Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The World's First 3D-Printed Gun

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the ok-ok-you've-got-my-order-now dept.

Printer 846

MrSeb writes "An American gunsmith has become the first person to construct and shoot a pistol partly made out of plastic, 3D-printed parts. The creator, who goes by the name HaveBlue and is an AR-15/M16 enthusiast, has reportedly fired 200 rounds with his part-plastic pistol without any sign of wear and tear. HaveBlue's custom creation is a .22-caliber pistol, formed from a 3D-printed AR-15 (M16) lower receiver, and a normal, commercial upper. In other words, the main body of the gun is plastic, while the chamber — where the bullets are actually struck — is solid metal. ... While this pistol obviously wasn't created from scratch using a 3D printer, the interesting thing is that the lower receiver — in a legal sense at least — is what actually constitutes a firearm. This means that people without gun licenses — or people who have had their licenses revoked — could print their own lower receiver and build a complete, off-the-books gun." Here come the illegal shapes. Note that the legal fiction of receiver-as-firearm is true in the U.S., but may not be in other jurisdictions, and that no gun license is required in most of the U.S. to purchase or possess a semi-automatic weapon.

cancel ×

846 comments

But ... (5, Insightful)

oPless (63249) | about 2 years ago | (#40778915)

Who will they blame when some nut-job goes postal with one of these illegal shapes?

Will they ban 3D Printers?

Re:But ... (5, Funny)

gman003 (1693318) | about 2 years ago | (#40778935)

Knowing our Congress, they'll try to ban teaching Geometry in schools.

After all, you can't print illegal shapes if you don't know shapes!

Re:But ... (5, Funny)

doubleplusungodly (1929514) | about 2 years ago | (#40779007)

After all, you can't print illegal shapes if you don't know shapes!

That would've made Apple v. Samsung a lot more interesting.

Re:But ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779055)

Knowing our Congress they wont because they are slaves to the NRA

Re:But ... (4, Insightful)

sporkstorms (472590) | about 2 years ago | (#40779235)

The NRA is 4.3 million Americans who care enough about their rights to put their hard-earned money to work (via dues) protecting those rights.

Whenever you read "NRA", substitute "4.3 million American citizens" to give the statement a little context.

Congress are "slaves to 4.3 million American citizens". That sounds pretty great to me!

Re:But ... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779323)

Which constitutes only 1.37% of the population...

Beware the tyranny of the minority.

Re:But ... (4, Interesting)

Applekid (993327) | about 2 years ago | (#40779385)

Which constitutes only 1.37% of the population...

Beware the tyranny of the minority.

What is it that the NRA wants to ban in law, exactly? It's not tyranny of the minority if they're not forcing anyone to do anything.

Re:But ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779421)

Do you genuinely believe that the NRA does not have a political agenda that has concrete, legislative implications?

Re:But ... (1, Insightful)

Agent0013 (828350) | about 2 years ago | (#40779397)

Which constitutes only 1.37% of the population...

Beware the tyranny of the minority.

Tyranny of the smart minority sounds better than tyranny of the fearful and stupid majority. Those who give up liberty for the sake of safety end up with neither one!

Re:But ... (5, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#40779491)

You could probably apply this "tyrrany of the minority" rhetoric to the ACLU and the EFF.

So that's a pretty dangerous bit of propaganda to push there.

Re:But ... (2)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 2 years ago | (#40779473)

Which constitutes only 1.37% of the population...

Beware the tyranny of the minority.

I'm reposting the AC comment above for visibility.

I like the fact I was able to walk into my local gun store and walk out with my Glock 19 and XD45 a half hour later. I like the fact that I can buy cases (1000 rounds) of ammunition online. I still think some of what comes out of the NRA is pretty kooky and I see no "liberal" or UN conspiracy to take any of that from me.

Re:But ... (0, Flamebait)

CosaNostra Pizza Inc (1299163) | about 2 years ago | (#40779405)

Is the timing of this news coincidence? The controversy of gun legislation is being brought up due to the recent events in Aurora, Colorado. BTW, no number of delusional John Wayne wannabes could have stopped that gunman. He was wearing full body armor and riot gear, including armored protection for his head, throat and groin. He also indiscriminately sprayed fire from high powered automatic weapons after throwing smoke grenades into the theaters. The casualty rate would have been much higher if his gun didn't jam.

Re:But ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779419)

Excellent point.

So how is this going to affect gun banning then when the criminals can just print their weapons and as they can be made of plastic they essentially can be made single use?

Gee, it's going to be as hard to control these as it is to control heroin, or to protect the borders of the 57 states, or to.

Can a corpse-man create his own AK-47 with this procedure? Think of the money that we can save! Why the Democrat Senat won't need to raise taxes on small business for maybe 1 or 2 more election cycles.

Well, no worries, we know HaveBlue didn't come up with this idea on his own, he had the help of the entire collective building him free roads, electricity and colonoscopies.

All hail the glorious Zerobama.

Re:But ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779427)

The NRA is 4.3 million Americans who care enough about their rights to put their hard-earned money to work (via dues) protecting those rights.

Whenever you read "NRA", substitute "4.3 million American citizens" to give the statement a little context.

Congress are "slaves to 4.3 million American citizens". That sounds pretty great to me!

4.3 million.

Out of over 300 million.

Thank you special interest groups.

Tell you what, you can implement proportionate party representation if you want, then see where the NRA ends up.

Re:But ... (5, Informative)

pnutjam (523990) | about 2 years ago | (#40779453)

The NRA has the same problem that Unions and our Government have. It has been co-opted by a vocal minority. Many people have left or refused to join. Which is why a simple google search on "NRA membership coupon" turns up a plethora of discounts and ways to get free memberships.

Re:But ... (-1, Offtopic)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40779165)

>>>Knowing our Congress, they'll try to ban teaching Geometry in schools. After all, you can't print illegal shapes if you don't know shapes!

Which is why we need School Choice to escape the Congress' or State Legislature's programming. You should be able to send your kid to any public or private school you wish (as is the case in the EU), and if it's private then you should be exempt from paying Public School Tax for that year (just as you don't pay gas taxes if you don't use public roads).

Re:But ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779305)

anyone who refers to education as programming immediatly sounds like a nut job. that is all.

Re:But ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779309)

What about us responsible people who decide not to shit out any children, shouldn't we be exempt from paying school taxes?

Re:But ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779333)

responsible: adj. Can't get laid to save his life.

Re:But ... (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40779457)

Yes I think if you're 40 years old and never had kids, then you should no longer have to pay school taxes since you never used the government school. (Of course if a miracle occurs and you get pregnant, then you'd have to resume paying.)

As for "programming" everyone knows that government schools are 95% education (good) but also 5% propaganda. In my day it was the importance of eating equal amounts of bread, dairy, cheese, etc..... even though cheese is bad for you (high in bad fat/cholesterol) but the government didn't care. It wanted to support the farm corporations.

Re:But ... (1)

pnutjam (523990) | about 2 years ago | (#40779483)

I think your understanding of biology is lacking.

Re:But ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779411)

You should be able to send your kid to any public or private school you wish (as is the case in the EU)

That's already the case.

and if it's private then you should be exempt from paying Public School Tax for that year (just as you don't pay gas taxes if you don't use public roads).

You benefit from public schools whether your kids go there or not. The same actually applies to public roads, though that's a separate matter.

Re:But ... (3, Interesting)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 2 years ago | (#40779461)

I don't have children, yet I still pay for schools in my taxes. I don't drive a car, but I do buy gasoline for my lawnmower and snowblower, so I am paying road taxes as well even though I don't drive on them. Sorry, but people that have kids and send them to private schools don't get my sympathy if they pay for public schools out of their taxes too. I don't have a problem with some of my taxes going towards public schools as I think investing money in education is a good idea. But your argument holds no water with me at all.

Re:But ... (1)

SScorpio (595836) | about 2 years ago | (#40779479)

Those are very poor examples.

At least where I live, taxes for public schools are collected via property taxes. You don't only play the tax if you have a child going to public school. I don't have any children, yet I still pay this tax.

Likewise, I can buy gas at a gas station and pay taxes that go towards maintaining roads, I then use this gas at home in my lawn mower, snow blower, etc. These things are never used on public roads yet the taxes are still paid and I have no way of opting out.

Re:But ... (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 2 years ago | (#40779489)

I thought they already had.

Re:But ... (2)

ackthpt (218170) | about 2 years ago | (#40778971)

Who will they blame when some nut-job goes postal with one of these illegal shapes?

Will they ban 3D Printers?

It'll just add to the political football match we've had for decades. Nutjobs will still kill people with weapons bought legally, with ammo bought leagally and nothing illegal done until they day they act.

I'm waiting for the first 3D printed bomb

Re:But ... (1)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | about 2 years ago | (#40779345)

That's right.
Guns don't kill people, people printing gun parts, assembling guns and being sick and twisted enough to kill people kill people.

Re:But ... (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#40779061)

when 3d printers become good enough to make knock-off products that's when real battle about copyrights heats up.
however, in most cases, one could do it without a 3d printer too. but there's going to be a line when it's much simpler to do it with them.

now this guy could have constructed the bottom part without a 3d printer too.

Re:But ... (1)

oGMo (379) | about 2 years ago | (#40779193)

now this guy could have constructed the bottom part without a 3d printer too.

While as you said copyrights will cause things to heat up, I think the real issue will be when 3D printers progress to the point they can do relatively cheap "mass" production. Not sure how long it takes to print one of these now, but imagine being able to hit "print" and make 1000 copies overnight. You could build this by hand now, but you couldn't easily build thousands with next to no effort.

Will they do what they do with currency and block printing certain shapes? Introduce errors? Seems a lot harder since you can already build your own 3D printer, and homebrew printers will only get better.

Re:But ... (1)

Applekid (993327) | about 2 years ago | (#40779493)

Takedown notices have already been sent over many items already. Games Workshop did most recently, and a while back I recall there was some hubbub about an optical illusion object.

You can't think like a normal person, or even a creative person who actually produced the content. You have to think like a content OWNER. In Ownermath, one copy, even a poor one by someone who would never have gone out and purchased the original anyway, represents not only lost profits, but increased costs.

Re:But ... (1)

pnutjam (523990) | about 2 years ago | (#40779495)

Not for $30.

Re:But ... (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about 2 years ago | (#40779317)

It's already possible to manufacture guns using traditional methods. Maybe a bit harder for a hobbyist.

Re:But ... (1)

Smidge204 (605297) | about 2 years ago | (#40779463)

I see no reason why this part couldn't have been produced just as easily using resin casting, or even whittled out of wood, using tools and materials purchased at any hobby supply for much less than a 3D printer would cost to build.

3D printing is actually a harder route for "the hobbyist" to take than the methods that have been available for decades. The only reason this is a story is because it involves the words "3D printer," which is the current buzzword.
=Smidge=

Oh brother (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40778919)

More 3D printing wankery. When can this fad die already??

Re:Oh brother (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40778987)

Micro-manufacturing will revolutionize the world just like digital, zero-cost copying. I'd guess it's not going to die, even if they declare it illegal.

Re:Oh brother (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779365)

But that's the thing, 3D printing is energy and materials intensive in the way that copying files isn't. 3D printing is like carpentry in the 1950s and 1960s. I don't know if you are familiar with the magazines of the era, but they were filled with plans and designs for furniture and what not. Everyone had tools and a space it seems. How many people you know these days that build their own furniture? How many people make their own clothes? In the same amount as you think people will embrace 3D printing? This 3D printing fad just reflects our rotten value system as a society ("ooh making objects at home is what life is all about".) Would you wear clothes you made yourself?

How much work do you think this gunsmith had to do to the part before it was usable? How many prototypes did he try? It's a hobby, and anyone who wants a receiver will simply buy one.

Basically mass production beats 3D printing, and most people simply don't have the time, patience, resources or skills to dick around for weeks to get poorly aligned slobs of smelly expensive plastics to show their friends.

The same way mass-produced furniture beats dicking around the garage to end up with an inferior, more expensive product. It's that simple. Time will tell, and I'm sure I'm right. 3D printing will revolutionize nothing, since this is a hobby that comes from established industrial techniques, not the other way around. The world is *already* "revolutionized", you just have an expensive hobby.

Re:Oh brother (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779191)

3D printing? Wanking? Hmmm...I sense a business opportunity.

Twitter is down also! (-1, Offtopic)

BetaDays (2355424) | about 2 years ago | (#40778921)

Re:Twitter is down also! (1)

BetaDays (2355424) | about 2 years ago | (#40778941)

WTF! the page showed about google talk being down when I clicked post it got attached to this. what?

Re:Twitter is down also! (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 years ago | (#40779169)

Haha, that happened to me as well, two or three times, I guess. Yay for slashcode. ;)

Isn't that so American (-1, Flamebait)

Lucas123 (935744) | about 2 years ago | (#40778929)

The first printed product - a gun. Ugh.

Re:Isn't that so American (2)

jon3k (691256) | about 2 years ago | (#40778967)

You think this is the first 3D printed product? Is this your first day on the internet?

Re:Isn't that so American (2)

valadaar (1667093) | about 2 years ago | (#40778969)

Most certainly not the first printed product by a long shot. Check google - the only thing new here is the application to a gun.

Re:Isn't that so American (5, Funny)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#40779031)

This is a long, long way from being the very first thing an American has used a 3d printer for. As for whether or not this is the first thing this particular guy printed, it doesn't say. However, he is a gunsmith so it does make sense that he would try printing a gun.

It'd be like saying "World's first 3d printed tea cup is made by housewares company in Britain... how British!" or "World's first 3d printed dildo with tentacles made by adult toy store in Japan... how Japanese"

Re:Isn't that so American (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779109)

Funny thing is he didn't seem to make a gun anyway. Just pieces of one.

It's no less (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40778945)

It's no less illegal than making one out of metal the old fashion way, it just might be easier, assuming you have access to a 3D printer.

Re:It's no less (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 2 years ago | (#40779009)

You can buy metal ones 90% done. People have been convicted for shipping them with the rock and roll option completed.

Re:It's no less (1)

nyet (19118) | about 2 years ago | (#40779159)

It's 80%, and yes, there is a "legal" standard for what 80% is.

Overblown fears (5, Informative)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about 2 years ago | (#40779043)

Exactly. Anyone with access to milling equipment could mill their own lower reciever, assuming they knew the plans. Then they would still have to purchase the upper, the trigger assembly, and other parts. It's not really any different, and with the ability to mill a real receiver, they could make a firearm that can actuall handle .223/.308 rounds.

Or, you know, they could save themselves all of this time and trouble and just go to one of the myriad of websites that allow people to get in touch with others looking to buy or sell firearms. I visit one myself regularly that is part of the forums of an outdoor website dedicatedto my state, and I have even sold a firearm through it. All perfectly legal, with no documentation of transfer of ownership. And on this website alone there are often several AR- and AK- type rifles for sale, anywhere from $400-$1000. This development adds nothing to the equation.

Re:Overblown fears (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779131)

AK- ? maybe that's big enough to compensate ...

Re:Overblown fears (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779449)

People have made AR lowers of bolted plates, wood, drilled and filed plastic and metal. It's completely legal as long as you're not a felon or other prohibited person. AK receivers are just stamped sheet metal, easy to make.

Don't freak out. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | about 2 years ago | (#40778977)

While the lower receiver is legally considered to be the serialized firearm it is fairly simple part. Folks have been making them on CNC machines for years. The metal upper receiver is much more difficult to manufacture and required precision metal machining. You need both to have a functional weapon. Without the upper, the lower is completely and utterly useless.

Re:Don't freak out. (0)

Cumstien (637803) | about 2 years ago | (#40779059)

Try ordering a barrel or bolt without a FFL (Federal Firearms License). You won't get very far. Now if you have your own CNC shop AND a 3-D plastic printer, well then you're on your way...

Re:Don't freak out. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779121)

Bull. Both barrel and bolts are just parts. No FFL needed.

Re:Don't freak out. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779237)

This. Barrels and bolts are considered to be accessories to the firearm. They are not controlled in any way, shape, or form - it's no more controlled than buying a candy bar.

Re:Don't freak out. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779125)

You can buy those things without an FFL. The only part that requires any sort of background/NICS check is the lower reciever.

It's an uncommon thing about the AR-15, as many other guns have a serialized part that is much harder to print.

Re:Don't freak out. (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#40779127)

Try ordering a barrel or bolt without a FFL (Federal Firearms License). You won't get very far.

That's a big negative, [midwayusa.com] Ghostrider.

Re:Don't freak out. (1)

echucker (570962) | about 2 years ago | (#40779073)

True, but you don't need a background check to purchase an upper.

Re:Don't freak out. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 2 years ago | (#40779209)

The point, I think, is that, since the upper is not legally a firearm, one can be purchased much easier without all the usual mandatory background checks etc. You can, in fact, order one online.

Printing Guns (1, Informative)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | about 2 years ago | (#40778979)

I was wondering how long until someone could circumvent the law with a 3-D printer.

Re:Printing Guns (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#40779057)

How is an American gunsmith creating a gun part with a 3d printer an example of someone circumventing the law?

Re:Printing Guns (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | about 2 years ago | (#40779115)

This case may not be a good example, but I can see criminals buying 3d printers to print guns. Hell I thought of it myself in the last week wondering.if it was feasible.

Re:Printing Guns (2)

jmorris42 (1458) | about 2 years ago | (#40779255)

It won't stop here. Lots of physical things, many fairly easy to make, are kept out of general circulation. Not for much longer.

Think locksmithing. Download and 'print' an entire professional set. Print keys.

And if you think bongs and such haven't already been printed you aren't paying attention. Legislate shops all ya want, won't matter soon.

Probably can't print glassware anytime soon so that soft ban will last a bit longer. Remember when all us nerdy kids got a chemistry set? And then suddenly they all but disappeared? I want 3d printers good enough to bring em back. Getting some of the actual chemicals will still be a challenge.

Spare parts that aren't practical to large scale manufacture, won't it be great when we can haunt obscure websites for downloads of semi-legal scans of them and print them ourselves?

Good times ahead.

Wow.. Really, Already? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40778981)

I'd like to be the first to say:

Way to fuck it up for the rest of us.

Re:Wow.. Really, Already? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#40779139)

I'd like to be the first to say:

Way to fuck it up for the rest of us.

you might not understand it but all the parts needed for building guns are freely for sale without restrictions and the stock metal is available as well.

there's something called common sense still in effect in most of the world, that's why pipes and fertilizer are still available for sale in most of the world.

Really? (3, Insightful)

Score Whore (32328) | about 2 years ago | (#40779017)

The apparent amazement about the "plastic" pistol is a bit baffling. I mean come on. [bing.com]

And as far as concern over someone who can not lawfully own a gun using a 3d printer to manufacture a weapon, really? For a very small amount of money pretty much anyone who wants can go buy a gun on the street. For slightly more money they can purchase a totally legal gun through the classifieds or a gun show.

Big deal (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779021)

All you need is a block of aluminum and a CNC machine to do the same thing.

Odd statement (3, Insightful)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 2 years ago | (#40779065)

No gun license required? Why would anyone need a license to exercise a right guaranteed by the law of the land? Do you need a license to vote? Do you need a license to be safe from being enslaved? Do you need a license to own a printing press and open a newspaper? I'm totally lost here. What sort of brain structure causes this mental vomit to occur?

Re:Odd statement (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#40779149)

No gun license required? Why would anyone need a license to exercise a right guaranteed by the law of the land? Do you need a license to vote? Do you need a license to be safe from being enslaved? Do you need a license to own a printing press and open a newspaper? I'm totally lost here. What sort of brain structure causes this mental vomit to occur?

anti-gun pussies
think every gun is a crime
law does not matter

Re:Odd statement (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779313)

I'm surprised the slashtards haven't virtually lynched you yet.

What sort of brain structure causes this mental vomit to occur?

The one that results from insufficient testosterone during the gestation period.

Re:Odd statement (2)

jmorris42 (1458) | about 2 years ago | (#40779347)

> No gun license required?

Preach! The 2nd Amendment is all the 'license' an American needs. And every single human being who has ever trod the Earth has exactly the same inherent Right, it is only that most of the world is unfree and oppresses their people.

We just saw what 'gun free zones' are good for, shooting galleries. Sue the theater for not providing security! I don't mind turning in arms in a courthouse, there are enough cops there that it is a reasonable trade, random guns there probably are more likely to cause problems than not. Not so most other places, no armed guards + unarmed victims = advertising where it is safest to go on a rampage.

Re:Odd statement (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779459)

The text of the second amendment reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". What actually constitutes "well regulated" is admittedly controversial, but requiring a license to own a gun is generally accepted as being part of that regulation and is not really all that controversial for most people.

Handmade weapons need paper work too. (2)

DeTech (2589785) | about 2 years ago | (#40779067)

That's just an illegal custom firearm. The AR-15 has a split receiver design and the lower is serialized and constitutes the firearm. By fabricating the lower receiver this gunsmith just made a new custom firearm (legal), but did not serialize it (illegal). Also a crappy plastic gun.

Re:Handmade weapons need paper work too. (2)

nyet (19118) | about 2 years ago | (#40779239)

It only needs markings that uniquely identify the lower before assembling it into a firearm. An unserialized lower by itself is simply an incomplete part (not illegal).

Well... (4, Informative)

DnemoniX (31461) | about 2 years ago | (#40779069)

A synthetic AR-15 lower receiver is nothing new, printing one yourself is however. Is it dangerous? Yeah kinda, unless you a printing with a rather high strength polymer. Is it illegal? Not if you follow the BATF guidelines. Hobby machinists have been milling them from aluminum for ages. You can buy all sorts of jigs and receiver blanks. If you were to say start manufacturing lower receivers, or do not qualify to legally own them and get caught the penalties are very severe. Also as anyone who builds their own AR-15s will tell you, certain parts are in very high demand, you may wait weeks to months for something simple to complete your build. So I wouldn't worry about somebody building a ton of "off books" rifles any time soon.

Re:Well... (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | about 2 years ago | (#40779303)

I wouldn't say it's particularly dangerous. Less robust and maybe more prone to failure, but even a catastrophic failure of a lower receiver wouldn't do any real harm. On the other hand, the upper exploding on you would ruin your day. And probably your face.

And this is why you can't outlaw guns (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40779075)

You can now literally download them and "print" the parts. (Or the local black market dealer can do it.) Outlawing guns is now more pointless than outlawing weed or cocaine, and will fail harder.

No different then making a gun through other means (2)

Kenja (541830) | about 2 years ago | (#40779081)

I can make a gun with a wide range of tools. How is this fundamentally different then a CNC mill?

Re:No different then making a gun through other me (1)

Chromium_One (126329) | about 2 years ago | (#40779145)

Cost.
3d printers can cost a LOT less than a CNC, both for purchase and continued operation.

Re:No different then making a gun through other me (1)

kidgenius (704962) | about 2 years ago | (#40779261)

Not really. I can build a CNC machine for about $600 in parts. I can build a 3d printer for about the same.

Re:No different then making a gun through other me (2)

sohmc (595388) | about 2 years ago | (#40779213)

This actually could be a good thing. Right now, the public mentality is that gun owner = nut job. Unless Congress is willing to criminalize owning a 3D printer, it might actually force people think about the current state of laws and actually make sensible gun laws.

Without wanting to diminish.. (0)

LifeIs0x2A (2615925) | about 2 years ago | (#40779095)

the accomplishment from an engineering viewpoint (everyone working with 3D printing materials knows what I'm talking about), there is two things that came to my mind when reading these news: 1. What makes self-made weapons made with 3D printer more dangerous than those made will e.g. a CNC machine and 2. The last thing that we need is another way to make more guns..

.22 ? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779101)

.22 is not big enough, I'll take a penile extension instead.

Re:.22 ? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779375)

They don't have an adapter that small; they'll have to custom fabricate it for you.

Non-metallic firearms have been around a while. (-1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#40779111)

In fact, a fair few are made almost entirely of plastics and ceramics. One such example is the GLOCK 17 "Parabellum". This isn't truly an all-ceramic gun (and there is no commercially available firearm that can get past a metal detector so forget the Die Hard references!), since the barrel and hammer spring need to be highly heat resistant and hard wearing - no ceramic or plastic can withstand the stresses of being fired through or repeatedly compressed quite like tenifer steel. Therefore only the frame and certain nonmoving or low stress parts (stock, trigger mechanism, sear assembly, sights, lower receiver, slide, chamber and ejector) are plastic or ceramic. This is done only to save weight, and has made the Parabellum a very popular sidearm for Government and private security contractors in Israel particularly, where they outsell any other firearm.

DISCLAIMER: I handle firearms on a daily basis.

Re:Non-metallic firearms have been around a while. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779373)

Then you should know the entire slide assembly of the glock is made of steel. The mags are lined with steel inside of the plastic. Glock was one of the first, but almost every handgun manufacturer makes at least one model like that now. One of the side effects is an increased chance of of the empty cartridge failing to eject completely. Not usually an issue with someone who has practiced and has a firm grip. (look for a video of a limp-wrist fire test of a glock, it will jam every single time, again, this isn't typical usage but its worthy of note) Cause: body of gun is light, by itself it offers little recoil resistance against the slide spring

Re:Non-metallic firearms have been around a while. (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 2 years ago | (#40779399)

no ceramic or plastic can withstand the stresses of being fired through or repeatedly compressed

What if you don't need to fire repeatedly, only a few times... like in the Clint Eastwood movie where John Malkovich is the assassin, and he builds a polymer gun to sneak it past the metal detector and kill the president?

Already done (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779129)

This was done on Sons of Guns a bit ago already.

in the line of fire 2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779141)

put this in the moive

Complete nonstory designed to stir up the ignorant (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779171)

Yawn, about as exciting as hearing somebody 3d-printed some handgrips. Wake me when they can print a sold steel barrel and bolt at a negligible cost and then maybe people should get, ahem, up in arms about 3d printed guns.

Silly human warrior race (2)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | about 2 years ago | (#40779197)

Shit, yo, why we gotta turn everything into weapons, huh? wouldn't we be more civilized without weapons?

Illegal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779203)

NOT. An individual can legally manufacture a gun. It can never be sold or given to any one else though without having the appropriate permits and paperwork.

3D printed zip guns (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779219)

It's going to get real interesting when somebody uploads a file for a complete printed zip gun. Since people already build them out of pvc pipe, it may be possible to build a usable weapon with extruded ABS plastic.

Guns should be banned alright (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779233)

Toss these 3D printing folks in prison. Then ban guns altogether. There are way too many people defending themselves from spree shooters and psychopaths.

If you ban guns, criminals won't be able to buy them anymore. Remember when they had a war on drugs, and now we don't have drugs anymore??

Making Your Own Firearms Is Fun (4, Interesting)

BenEnglishAtHome (449670) | about 2 years ago | (#40779263)

Making your own firearms is a well-established hobby in the U.S. Lots of people do it. There are forums devoted to it. Federal law specifically provides for it. It's nothing new. Nor is composite as a material for AR lowers; youtube has plenty of videos of people shooting "Plum Crazy"-based AR rifles. And 3D printing has been around a while.

What's newsworthy here? I don't get it.

Already been done? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779307)

IIRC, The Red Jacket .22 zombie gun used a 3D printed body on a metal receiver.

http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/04/19/the-ultimate-zombie-gun-red-jacket-zk-22-bullpup-rifle/

Prescient... (1)

mclearn (86140) | about 2 years ago | (#40779339)

I just saw a TED talk [ted.com] in which the presenter asked this very question.

....but (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40779363)

"and that no gun license is required in most of the U.S. to purchase or possess a semi-automatic weapon."

While true for most people, felony convicts universally aren't allowed to own guns, and even people convicted of misdemeanor domestic abuse. Same for people with drug addictions, I believe.

Note, that applies to OWNING a firearm... nevermind open carry.

printed does not matter? (1)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | about 2 years ago | (#40779377)

Why would the method of construction matter as to what the actual end result is. Even if it's made in the digestive channel of a rhinoceros, if it is able to fire bullets it's a firearm and should be regarded as such by regulations.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...