First fully 3D printed gun now exists

[Blind groper]

Seth

You suggested giving a loaded gun to everyone on every flight. Are you going senile, unable even to remember your own posts?

[JimC]

Seth

You suggested giving a loaded gun to everyone on every flight. Are you going senile, unable even to remember your own posts?

Sniffing gun oil too long will do that, I gather...

[Seth]

Seth

You suggested giving a loaded gun to everyone on every flight. Are you going senile, unable even to remember your own posts?

I know exactly what I said. I just have a lot more faith and trust in my fellow citizens than you do. That's because you live in a perpetual state of terror of your fellow men, thinking that they are all maniacs in waiting and if they get their hands on a gun, they will all spontaneously go on murderous rampages.

The facts prove you to be wrong.

I'd be perfectly comfortable on an airliner filled with guns because I know that the chances that a truly insane individual will do anything when faced with 200 other people who can kill him in an instant is extremely remote, and that even if one shows up, I, and everyone else on the plane will do what is necessary to protect each other.

Now, of course I'm not serious about issuing guns to passengers, I'm just making the above point. I walk around with a handgun every day of my life and have done so for more than a quarter century and, surprise, I've never suffered from "spontaneous handgun psychosis" even once. Nor has anybody else I know. But it's damned certain that if I DO encounter someone who, from insanity or mal intent, pulls a gun and starts shooting, I'll put my life at risk to protect even you, and other idiots who rant and rave against an armed citizenry. And you'll be glad I'm there.

Know what one of the frequent comments heard from the living victims of the Virginia Tech shooting...and the Columbine shooting...was?

Let me tell you: It was "I wish somebody else had had a gun."

Well, I'm that guy. So, I suspect is Collector. I know Gallstones is.

It has nothing to do with bullying anyone, it has to do with protecting the weak an innocent, and protecting myself. But I wouldn't expect a paranoid hoplophobe to actually understand this.

[Blind groper]

At Columbine someone else did have a gun. The security guard. It earned him the first bullet.

On an aircraft.
Bear in mind that 10% of the general population, and often more, have some kind of mental illness. Frankly, if you think you can trust every one of a modern passenger aircraft full of people, all hefting a gun, you are part of that 10%.

[Seth]

At Columbine someone else did have a gun. The security guard. It earned him the first bullet.

LIar. You were on the other side of the planet, and you can't even check Wikipedia before you spew. I was at the school interviewing people two hours after it was over.

At 11:19 a.m., a witness heard Eric Harris yell "Go! Go!" The two gunmen pulled their guns from beneath their trenchcoats and began shooting at two 17-year-old students who had been sitting in the grass next to the West Entrance of the school.[28] Rachel Scott was hit four times and killed instantly. Richard Castaldo was shot eight times in the chest, arm and abdomen and paralyzed below the chest.[6] It is unknown who fired first or which gunman shot and killed Scott.[26] Source: Wikipedia

The "security guard" was actually Jefferson County Sheriff's Deputy Neil Gardner, the school Resource Officer, who was outside the building monitoring students smoking off-campus while he ate lunch. He was the ONLY person who was or could be legally armed on the campus, and he usually ate lunch in the cafeteria, where the bombs were planted and the shooting started. He didn't get the "first bullet," in fact he was not shot, and he exchanged fire with Eric Harris at the West entrance. He was armed only with his service revolver, and had no semi-automatic patrol rifle (AR-15) with high-capacity magazines with which to effectively engage Harris, who was 60 yards away firing at him with a rifle. That's changed, and now many departments issue patrol rifles to officers precisely to counter this sort of incident, which also completely changed the way police and administrators handle school shootings, as was seen at Sandy Hook Elementary where the Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school counselor Mary Sherlach flew at the shooter UNARMED to try to stop him, and got killed. Sure would have been nice if one or both of them had been armed, wouldn't it?

So, once again you show your abysmal ignorance of all things gun related.

You really should shut the fuck up, you're making even more of a fool of yourself than normal, which takes some doing.

[Blind groper]

Seth

It may be that the security guard survived. The point, though, is that he made no difference to the slaughter. Having armed guards in schools is an unproven strategy. No school mass killing has even been slowed down by a person with a gun.

Your gun nutter strategy so far has a 100% failure rate.

[Seth]

Seth

It may be that the security guard survived.

He wasn't a security guard, he was a trained, certified deputy sheriff, and it was pure chance he was outside the building.

The point, though, is that he made no difference to the slaughter.

Wrong again. The problem, which law enforcement has universally recognized is that at the time, the tactical protocol for such events was NOT to immediately enter the premises and engage the shooters, it was to establish a perimeter and wait for backup and the SWAT team, which is exactly what happened. Since that time tactics for active shooters have changed 180 degrees and the protocol now is for any available officers to form a "hasty assault team", make immediate entry and engage the shooter.

The problem at Columbine is that there were NOT ENOUGH good guys with guns in the school, so we had teachers trying to use fire extinguishers as weapons.

One "school resource officer" is not sufficient. Each school needs at least a half-dozen armed teachers, custodians and administrators on campus at all times. Preferably more.

And you're quite wrong about the effectiveness of armed people in schools. Go look up Joel Myrick.

Having armed guards in schools is an unproven strategy. No school mass killing has even been slowed down by a person with a gun.

Wrong. And other than Columbine, no school shooter has tried shooting up a school where there ARE armed persons inside, either teachers/staff or police officers. Every other school shooting has taken place at schools where NO ONE other than the shooter has a firearm. By law. That's one reason shooters pick such targets.

Your gun nutter strategy so far has a 100% failure rate.

Actually, it's been 100 percent effective in every school where it's been implemented in the years after Columbine, where there have been zero attacks. The problem is that it hasn't been implemented in all schools because hoplophobe, know-nothing idiots care more about their political anti-gun agenda than they do about protecting children. This is proven by the fact that Obama and his minions had their gun control plans sitting in a drawer, WAITING FOR THE NEXT MASSACRE TO OCCUR. And then they danced on the graves of the dead children in order to capitalize on the emotions.

These idiots, like you, would rather do nothing and have children die than do the obvious thing: put armed teachers and staff in schools.

Your sort of political expediency is disgusting and flat-out evil.

[Blind groper]

Seth

OVer the last few decades there have been an average of 20 mass killings per year in the USA, with an average of 5 dead per killing. 100 dead each year.

No strategy has proved in the least effective in trying to reduce this. 100% failure rate.

And at that, this is the least of your problems. Mass killings are only 1% of the firearms murders each year in America. All those excess killings with guns.

No other OECD country has this level of murder. Why not? It is so simple. No other OECD country has that level of gun ownership, especially hand guns. Half of all US murders are with hand guns. More guns means more gun murders.

[FBM]

US government orders removal of Defcad 3D-gun designs.

[Collector1337]

"REVOLUTION CONTROL TACTICS for LAW ENFORCEMENT"

http://southmetrotraining.com/Courses/2 ... ctics.html

[Seth]

US government orders removal of Defcad 3D-gun designs.

Yeah, their desperation is obvious, and their legal case is weak. The Liberator is not covered under ITAR because ITAR only regulates items manufactured for MILITARY USE, not consumer products. If what the government is claiming is true, then Smith & Wesson, Colt and every other non-military firearms manufacturer is guilty of violating ITAR.

Here's the distinction: It might be a violation of ITAR to "release" blueprints of the M-16/M-4 rifle (if they weren't already out there) because the M-16/M-4 was specifically designed for military use, and is therefore covered by ITAR.

But the AR-15, despite being virtually identical to the M-16/M-4 in design, with a few minor changes to the receiver to prevent the installation of full-auto parts, is NOT an ITAR regulated item because it was NOT designed for military use.

The way you tell if what you want to export is an ITAR item is to a) read the ITAR list; and b) see if the item has an NSN (National Stock Number) assigned to it, which means it was designed pursuant to a military contract for military use.

There are certain categories of devices within which ALL of the iterations of the technology are ITAR restricted, such as Gen3 night vision tubes (but not the housings or other parts), but civilian firearms don't happen to be among them.

The feds are all panicked and are blowing smoke up the guy's skirt and are trying to bully him. He's got a lawyer and they'll tell the government to fuck off presently, which it'll have to do because a) such information is an expression of free speech; and b) he's not exporting ITAR-regulated items or information. Just because the government WANTS it to be ITAR restricted doesn't mean it is, or can be so restricted.

[pErvinalia]

I'm interested in the concept of 3D printing in general. It gets interesting when you throw guns/weapons into the mix. What's happening now reminds me a bit of what happened when internet "crime" really started to boom. There were no specific laws governing cyber crime, so police and regulators were scrambling to keep up and apply regular world laws to the cyber world. This was an inaccurate process and led to some absurd sorts of convictions while other people got away with stuff that could clearly be reasoned to be a crime. It seems now we are at that point with 3D printed guns. The regulations need to evolve to encompass this new technology. Trying to apply rules and regs from a different class isn't going to work. The next few years in 3D printing in general, and specifically in guns, is going to be very interesting to watch.

[Blind groper]

Internet restrictions will not work.

However, what would give partial success, and substantially, though not totally drop the murder rate, would be a simple ban on possessing or carrying hand guns, whether bought or 3D printed. When enough people have been arrested and imprisoned, hand gun possession would drop dramatically, and numerous lives would be saved. This is demonstrated by the fact that 23 out of the 24 richest nations have already removed those hand guns, and the hand gun murder rate in those nations is close to zero.


And yes, Seth, I know that the bad guys would not comply. But FBI figures show that career criminals killing people represent a minority of all murders.

The two big hand gun murder categories are
1. Heated arguments
2. Shootings in the home by a person known to the victim.

Murders by nasty criminals do happen, but as Seth himself points out, they are mostly of other criminals. To save decent people from hand gun murder, we need to remove hand guns from ordinary citizens, and especially young, hot blooded males.

[Collector1337]

Internet restrictions will not work.

However, what would give partial success, and substantially, though not totally drop the murder rate, would be a simple ban on possessing or carrying hand guns, whether bought or 3D printed. When enough people have been arrested and imprisoned, hand gun possession would drop dramatically, and numerous lives would be saved. This is demonstrated by the fact that 23 out of the 24 richest nations have already removed those hand guns, and the hand gun murder rate in those nations is close to zero.


And yes, Seth, I know that the bad guys would not comply. But FBI figures show that career criminals killing people represent a minority of all murders.

The two big hand gun murder categories are
1. Heated arguments
2. Shootings in the home by a person known to the victim.

Murders by nasty criminals do happen, but as Seth himself points out, they are mostly of other criminals. To save decent people from hand gun murder, we need to remove hand guns from ordinary citizens, and especially young, hot blooded males.

You need to refer to the other thread where we're talking about over population and increasing stupidity.

All crime has been on the decline for over 30 years now. There is no need to restrict people's rights when you look at the big picture and actually take those 2 facts into consideration, instead of being blindly anti-gun and anti-American.

[Seth]

I'm interested in the concept of 3D printing in general. It gets interesting when you throw guns/weapons into the mix. What's happening now reminds me a bit of what happened when internet "crime" really started to boom. There were no specific laws governing cyber crime, so police and regulators were scrambling to keep up and apply regular world laws to the cyber world. This was an inaccurate process and led to some absurd sorts of convictions while other people got away with stuff that could clearly be reasoned to be a crime. It seems now we are at that point with 3D printed guns. The regulations need to evolve to encompass this new technology. Trying to apply rules and regs from a different class isn't going to work. The next few years in 3D printing in general, and specifically in guns, is going to be very interesting to watch.

Um, er...it's ALREADY illegal to manufacture a firearm in the US without filling out a Form 1 and paying a $200 "making" tax, and by putting the required identification and serial numbers on the registered part and including a specified amount of metal so that the firearm will be detected by metal detectors.

It's a pretty serious federal felony in fact.

So, since making a 3D printed gun is already quite closely regulated, why do we need more regulations?

It's exactly the same problem faced by the control freaks in re people who buy milling machines and learn how to use them...or people who buy printing presses.

The fact of the matter is that the government CANNOT control this technology. It never could, and will never be able to do so, anymore than it can prevent criminals from getting, or building, their own firearms, bombs, knives, etc., or it could prevent the Soviets from getting our nuclear technology.

They can't suppress information, no matter how hard they try, if somebody else wants it badly enough.

This hysteria is just stupid. Few people are going to bother, and those that want to do so illegally would have done so anyway.