LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   USA: should 3D printing of plastic guns be outlawed ? (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/usa-should-3d-printing-of-plastic-guns-be-outlawed-4175462468/)

H_TeXMeX_H 05-18-2013 07:50 AM

USA: should 3D printing of plastic guns be outlawed ?
 
I won't post any link to the recent poll that was done in the news, but rather to what a 3D printed gun looks like:
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/des...ted-entire-gun

273 05-18-2013 07:53 AM

I'm not from the USA but as far as I can see this "gun" is a plastic kids gun that can set of one bullet in a manner akin to gripping it in mole grips and hitting it with a hammer and in doing so will destroy itself. As such it's about as much use as a chocolate fire-guard and anyone who wanted to evade a metal detector would be better of with a ceramic knife.

Habitual 05-18-2013 06:34 PM

Minority Report keeps coming to mind...

cortman 05-18-2013 09:43 PM

Until I saw it being fired I would doubt if polymer would withstand the pressures required by a smokeless cartridge.
I'm kind of with 273 on that one.

frankbell 05-18-2013 09:50 PM

I'm a country boy.

I grew up with guns.

I'm a damned good shot.

I am sick and tired of the pervy gun fetish that seems to infatuate so many of my fellow countrymen.

H_TeXMeX_H 05-19-2013 02:21 AM

Personally, I would outlaw printed plastic guns. They don't seem safe at all. I mean, even composite Glocks are known to kaboom once in a while, but these fully plastic things ...

And then there's the fact that they are not visible to metal detectors. Not that they would be particularly dangerous to anyone but the shooter, but I'm sure politicians will see this as a reason to put more X-ray machines.

Randicus Draco Albus 05-19-2013 03:11 AM

Should printing plastic guns be outlawed?

Certainly! Almost anyone can walk into a gun store and buy a real gun, and far too many (the majority?) can get a licence to carry real guns on the street, but action must be taken now to protect the public from the imminent danger of plastic guns. (I hope the sarcasm is evident.)

It is also easy for politicians to ban such plastic creations, because there would be no opposition from the NRA.

WHITE_POWER 05-31-2013 03:48 PM

my vote is NO!

jefro 05-31-2013 07:56 PM

I can legally make a safe metal firearm right now. Why would I be stupid enough to create a totally inferior dangerous to user weapon?

I doubt one could ban these devices anymore than any other dangerous machine or device.

As it stands now, it is illegal to make this gun and transport it unless the owner has the required FFL to make it. One is still legally able to create their own real metal firearm for their use without paying the restoration tax. Sadly the restoration tax had been stolen by Congress for decades and not used to further sporting issues.

I have some experience with smokeless and black power. All of them can be dangerous and should not be considered toy on either side.

mjolnir 06-01-2013 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jefro (Post 4963145)
I can legally make a safe metal firearm right now. Why would I be stupid enough to create a totally inferior dangerous to user weapon?

I doubt one could ban these devices anymore than any other dangerous machine or device. ...

Quite correct and a fact of which most people aren't aware. I believe this device contained some metal. The ceramic knives mentioned above contain enough metallic powder to be visible by X-ray.

I don't plan ever to "print" a gun, I have however d/l some of the .stls.

sundialsvcs 06-01-2013 09:44 AM

Agreeing with Frankbell on this one ... I grew up with guns, and (like Chief Justice Scalia), in my high school "marksmanship" was a team that was hard to get onto. Football was one thing – any jocko could do it – but this was elite. People on that team routinely carried their prized guns with them to school and home every day ... unloaded and locked ... and the ammunition was stored in a locker at the school's range. You learned how to use the gun as what it is ... as a tool ... and you learned how to use it with great skill. You were r-e-s-p-o-n-s-i-b-l-e.

The making of a fireable weapon is an interesting demonstration of the potential applicability of 3D-printing technology, because it does demonstrate that a structure can be built successfully which can withstand the chamber-pressures caused by a cartridge ... although I don't recall how big the cartridge actually was. But my principal concern is simply one of safety: could someone get hurt, whether on the first firing or the fiftieth. Answer: "probably so." To date, the barrel is always made of metal, and even so, sometimes still they crack. (Usually the metal is still strong enough that it does not shatter.) I do not feel that polymer plastics would be suitable, or ever could be made so.

I'm not at all concerned about metal-detectors.

I am dismayed that the National Rifle Association, which at one time was the champion of gun-safety, has of late become a political mouth-piece which shamelessly promotes, well, "gun-mongering" and what are outrageously un-safe scenarios. It has no business doing any such thing, and it didn't used to. "A gun is a weapon that is designed to destroy anything that it is pointed at. Remember that, always." I vividly remember both an instructor and my father very-soberly saying that. But, NRA is not saying that anymore. I think that somewhere along the way, the organization sold its own soul. Knowing what they used to be, that's very sad.

In the State of Tennessee, they managed to get a law passed saying that it was legal to bear guns in .. of all places .. bars. :eek: A provision was added, "unless the bar owner states otherwise." And, let the record show, every bar in the State promptly showed itself to be much smarter and more-pragmatic than our gullible legislators. I have never seen a bar, anywhere at all, that does not now very prominently display "NO GUNS" at every door. (There probably is no "more un-safe place" to carry a weapon ... than a bar. If you feel the need to be "packing" to walk into a bar ... you're walking into the wrong bar! Du-uhh....)

Habitual 06-01-2013 01:37 PM

When guns are outlawed, only Outlaws will have guns.

Timothy Miller 06-01-2013 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Habitual (Post 4963577)
When guns are outlawed, only Outlaws will have guns.

In agreement. Look at the violent crime rate in the US (where guns are legal still) and the UK (where they're not). The UK has a much higher violent crime rate per capita. And that trend carries over in EVERY country (that you can easily pull accurate data from) where firearms for law-abiding citizens are outlawed.

Those who are going to break the law don't care if something's illegal, that's why it's called "breaking the law".

jefro 06-01-2013 04:37 PM

I remember seeing a book when I was a kid that upset everyone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anarchist_Cookbook was mostly filled with prank type of information but the word anarchist along with some feeling or belief that the book would destroy civilization resulted in many scared people. Knowing what I know now, I'd consider the book mostly useless in terms of overthrowing a regime or creating a destructive device.

In almost every country, the people would most likely be killed by some accident or medical issue. Traffic deaths in some states are greater than all the firearm deaths in the world. Cancer, heart attack and stroke also are many many times higher risks. Should we ban all items that relate to these issues? We really should shouldn't we?



The NRA many years ago was hounded by the IRS. They finally decided to just pay taxes unlike other organizations that get tax breaks. They also had to change their agenda. Sadly, crazy people are trying to make a name and get 15 minutes of fame by some heinous act. The NRA knew that if they didn't rally the troops they'd be out of a job. I'd like to know what un-safe practice the NRA is supporting.

It is my opinion that safety of all common machines ought to be in the schools. Everything from chain saw to hammers to electricity to firearms ought to be a requirement. Not one minute of safety is required in schools, yet they let kids in kindergarten learn about homosexuality. Seems to me they'd be better off learning how to be safe.

cascade9 06-02-2013 07:14 AM

Outlaw? The cad drawings are out, have been widely downloaded, and unless you want some sort of control software that determines what you can and cannot pinrt 3D, there isnt much anyone can do about it.

Not that it matters overly much IMO, this 'gun' is slow to load, doesnt have a saftely IIRC (so you cant really walk around with it loaded unless you want to shot yourself) and inaccurate. Considering how easy it is to get guns all over the world, its like banning home made methadone when heroin is cheap and widely avaible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timothy Miller (Post 4963581)
In agreement. Look at the violent crime rate in the US (where guns are legal still) and the UK (where they're not). The UK has a much higher violent crime rate per capita. And that trend carries over in EVERY country (that you can easily pull accurate data from) where firearms for law-abiding citizens are outlawed.

The numbers used are at best misleading, and IMO outright distortions-

Quote:

First, it should be noted that the figures Swann gives are out of date: in 2010, according to the FBI, the reported rate of violent crime in the US was 403 incidents per 100,000 people–the 466 figure comes from 2007. Second, and more importantly, the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a “violent crime” as one of four specific offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

The British Home Office, by contrast, has a substantially different definition of violent crime. The British definition includes all “crimes against the person,” including simple assaults, all robberies, and all “sexual offenses,” as opposed to the FBI, which only counts aggravated assaults and “forcible rapes.”

When you look at how this changes the meaning of “violent crime,” it becomes clear how misleading it is to compare rates of violent crime in the US and the UK. You’re simply comparing two different sets of crimes. In 2009/10, for instance (annual data is from September to September), British police recorded 871,712 crimes against persons, 54,509 sexual offenses, and 75,101 robberies in England and Wales. Based on the 2010 population of 55.6 million, this gives a staggeringly high violent crime rate of 1,797 offenses per 100,00 people.

But of the 871,000 crimes against the person, less than half (401,000) involved any actual injury. The remainder were mostly crimes like simple assault without injury, harassment, “possession of an article with a blade or point,” and causing “public fear, alarm, or distress.” And of the 54,000 sexual offenses, only a quarter (15,000) were rapes. This makes it abundantly clear that the naive comparison of crime rates either wildly overstates the amount of violence in the UK or wildly understates it in the US.
http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com...t-than-the-us/

I wouldnt be suprised if any world-wide 'trend' (if it even exists) is based on 'comparing apples and oranges'.

Even if it was true, US has the highest rates of gun (and non-gun) homidcide in the western world. If you just used the gun homicide rates, the US is 4 times as violent as the UK.....


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:25 PM.