• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Downloadable Blueprints for a 3D-Printed (Plastic) Gun: What to do?

No, it's much more likely that the current interpretation of it is wrong and needs to be corrected.


Just another reason it needs to be regulated. The cost of regulation doesn't have to be expensive either. Software could handle most of the hard work.

Except it's not actually doable. How are we supposed to stop people getting access to information on the internet? With modern cryptography, anyone can send any arbitrary information to anyone else. We don't have to power to stop it. What's the point?

As I said, at least with child porn, while we can't stop it at least we can be sure that anyone we catch involved with it is a scum bag. But most people trading around 3d printed firearms are hobbyists.

The reason nobody bothers to build guns from scratch, even in countries with strong gun laws, is that even in those countries its STILL more effective to just find the existing guns. 3d printed guns are next to worthless.

It would make MUCH more sense to change how we regulate ammunition. A 3d gun is already almost useless but it goes from almost to entirely useless without any ammo. And it takes the much deadlier home machined guns out of the equation with it.

It's just bad policy made for bad reasons. It's all reactionary.
 
Except it's not actually doable. How are we supposed to stop people getting access to information on the internet? With modern cryptography, anyone can send any arbitrary information to anyone else. We don't have to power to stop it. What's the point?
Why do we need cops if they don't solve all our crimes?


It would make MUCH more sense to change how we regulate ammunition.
This is assumed as part of regulation.

It's just bad policy made for bad reasons. It's all reactionary.
Well, I did see Trump's tweet for the first time today so that is a reaction to something. However I first heard about 3d printed guns years ago and felt the same then as I do now. How long do I need to wait until it's not a reaction?
 
Why do we need cops if they don't solve all our crimes?



This is assumed as part of regulation.


Well, I did see Trump's tweet for the first time today so that is a reaction to something. However I first heard about 3d printed guns years ago and felt the same then as I do now. How long do I need to wait until it's not a reaction?

It's not that it's a reaction, it's that it's reactionary. But let's forget about that choice of words. My point is that this idea comes from the fear of prolific 3d printed guns causing lots of deaths. Not because of any actual problem of people being killed by 3d printed guns. I've never heard of ANYONE dying from a 3d printed gun. There might be some, but certainly none of statistical significance. And there never will be because as I keep saying, a 3d printed gun is a glorified Derringer. It fires one shot and poses serious danger to the operator. Theres just no sensible argument to trying to stop it.

And while we may still have cops even though they don't solve all crimes, the point here is we can't actually do ANYTHING. We can try and force it off the public web, but then it'll just appear on the dark net, and then we will have NO ability to do anything else to stop it.

We don't have the power to stop 3d printed gun instructions being available on the internet. Any attempts to stop it are a waste of money because we can't make any impact, and most of the people involved are no threat.

Why don't we license machine tool garages? They can produce much more dangerous weapons. They've had 3d printing for a LONG time only its called a CNC machine. So why aren't we worried about it? Because no problem actually exists, and because it's not seen as a scary new technology.
 
All it will take is for the price to drop for it to go from, "why", to "why not".

Just a heads up, really.

Even if they were free it wouldn't change that they can only fire one extremely inaccurate very low caliber round and then are likely to blow up. Nor would it change the fact that we can't actually stop it even if it were a serious threat, and it's not. And as far as I've noticed, I haven't seen any arguments from you on either of those two points.
 
So let me get this right. They are likely to literally blow up in your face, but this isn't a serious threat?
 
Well, lets qualify that by blow up in your face, I mean it could give you fairly serious injuries to your hands and more minor injuries to your face. And with that in mind. Yeah, I can't say I see that as a serious threat. Not when there are so many more dangerous things in every day life that we pay no attention to. And when you keep in mind that we can't actually do anything about it anyway. No, I wouldn't call it a serious threat.

I mean, if you have access to ammunition, and if you're worried about people using 3d guns, then you must be assuming they do. Then they can already easily build a pipe bomb with ordinary materials from any hardware store, with no 3d printer at all, and kill substantially more people. Why aren't we worrying about that?
 
Blueprints for 3D guns: What to do?

Federal Judge blocks release of 3D printed guns

By Associated Press July 31 at 6:21 PM
SEATTLE — The Latest on President Donald Trump and downloadable blueprints for a 3D-printed gun (all times local):

3:15 p.m.

A federal judge in Seattle has issued a temporary restraining order to stop the release of blueprints to make untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed plastic guns.

Eight Democratic attorneys general filed a lawsuit Monday seeking to block the federal government’s settlement with the company that makes the plans available online. They also sought a restraining order, arguing the 3D guns would be a safety risk.

U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik issued the order Tuesday afternoon.

The company behind the plans, Austin, Texas-based Defense Distributed, had reached a settlement with the federal government in June that allows it to make the plans for the guns available for download on Wednesday.

The restraining order puts that plan on hold for now.

In the meantime, Congressional Democrats have urged President Trump to reverse the decision to let Defense Distributed publish the plans. Trump said Tuesday that he’s “looking into” the idea, saying making 3D plastic guns available to the public “doesn’t seem to make much sense!

5:30 p.m.

The White House is declining to say whether the president thinks blueprints for printing plastic guns should be available to the public.

Spokesman Hogan Gidley tells reporters aboard Air Force One that President Donald Trump “is committed to the safety and security of all Americans and considers this his highest responsibility.”

Gidley notes that it’s currently illegal to own or make a wholly plastic gun, including any made with a 3D printer, and says the administration supports that law and “will continue to look at all options available to us to do what is necessary to protect Americans while also supporting the First and Second amendments.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...ee3c38-9510-11e8-818b-e9b7348cd87d_story.html

Files they've attempted to block for reference: https://mega.nz/#!qNcDUJrT!wVzbt6pWi4oJW2Vox4N8kDQcce8kBpBbc_5IMpo1ps4

Includes grenade, rifle, pistol, ammo, muzzle devices and misc. blueprints.
 
Information can't be stopped in the information age. Many have tried, all have failed. And often the attempt to stop the propagation of information has been a key factor in increasing its accessibility.
 
Well, lets qualify that by blow up in your face, I mean it could give you fairly serious injuries to your hands and more minor injuries to your face. And with that in mind. Yeah, I can't say I see that as a serious threat. Not when there are so many more dangerous things in every day life that we pay no attention to. And when you keep in mind that we can't actually do anything about it anyway. No, I wouldn't call it a serious threat.

I mean, if you have access to ammunition, and if you're worried about people using 3d guns, then you must be assuming they do. Then they can already easily build a pipe bomb with ordinary materials from any hardware store, with no 3d printer at all, and kill substantially more people. Why aren't we worrying about that?

That feels a bit like misirection Jess, tsk tsk. ;) I suppose the major difference is the question of will. Given the way that guns are so strangely entwined with freedom and selfhood by some US peoples, I think there is a biggerwill towards printing guns than pipe bombs.'

But yeah, at this stage such things are not something I would call a threat. Technology is there but is not really available to Joe Blow. That said, I'm seeing some 3d printer retailing for a few hundred- I don't know what to think. :?
 
The reason child pornography is illegal is because its existence necessitates the harm of a child. Blueprints for a plastic gun isn?t inherently or necessarily harming anyone. It?s not an apt comparison.

By that logic, videos that depict violence would fall under the same category and Liveleak has no shortage of those.

I think it's illegal in order to punish people for sexual deviancy. It doesn't seem more complicated than that. Besides, virtual porn (CGI, drawings of porn) are also illegal in the US, and there is nothing inherently harmful in a drawing.
 
By that logic, videos that depict violence would fall under the same category and Liveleak has no shortage of those.

Actually, using your logic, CH is correct.

I think it's illegal in order to punish people for sexual deviancy.
It's quite legal. Rape, sexual abuse of children, furries and necrophilia come to mind.

Besides, virtual porn (CGI, drawings of porn) are also illegal in the US, and there is nothing inherently harmful in a drawing.

Depends.

Most of your post was rather confusing to me.
 
Thread created because topic is about a novel way to potentially create guns.

Therefore, it's preferable from my pov, to create a thread where related technology can be discussed.

It can be moved to the "Mass Shootings and Gun Debate 2018" thread later if another mod feels strongly about the separation of this topic.
 
I tend to agree there is nothing that can really be done about this, the info is out there and will be available to those who seek, just like everything on the Internet. As the technology stands, plastic printed guns are not a serious threat. As 3D printing technology improves, we may see metal 3D printing possible, in which case the threat will be much more real. I would expect, if it becomes possible to print effective weapons, that they should become illegal. Not that it will stop them from being made, but it would at least create ramifications for those caught.
 
Thanks for making this a separate thread, it probably deserved its own.

Federal Judge blocks release of 3D printed guns



https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...ee3c38-9510-11e8-818b-e9b7348cd87d_story.html

Files they've attempted to block for reference: https://mega.nz/#!qNcDUJrT!wVzbt6pWi4oJW2Vox4N8kDQcce8kBpBbc_5IMpo1ps4

Includes grenade, rifle, pistol, ammo, muzzle devices and misc. blueprints.

thank you for including the download link. :)

I'm seeing some 3d printer retailing for a few hundred- I don't know what to think. :?

You can get hand gun for the same price.

First story from this year after a quick Google:
50,000 pounds of illegal fireworks seized, 7 arrested in Cal Fire bust
https://amp-sacbee-com.cdn.ampproje...referrer=https://www.google.com&_tf=From %1$s

The funny thing (dark humor funny haha) is your fire Marshall really is the only one picking up ANY slack from lack of gun control.

None of that is in Los Angeles. LA's the closest thing to anarchism you'll ever see in a world with 7 billion people. Almost anything goes in this county.
 
Last edited:
Top