First fully 3D printed gun now exists

[JimC]

Seth wrote:

...Yes, we've long established that criminals of whatever age can and will get handguns if they really want one, and that's a fact in the US and quite literally everywhere else on earth, including the UK, OZ and NZ....

That is factually incorrect. In western countries other than the US, it is very difficult and/or very expensive for criminals to obtain handguns, simply because there are vastly fewer in circulation (due to restrictive gun laws). The most successful of the criminal fraternity will obtain them, to be sure, but not the young, punk wannabees...

It's not about status, it's about money. If you have enough money, you can buy one.

Yes, in Australia, enough money, underworld connections and avoiding the various police stings can probably get you a handgun.

Doable for a minority of serious career crims, but not easily doable for young punks...

[FBM]

S. Korea and Japan have much, much stricter gun control laws than any Western country I can think of (without thinking too hard, that is), and yet from time to time a crime is committed with a gun. It's rare, but it's there. Just a few weeks ago, a Korean man committed suicide with a handgun. I can't think of any law that can't be broken somehow by somebody. The big ones should not, however, be easy to do and get away with.

[JimC]

S. Korea and Japan have much, much stricter gun control laws than any Western country I can think of (without thinking too hard, that is), and yet from time to time a crime is committed with a gun. It's rare, but it's there. Just a few weeks ago, a Korean man committed suicide with a handgun. I can't think of any law that can't be broken somehow by somebody. The big ones should not, however, be easy to do and get away with.

Absolutely. I'm certainly not claiming there is no gun crime in Oz, simply that it is relatively rare, due to the comparative unavailability of guns. And committing violent crimes are easier with a hand-gun, due to the conceal-ability issue... Plenty of bolt action rifles in Oz...

[FBM]

S. Korea and Japan have much, much stricter gun control laws than any Western country I can think of (without thinking too hard, that is), and yet from time to time a crime is committed with a gun. It's rare, but it's there. Just a few weeks ago, a Korean man committed suicide with a handgun. I can't think of any law that can't be broken somehow by somebody. The big ones should not, however, be easy to do and get away with.

Absolutely. I'm certainly not claiming there is no gun crime in Oz, simply that it is relatively rare, due to the comparative unavailability of guns. And committing violent crimes are easier with a hand-gun, due to the conceal-ability issue... Plenty of bolt action rifles in Oz...

Yup. Of course, someone is going to come along and say that self-defense is also easier with a handgun for the same reasons.

[JimC]

S. Korea and Japan have much, much stricter gun control laws than any Western country I can think of (without thinking too hard, that is), and yet from time to time a crime is committed with a gun. It's rare, but it's there. Just a few weeks ago, a Korean man committed suicide with a handgun. I can't think of any law that can't be broken somehow by somebody. The big ones should not, however, be easy to do and get away with.

Absolutely. I'm certainly not claiming there is no gun crime in Oz, simply that it is relatively rare, due to the comparative unavailability of guns. And committing violent crimes are easier with a hand-gun, due to the conceal-ability issue... Plenty of bolt action rifles in Oz...

Yup. Of course, someone is going to come along and say that self-defense is also easier with a handgun for the same reasons.

And I wouldn't deny that. Undoubtedly, there are occasions, particularly in the US, where people have successfully defended themselves with a hand-gun. How many occasions they would have actually lost their life if they weren't armed is another matter...

But the argument goes beyond that, basically saying that the lives lost in Oz, for example, by someone not being armed for self defence are greatly outweighed by the lives saved because criminals or just angry people did not have a gun easy to hand, not to mention the suicides and accidental deaths facilitated by an easy availability of guns.

[FBM]

Yep. I'm not stumping for widespread, easy access to guns, I just don't think abolition is going to work in the U.S. But I've already said that a couple dozen times, so I won't bore everyone by repeating it.

[FBM]

Working gun made with 3D printer fired (video).

[Cormac]

Seth wrote:

...Yes, we've long established that criminals of whatever age can and will get handguns if they really want one, and that's a fact in the US and quite literally everywhere else on earth, including the UK, OZ and NZ....

That is factually incorrect. In western countries other than the US, it is very difficult and/or very expensive for criminals to obtain handguns, simply because there are vastly fewer in circulation (due to restrictive gun laws). The most successful of the criminal fraternity will obtain them, to be sure, but not the young, punk wannabees...

It isn't really that expensive or difficult Jim. Ireland has very restrictive gun laws, and I'm fairly confident that I could get my hands on a fully automatic weapon within a fortnight, for a few hundred euro.

The difficult would be inviting very unsavoury characters into your life.

[Collector1337]

S. Korea and Japan have much, much stricter gun control laws than any Western country I can think of (without thinking too hard, that is), and yet from time to time a crime is committed with a gun. It's rare, but it's there. Just a few weeks ago, a Korean man committed suicide with a handgun. I can't think of any law that can't be broken somehow by somebody. The big ones should not, however, be easy to do and get away with.

Absolutely. I'm certainly not claiming there is no gun crime in Oz, simply that it is relatively rare, due to the comparative unavailability of guns. And committing violent crimes are easier with a hand-gun, due to the conceal-ability issue... Plenty of bolt action rifles in Oz...

Yup. Of course, someone is going to come along and say that self-defense is also easier with a handgun for the same reasons.

And I wouldn't deny that. Undoubtedly, there are occasions, particularly in the US, where people have successfully defended themselves with a hand-gun. How many occasions they would have actually lost their life if they weren't armed is another matter...

But the argument goes beyond that, basically saying that the lives lost in Oz, for example, by someone not being armed for self defence are greatly outweighed by the lives saved because criminals or just angry people did not have a gun easy to hand, not to mention the suicides and accidental deaths facilitated by an easy availability of guns.

The deaths from those not being armed do outweigh the other lives "saved." Those who are intelligent and prepared to save their own lives are the ones who's lives you should value greater, since apparently we're placing value on life.

It's simple Natural Selection. Those who are smart and prepared should live. "Survival of the fittest," remember? Not, the sheeple, "Let's hope someone comes in time to save us!" mentality. That's not fit. Especially when you mention suicide. Apparently those who are willing to take their own life, are also more important than those who value their life enough to protect it. Talk about some fucked up logic.

And then on top of it, then you mention accidental deaths. Yet again, apparently idiots doing stupid shit with guns, are the people who need to be saved, not the smart ones who can manage firearm ownership without negligent discharges.

So yeah, let's promote the breeding of the scared sheep, suicidal, and stupid. Or do we not believe in Evolution anymore? Since apparently some lives are more important than others. I'll pick the intelligent and capable.

I am one of those people who would be dead had I not been armed. But, I guess according to the collectivists, it's better for society that I die so that everyone else can feel safer. Well guess what? Fuck you.

[MrJonno]

It's simple Natural Selection. Those who are smart and prepared should live. "Survival of the fittest,

Human beings don't adapt to their environment, they adapt their environment to themselves, and ensuring a gun free environment by paying the police to lock up/execute anyone carrying a gun is the most effective survival strategy by a long long way

[cronus]

Printing a crossbow would be cool and unlike a gun it would be possible to print the projectiles too.

[orpheus]

S. Korea and Japan have much, much stricter gun control laws than any Western country I can think of (without thinking too hard, that is), and yet from time to time a crime is committed with a gun. It's rare, but it's there. Just a few weeks ago, a Korean man committed suicide with a handgun. I can't think of any law that can't be broken somehow by somebody. The big ones should not, however, be easy to do and get away with.

Absolutely. I'm certainly not claiming there is no gun crime in Oz, simply that it is relatively rare, due to the comparative unavailability of guns. And committing violent crimes are easier with a hand-gun, due to the conceal-ability issue... Plenty of bolt action rifles in Oz...

Yup. Of course, someone is going to come along and say that self-defense is also easier with a handgun for the same reasons.

And I wouldn't deny that. Undoubtedly, there are occasions, particularly in the US, where people have successfully defended themselves with a hand-gun. How many occasions they would have actually lost their life if they weren't armed is another matter...

But the argument goes beyond that, basically saying that the lives lost in Oz, for example, by someone not being armed for self defence are greatly outweighed by the lives saved because criminals or just angry people did not have a gun easy to hand, not to mention the suicides and accidental deaths facilitated by an easy availability of guns.

The deaths from those not being armed do outweigh the other lives "saved." Those who are intelligent and prepared to save their own lives are the ones who's lives you should value greater, since apparently we're placing value on life.

It's simple Natural Selection. Those who are smart and prepared should live. "Survival of the fittest," remember? Not, the sheeple, "Let's hope someone comes in time to save us!" mentality. That's not fit. Especially when you mention suicide. Apparently those who are willing to take their own life, are also more important than those who value their life enough to protect it. Talk about some fucked up logic.

And then on top of it, then you mention accidental deaths. Yet again, apparently idiots doing stupid shit with guns, are the people who need to be saved, not the smart ones who can manage firearm ownership without negligent discharges.

So yeah, let's promote the breeding of the scared sheep, suicidal, and stupid. Or do we not believe in Evolution anymore? Since apparently some lives are more important than others. I'll pick the intelligent and capable.

Naturalistic fallacy.

[MrJonno]

The deaths from those not being armed do outweigh the other lives "saved." Those who are intelligent and prepared to save their own lives are the ones who's lives you should value greater, since apparently we're placing value on life.

Making sure guns are not readily available increases the chances of me not being murdered by 400%, the rational and intelligent thing to do would to ensure it stays that way.

The best form of security I can ever have is ensuring my neighbour (and anyone in my family) has the smallest chance of having access to a firearm as possible

[Collector1337]

It's simple Natural Selection. Those who are smart and prepared should live. "Survival of the fittest,

Human beings don't adapt to their environment, they adapt their environment to themselves, and ensuring a gun free environment by paying the police to lock up/execute anyone carrying a gun is the most effective survival strategy by a long long way

Wrong. It's both.

So, you think that I should be dead or in jail just because I have guns?

[Collector1337]

The deaths from those not being armed do outweigh the other lives "saved." Those who are intelligent and prepared to save their own lives are the ones who's lives you should value greater, since apparently we're placing value on life.

It's simple Natural Selection. Those who are smart and prepared should live. "Survival of the fittest," remember? Not, the sheeple, "Let's hope someone comes in time to save us!" mentality. That's not fit. Especially when you mention suicide. Apparently those who are willing to take their own life, are also more important than those who value their life enough to protect it. Talk about some fucked up logic.

And then on top of it, then you mention accidental deaths. Yet again, apparently idiots doing stupid shit with guns, are the people who need to be saved, not the smart ones who can manage firearm ownership without negligent discharges.

So yeah, let's promote the breeding of the scared sheep, suicidal, and stupid. Or do we not believe in Evolution anymore? Since apparently some lives are more important than others. I'll pick the intelligent and capable.

Naturalistic fallacy.

Good to know you're one of the Evolution deniers.