Build your own gun with a printer

[TNFlyer]

I saw this tonight and me and my buddy a discussion about the legalities of this. I personally think this is really cool, but both of us see it opening a huge can of worms with the government. What are y'alls thoughts?

http://hackaday.com/2012/08/26/3d-printed-guns-laws-and-regulations-and-philosophical-discussions-on-the-nature-of-printed-objects/

[Guest adamoxtwo]

Wow......talk about the perfect assassination tool. If this goes to the open public, this can be the cause of the government taking away rights of the people. What this guy doesn't realize is that he is opening a can of worms that will cause a lot of damage to national security. BATF is the least of their concerns if this gets funded and go out on the internet. They would be able to avoid metal detectors and could be carried onto an aircraft. This is a scary thing!

[timcar86]

http://www.zdnet.com/no-you-cant-download-a-gun-from-the-internet-7000002108/

Not quite there yet fellas...

[DaveTN]

I don’t know why it would be a “Can of worms†with the government. You can legally make your own gun. You can make it from scratch, or you can buy forged lowers that are unfinished. Plastic just isn’t practical to make a complete gun.

3D printing is pretty cool though for prototyping. Of course it can be used to make stuff that is illegal or controlled, but this machine doesn’t change the risk of doing something like that.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I don’t know why it would be a “Can of worms†with the government. You can legally make your own gun. You can make it from scratch, or you can buy forged lowers that are unfinished. Plastic just isn’t practical to make a complete gun.

3D printing is pretty cool though for prototyping. Of course it can be used to make stuff that is illegal or controlled, but this machine doesn’t change the risk of doing something like that.

+1

Nothing wrong or illegal about making your own firearm.. Anyone who is going to assasinate someone isn't going to go through all the hassle of making a gun which is probably easier tracked. They are just going to go buy a gun at a gun show and use it instead.

Dolomite

[TNFlyer]

+1

Nothing wrong or illegal about making your own firearm.. Anyone who is going to assasinate someone isn't going to go through all the hassle of making a gun which is probably easier tracked. They are just going to go buy a gun at a gun show and use it instead.

Dolomite

I totally agree with both of you. But, playing devil's advocate here where does the 80% come into play? Say I download the file to print an AR-15 lower receiver, is the writing of the program the actual construction or does clicking the print button count? Or does the amount of hand fitting make up the last 20%, but what happens when everything gets refined to a "production" level?

I'm no lawyer, but we have all seen stories of folks getting tangled up with the law in a way that beats all common sense. And, I would hate to see myself or anyone else in trouble due to some beaurocrat's interpretation of this development of technology.

[ShamGlock]

I read the article they did on this on TTAG a few weeks back. The problem is that we all know the laws and what we can and can not do within the ever changing and confusing construct of the BATF, but the majority of Americans don't. Just think about the noise that could be made by a Bloomberg or Pelosi if they got on TV evangalizing about how the technology now exists for people to manufacture guns from their basement. Of course they will leave out the fact that this could already be done. As we have all seen so many times common sense and facts rarely play a part when one of the antis wants to deliver an empassioned speech to the masses on gun control.

As a side note we have a 3-D printer at work and it is truly amazing technology.

[Dolomite_supafly]

As an individual you can make as many guns as they want. They can make them using whatever means they want. The guns do not need to have a serial number and they do not need to be registered. That is for an individual that does not make them with the intent to sell them.

The problem comes in when you make them with the intent to sell them without the licensing to do so. This is what gets people in trouble more than anything else. Even the person who is buying an already made stripped lower and assembling it must have a manufacturers license. There are a lot of people who buy a stripped AR lower then assemble it into a rifle or pistol then resell it. You MUST have a manufacturer's license to assemble a stripped lower into a title I firearm for resale.

There have been FFL's who have gotten in trouble for legally buying stripped lowers then assembling them into a rifle or pistol then selling them. Everything was perfectly legal until they chose to sell them as a complete gun. And even if it is just a lower with the buffer tube installed it just went from being a stripped receiver to a firearm.

It is perfectly legal to manufacture a firearm then later sell it. It is illegal to manufacture a firearm with the intent to sell it. And people ask how does someone know the intent of another. Well most people who break the law by manufacturing a firearm and selling it rarely do it just once or twice. Most times they have done it dozens, if not hundreds, of times before getting caught.

When the part becomes useable then it is constructed.

Dolomite

[1gewehr]

Keep in mind that the technology does not yet exist to make affordable and usable barrels or bolts with this method. I see that coming down the road, and look forward to it.

Gun Control has never worked. Currently, anyone with basic machine tools can make rifles, pistols, or machine guns with just a little effort. In Pakistan they make working full-auto AKs with only hand tools. Does anyone doubt that the average hobby machinist in the US is capable of making any firearm they want? How is 3D printing any different?

In the US, as long as you are not making a firearm covered by the National Firearms Act (machine gun, short-barreled rifle or shotgun, or cannon), and it's not made with intent to sell, there are no Federal laws preventing you from making your own firearms. In TN, there are no laws preventing it either. Some other states have restrictions.

[ShamGlock]

Wholeheartedly agree. Just not looking forward to when this becomes the next anti's scare tactic is all I'm saying.

[DaveTN]

I totally agree with both of you. But, playing devil's advocate here where does the 80% come into play? Say I download the file to print an AR-15 lower receiver, is the writing of the program the actual construction or does clicking the print button count? Or does the amount of hand fitting make up the last 20%, but what happens when everything gets refined to a "production" level?

I'm no lawyer, but we have all seen stories of folks getting tangled up with the law in a way that beats all common sense. And, I would hate to see myself or anyone else in trouble due to some beaurocrat's interpretation of this development of technology.

The 80% doesn't come into play unless you are going to sell lowers. Then you would need a letter from the ATF saying your lowers meet that requirement.

The problem with this is not making the lower; it's making it thinking you are going to sell or transfer it.

[Guest adamoxtwo]

I understand what you guys are saying, but this isn't just a weapon. The guy even says that it only has to fire one shot. With the ability to get past metal detectors and no way to monitor the production, I think that this is a very Dangerous idea. Don't get me wrong, I think it's cool as hell. I would be more concerned with a 13 year old kid being able to print his own gun and doing something stupid with it. I got it you can't control stupid people, but on the same token I don't think we need to make it easier for them. I'm just playing devils advocate. I'm all for freedom, but this teeters on that edge for me personally.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Check the prices on a 3d printer, there isn't a single 13 year old that could afford one.

The ammunition is still metal and will be set off by metal detectors.

Last time I checked a 3d printer didn't kill anyone, nor did the weapon it made. It was a human being that would have done something. We need to hold people accountable and not the objects they may use. If we are going to regulate 3d printers because it can make a weapon then we may as well regulate anything that can be used as a weapon. I guess we need to call for a moratorium on the production of bricks because they can be used as a weapon.

Dolomite

[gjohnsoniv]

I don't see what the difference is between a 3d printer and having access to basic hand tools. I've seen several derringers that people built with minor tools as well as all those zip guns out there. It would be easier imo to make one of those than have to learn how to use the program and then spend the time to model the item. Not to mention fix any bugs that the printer might have.

[Guest adamoxtwo]

No need to be rash I'm just saying I can see how it can be used for a lot of bad. That's all and that it would make regulating more difficult. You have your opinion (and it's not that I don't agree with it) but the more fear you put into the system the larger the call to against responsible gun owners will be. It doesn't make it right it just makes it a larger issue for Liberals. I support people making their own weapons. I think it's honest and pure. However, I can't say the same for the idiots that give good gun owners a bad name.

Edited August 27, 2012 by adamoxtwo

[gjohnsoniv]

No, no completely understood. I don't think anyone is trying to argue with you but merely point out more likely ideas. I also don't think that there should be any regulations on the printers, that's just dumb and another way for the government to get their greedy little fingers in another pie.

Edited August 27, 2012 by gjohnsoniv

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I like the 3d printers and cnc machining. For many years I expected there would be consumer desktop products you could get at Best Buy by now. Look at how fast consumer 2D printing took off. About any home that has a computer has a 2D printer of some kind.

It is a prerequisite before we can do much practical space colonization. Living in space requires lots of gadgets, needs lots of spare parts, and you can't carry enough spare parts and the delivery chain from earth is too long and expensive for "just in time" repair parts delivery. Need to take along a few "anything machines" plus some raw stock materials. Along with manufacturing files to make all required spare parts. Forseeable future, maybe one machine for one-off integrated circuits, another machine that can make circuit boards (or maybe a cnc machine could do double duty). A 3-D printer that uses some standard strong plastic that is "good enough" for most plastic parts, and a couple of metal cnc machines. If you lose a screw then make a new screw. If you blow out a microprocessor, then make a new microprocessor. For initial purposes, if you need a new "moderately complicated" multi-part device, you would print all the individual pieces and then hand-assemble the finished device.

Problem back on planet earth in the early 21st century, is the demonization of devices which can be used for either good or evil. And the fact that there are so many laws, the authorities can heavy-fine or jail about any random citizen for breaking laws the citizen didn't even have a clue existed. Just saying, about any person is at risk if he gives "the authorities" a good reason to start poking around in-depth looking for infractions. The best thing is to avoid close examination, because close examination could probably find something or t'other illegal.

A home chemist hobbyist would get unwanted attention in spades. In fact, just having certain common chemicals can be illegal. That is a situation where precursors have become as illegal as banned substances. Another way to get unwanted attention is to be a model rocketry hobbyist, especially if you make yer own propellants or make some "pretty powerful" rockets. According to the authorities that skill set overlaps with the terrorists' skill set. A minor issue is "pretty strong but legal" green lasers. Some idiots light up aircraft with green lasers and can get stiff fines and jail time. Some might even be terrorists in addition to garden variety idiots. Now amateur astronomers use green lasers to aim telescopes at the sky. It is a good idea to look for aircraft before turning on the laser, and run the laser only a minute or two to get the job done and then turn the dang thing off. But there is an intersection there-- The authorities observe some character with a big ole vaguely cannon- or missile- shaped device out at night, shining green laser beams up into the sky. Sometimes it gets people unwanted attention.

If a string or rubber band in vicinity of a semi-auto rifle is considered by the authorities to be an automatic weapon, then it isn't a great leap that the authorities might decide that a CNC file for an automatic capable receiver, in vicinity of a CNC or 3D printer might also be an automatic weapon. Or maybe the CNC or 3D printer could be considered the same thing as an automatic weapon if all you have to do is download or write a CNC file for an automatic receiver. The best outcome is when everybody including granny has consumer desktop cnc machines. Make it so common that having one would not attract unwanted special attention. But in the evolution toward CNC in every home, people on the bleeding edge of home CNC might find themselves attracting as much unwanted attention as amateur chemists or amateur rocketry fellers.

[Dolomite_supafly]

With regards to the 3D printer.

Imagine if the government decides that it can be used to make dangrous weapons so they increase the cost substantially by regulations and fees to keep it out of the criminal's hands. Then some young scientist has a new design for a heart valve or some other medical device to save or increase the quality of life. Now he can't afford the printer, so he can't test or produce a prototype. And this could impact thousands of people.

And realistically a person intent on making a machine gun isn't going to go out and buy and expensive 3D printer to do so. They are going to buy a standard weapon then buy the parts to convert it. And yes all those parts can be bought pretty easily. The conversion process, depending on the weapon, is also pretty easy. But most importantly the conversion is cheap so it makes no sense to buy an expensive 3D printer in order to build a cheap firearm.

Our imagination and creativity is being stiffled by regulations as it is, we don't need more. Our kids are being labeled and then medicated when they exhibit free thinking. And they do this in the name of safety when in reality it only makes things worse.

Dolomite

[monkeylizard]

This just hit Yahoo! news feed.

http://news.yahoo.com/you-don-t-bring-a-3d-printer-to-a-gun-fight----yet.html