way you have access to people out of state. Just imagine the extra cash you could bring in.











Do I really need a sarcasm tag?
For the slow ones, doing what I said above would get you in prison so fast your head would spin.

[rdharma]

41. "Do I really need a sarcasm tag?"

No. You need an absurdity tag if you give any credibility to this rightie BS of AR-15 lowers produced in Bubba's basement with $500 3-D "printers"!

[iiibbb]

42. Simply will point out that 15 yrs ago the idea of smartphones as commonplace

would have been thought absurd.


That the technology is not in garages yet isn't the point. You just need access.

[rdharma]

43. "technology is not in garages yet"

Use "depends undergarments" to keep from soiling yourself until that happens!

[rdharma]

52. Give it up! Weak argument!

No attempt should be made to control firearms ....... because everybody in the future can make their own?

Herrrp deeeerrrrppppp!

[cherokeeprogressive]

57. There was a time when the Sun, Moon, and stars all revolved around the earth...

EVERYONE knew that was true. To suggest otherwise might have caused one to lose their head (in a completely literal sense)... Until it wasn't true any longer.

There was a time when the Earth was flat, and EVERYONE knew that was true. To suggest otherwise invited ridicule at the very least... Until it wasn't true any longer.

There was a time when EVERYONE knew it was impossible to travel faster than 30 mph. To travel faster than that invited catastrophic disintegration of the human body... Until it wasn't true any longer.

There as a time when EVERYONE believed that if God had intended for Man to fly, He'd have given humans wings... Until it wasn't true any longer.

There was a time when the speed of sound was an invisible barrier through which NO ONE could break, and EVERYONE knew that to be true... Until Chuck Yeager had the nerve to "give it a shot".

You think your petty insults make you smart somehow. I think they prove your lack of foresight and imagination. In fact, I think your last several posts put you in the category of EVERYONE listed above.

[rdharma]

61. There will be a time ........

.....when "herp derp" rules!

Time travel and tele-transportation too!

No need for regulation of assault weapons....... because in the near future....... your kid will be able to make them with his lap top in his bedroom!

You gun nutters are HILARIOUS!

[cherokeeprogressive]

65. You just keep whistling past that graveyard.

You're the hilarious one. I bet you STILL think the Earth is flat, right?

We're only one lifetime into powered flight. Technology moves so fast; we're losing our capability to keep up with intellectually. It seems as though you might already have...

Oh, what wonders does the future hold? Don't ask rdharma... you'll hear that we've already seen everything the future has to offer.

[iiibbb]

66. No less herpyderpy than a reply to the same post 3 hrs apart...

[rdharma]

73. "Everybody can make their own firearms NOW"

You go ahead and make your zip-gun there, Sparky!

[holdencaufield]

75. Does this look like a "zip gun" to you?

18 round magazine (could be changed to 30 by stacking). 450 rounds per minute cyclic rate. Made with a drill press, hand tools and off-the shelf steel piping in common sizes that you can buy from any steel supplier -- the PA Luty 9mm SMG. The plans, patterns and instructions are on the Internet and also available in book form from Amazon.

[rdharma]

76. "look like a "zip gun" to you?"

Sure does! Go ahead and make one there, Einstein!

[holdencaufield]

90. But ...

... that would be illegal.

[NYC_SKP]

77. Some people... They see a Bridgeport mill and say, "nice drill press!"

Actually, they don't even know a drill press is even a thing.

But, somehow, they know a LOT about how things are made.

[rdharma]

88. Who needs a mill........?

Check post #9!

"I had a classmate that machined all the parts, including rifling the barrel, of a working 1911 .45 cal pistol using a UniMat bench lathe."

[NYC_SKP]

89. I have three Unimats, two newer ones (80's) and one really sweet older one.

The older one is more well made and looks like a miniature full size 12" X 48" bench lathe.

Kind of like this:

[rdharma]

92. I'll bet you could whip out 1911 frames and slides on that baby! nt

[holdencaufield]

91. In the case of the Luty ...

... a drill press isn't even necessary. The weapon requires that two rectangular openings be made in the stock steel tubing -- in the upper receiver (for shell ejection and magazine feed). This is accomplished in the instructions by making a lot of contiguous holes with a drill and then hand-filing to shape. The lower is similarly shaped and fashioned. A drill press would make this easier but it isn't essential.

The bolt is made from solid steel rod with shaft collars fitted. No milling or lathing required. While this weapon could be created with hand tools, the design also lends itself to mass production.

[oldhippie]

60. Our high school robotics club has one ......

.... that is used to print cams, gears, sprockets, motor mounts, and other heavy duty components for very robust 130# robots. (USFIRST) They've had it for a couple of years and a lot of the kids can program it. Given the right materials I think it could print a receiver.

[rdharma]

62. Given the right materials I think it could print a receiver.

I think a milling machine could too!

You mean you don't know for sure if your HS robotics club can do it? What model/type 3-D "printer" does your club have? Do tell!

[clffrdjk]

21. $499

I do not know how long the lower would last but a little redesign would go a long ways.

http://www.solidoodle.com/

[krispos42]

98. You might be able to make a casting with the product from a 3-D printer.

Make it out of plastic, wrap it in clay, bake the clay, melt out (or burn out) the plastic, then fill the now-hollow clay mold with molten metal. Break the clay and machine the blank as needed.



I might be speaking out of my ass... I don't own an AR-15 and don't know what goes into making one. I understand the upper is the expensive part full of machined parts, though. If you can buy an upper and a trigger assembly via mail order, then casting and machining your own receiver to attach it to might not be as hard as one thinks.


Or I might be full of shit!

[Eleanors38]

17. Nah, they'll just wait til the video comes out.

There is an interesting piece by Michael Ventura in the last Austin Chronicle (2nd of 2 parts) on the impending revolution stemming from print technology. I can't link with this hand-held. You might like it. He notes the NYT's obsession with guns, and how they miss the bigger picture of the technology.

[Animal Chin]

69. +1 would like to see the video

I don't know what is involved in printing a gun, but I do believe that 3-D printers will be in almost every home in America. Furthermore, I believe that the speed with which that happens will make the widespread adoption of the home computer and the internet seem like they took lifetimes.

[Eleanors38]

95. "firing an AR 15 with a printed loader" is title of DU thread/video.

Sorry I'm unable to link to video.

[Kolesar]

80. " the NYT's obsession with guns,"

More whining about the "MSM"

[NYC_SKP]

86. The NYT also hates TESLA electric vehicles.

Full of hate, they are, not to be trusted.

[Eleanors38]

96. Actually, the criticism was from Michael Ventura in his

2-part series on the future if 3D printing. Try reading the piece, particularly the 2nd part.

[mwrguy]

93. So mandate a "V Chip" in all 3D printers

One that won't allow certain items to be made.

[holdencaufield]

94. 3D Printers

Make objects from 3D CAD files that users make themselves. How would the printer know it was printing a gun part or the top of a Papa Smurf bobblehead?

[kudzu22]

97. Magic