The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/10/us/te ... .html?_r=0

I was wondering when that would happen tesnews

I wonder how that rides with 1st Amendment rights on free speech versus 2nd Amendment rights on bearing arms.

Certainly interesting times ahead.

christel wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/10/us/te ... .html?_r=0

I was wondering when that would happen tesnews

Typical 'internet fail'

Once the files are on the internet - thats it, you can't get them back.
Even if they take them off the site in question.

Anyone who has already downloaded them can post them on a site outside the juristiction.
Or just share them on any one of the numerous file sharing sites.

Not to mention being a load of fuss about nothing, the 'plastic parts' are only for some bits of the AR-15, most of which are freely available in the US anyway. Can't 3-D print a barrel or a bolt (yet), whithout which you ain't got a functioning firearm.

Individual wrote: Can't 3-D print a barrel or a bolt (yet), whithout which you ain't got a functioning firearm.

This gun is fully functioning and the only metal part in it is a strip of metal the manufacturer puts in to comply with the US 'Undetectable Firearms Act'...

Blackstuff wrote:

Individual wrote: Can't 3-D print a barrel or a bolt (yet), whithout which you ain't got a functioning firearm.

This gun is fully functioning and the only metal part in it is a strip of metal the manufacturer puts in to comply with the US 'Undetectable Firearms Act'...

Hmm thanks - seems I'm a bit out of date......

OK so it fired one round. I'm still somewhat underwhelmed.
Its always been possible to build a .22 zip gun from easily obtainable plumbing parts (and for much less than an $8000 3-D printer).

OK so he bought the satanic-devil-printer on ebay, where he could also have bought a lathe and a milling machine and built a proper firearm. I still say they are sensationalising this because its 'the internet'.

The real reason that this technology is getting this coverage is that traditional manufacturers are sh*tt*n themselves and will do anything to slow its progress - including getting it banned because you can make guns with it.

Frankly even chambering in .22LR I am not exactly keen on the idea of shooting an entirely plastic gun that has come off a 3D printer! Looks like a good way to get yourself hurt.

Also it ignores the more major issue when it comes to illegal guns, availability of ammunition!

Also it ignores the more major issue when it comes to illegal guns, availability of ammunition!

Well illegal guns cost way less than $8000 plus whatever else and that white thing is not exactly easily concealed by the looks of it. Ammo, well good luck getting decent 22RF in the USA right now, not much of it around. CCI mini mags MAY be available in about a year according to some shops.

Still, how to make a bomb is apparently still online so maybe that's what the loonytune / criminal with bad intent will go back to.

At risk of gratuitously plugging work, one of our columnists has a rather good take on the whole 3D printed gun thing and why it's utter nonsense:

'Liberator': Proof that you CAN'T make a working gun in a 3D printer
No need to pry this piece of crap out of my fingers

Comment People are missing one important point about the "Liberator" 3D-printed "plastic gun": it isn't any more a gun than any other very short piece of plastic pipe is a "gun".

Seriously. That's all a Liberator is: a particularly crappy pipe, because it is made of lots of laminated layers in a 3D printer. Attached to the back of the pipe is a needlessly bulky and complicated mechanism allowing you to bang a lump of plastic with a nail in it against the end of the pipe...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/10 ... ic_3d_gun/