Philadelphia to ban 3d printed guns

M

Mazulu

Banned
Banned
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/26/philadelphia-poised-to-become-first-city-to-ban-3d-printed-guns/

Wow! I'm just blown away by that. There have been news stories about how it's possible to use 3D printer to make gun parts. Apparently, you can make all of the parts, even the firing pin. I am someone who is sympathetic to gun rights and the NRA. But I find myself pondering what would happen if you let people create gun parts (and guns) using a printer. What's the worst that can happen in a city like Philadelphia if you effectively make guns freely available (which is what a 3D printer would do). I find myself leaning to the right on this one. Making it illegal to print 3D guns is probably an improper infringement by the government.
 
Mazulu said:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/26/philadelphia-poised-to-become-first-city-to-ban-3d-printed-guns/

Wow! I'm just blown away by that. There have been news stories about how it's possible to use 3D printer to make gun parts. Apparently, you can make all of the parts, even the firing pin. I am someone who is sympathetic to gun rights and the NRA. But I find myself pondering what would happen if you let people create gun parts (and guns) using a printer. What's the worst that can happen in a city like Philadelphia if you effectively make guns freely available (which is what a 3D printer would do). I find myself leaning to the right on this one. Making it illegal to print 3D guns is probably an improper infringement by the government.
Click to expand...

Bang goes the up-till-now profitable business model (of NRA-shilling/lobbying and Arms manufacturers making and selling guns to all those crazies out there)!

The crazies won't need the NRA/Manufacturers anymore if they can buy a printer and make all the guns they want when they want.

Quick (scream the NRA et al), make the printers illegal so that the "capitalist right winger" NRA and Arms manufacturers can keep their profitable business model using the "socialist left wing" laws and state police to keep those bad printers out of the hands of just anyone who wants a gun!


Oops, the NRA and gun manufacturers just used the same argument (for 'control' of printers) that reasonable people have been using (for 'control' of guns) all this time. Amazing what happens when the shoe is NOW on the other foot! :)
 
The technology to make guns at home has been around for decades, they call them lathes and milling machines.
 
spidergoat said:
The technology to make guns at home has been around for decades, they call them lathes and milling machines.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but lathes and milling require metal shop skill. A 3D printer doesn't require any skill (other than a little bit of computer skill). You just download the file from the internet and hit PRINT.
 
Mazulu said:
What's the worst that can happen in a city like Philadelphia if you effectively make guns freely available (which is what a 3D printer would do). I find myself leaning to the right on this one. Making it illegal to print 3D guns is probably an improper infringement by the government.
Click to expand...

How does the first sentence lead to the second sentence? I mean, if gun printing is at all a feasible alternative to purchasing or stealing weapons, then you're talking about a nightmare scenario.
 
Mazulu said:
Yeah, but lathes and milling require metal shop skill. A 3D printer doesn't require any skill (other than a little bit of computer skill). You just download the file from the internet and hit PRINT.
Click to expand...

It not quite that simple. The technicals skills are more similar than you might think.
 
Balerion said:
Nothing a few Youtube videos couldn't help.

There's no question that printing guns with a 3D printer is easier than manufacturing guns mechanically.
Click to expand...

But as long as they are plastic, they will be crappy and might blow up in your hand. Bullets are the hard part to manufacture, maybe access to bullets should be restricted.
 
Mazulu said:
Yeah, but lathes and milling require metal shop skill. A 3D printer doesn't require any skill (other than a little bit of computer skill). You just download the file from the internet and hit PRINT.
Click to expand...

You can make a gun from a piece of pipe and a stapler. It doesn't require any skill beyond buying stuff at a Home Depot and using a drill.
 
the only thing gun laws do is take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. no law has ever stopped a criminal with intent from getting their hands on one.
 
Balerion said:
Nothing a few Youtube videos couldn't help.

There's no question that printing guns with a 3D printer is easier than manufacturing guns mechanically.
Click to expand...

There probably worried that gang members are going to get on the internet, download an uzi file, and then 3D print it. It's probably an overreaction to new technology, but then again, I don't live in Philly.
 
Has anyone bothered to do even a tiny bit of research on this topic??? The last number I saw said that it cost something over 3,000 to print one of those things! (and it's only good for about one or two shots.)
 
Read-Only said:
Has anyone bothered to do even a tiny bit of research on this topic??? The last number I saw said that it cost something over 3,000 to print one of those things! (and it's only good for about one or two shots.)
Click to expand...

I agree, which means that making it illegal to manufacture a gun with a 3D printer is stupid. You can buy a perfectly good hand gun for about $350.

On the other hand, what if a 3D printer store opens up that charges $20/kg of "printed" material. Let's say that 12 y/o hoodlum Johnny prints out gun parts for $20, buys some bullets for $25, then starts robbing people?
 
Some of the things americans are allowed to buy is mad.

There should be controls on what you can get hold off.

Of course criminals out there will find and use anything as weapons, but the stuff americans can get hold of is bizarre, in how its even allowed.
 
I think eventually 3D printing will come to be a commonplace manufacturing technique. Companies will be able to make custom metal parts for each individual customer. And not just for the gun industry. It's rather short sighted to outlaw all 3D printing processes before they even have a chance to make it in the marketplace.
 
Read-Only said:
Has anyone bothered to do even a tiny bit of research on this topic??? The last number I saw said that it cost something over 3,000 to print one of those things! (and it's only good for about one or two shots.)
Click to expand...

That is the concern, the "disposable" nature of the product that's printed. Think of it like this, a licensed gun tends to have a history, where it was made, where it was sold and in some cases who it was sold to. If you talking about something that can be printed up with no history (other than perhaps the polymer type used), while indeed it might only have one use (one shot) it's something that can be disposed of, Printable weapons are an assassins dream.
 
Balerion said:
How does the first sentence lead to the second sentence? I mean, if gun printing is at all a feasible alternative to purchasing or stealing weapons, then you're talking about a nightmare scenario.
Click to expand...
The second sentence was about Constitutionality.
 
Read-Only said:
Has anyone bothered to do even a tiny bit of research on this topic??? The last number I saw said that it cost something over 3,000 to print one of those things! (and it's only good for about one or two shots.)
Click to expand...
Agreed. This is interesting from a technical, "gee-wiz" view, but it is a very long way from having real legal or economic implications.

The printers will always cost money and the metal will always cost money, so you won't see people printing them at home, you will see changing manufacturing processes for regular and smaller manufacturers first.
 
Notes on a Familiar Routine

Balerion said:

How does the first sentence lead to the second sentence? I mean, if gun printing is at all a feasible alternative to purchasing or stealing weapons, then you're talking about a nightmare scenario.
Click to expand...

I agree, but the reason I didn't bother making the point is something you might notice in Russ Watters' reply:

"The second sentence was about Constitutionality."​

It's an intellectually lazy way of arguing, though we need not tack him to the shed for it; lots of people do it—kind of like refusing to say what thesis one is addressing so that they don't have to acknowledge a direct challenge to their assertion, and instead say things like, "I don't see it anywhere. It does not say that in any of your references."

In this case, our Mr. Watters' point is to make you state a thesis, so that he can just sit back and say you're wrong. The convenient thing about this approach that people seem to like is that they don't actually have to do anything.

In the end, we must look past Mr. Watters, who offers nothing of substance to the issue, and turn back to the topic post:

"Making it illegal to print 3D guns is probably an improper infringement by the government."​

Okay ... now, what does that even mean?

And unless these people can actually give some sort of substantive analysis, don't play their game. Make them actually be honest, and make them actually put up some kind of argument.

Well, okay, I suppose there is always a point to be made that this is about hating 3-D printers and reality doesn't matter, but that would be a really, really stupid presumption; remember, their whole point here is an exchange of maximum spectacle for minimum effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top