Comments
profossi t1_ivpp4ly wrote
Yeah, stopping people from 3D printing "illegal" stuff is completely unenforceable. The entire software ecosystem already has popular open source implementations, from CAD to slicer to printer firmware, so good luck forcing some gun detection code into it.
Not to mention that a cheap lathe can be used make a gun with superior accuracy, durability and safety than a similarly priced 3D printer ever could. I don't understand why 3D printers are scary, yet crappy machine tools from aliexpress aren't.
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_ivs76rg wrote
Because those in power usually aren't the smartest. Out of sync with the world and the tech. They get wind of something and freak out ... in my experience
Al_Rascala t1_ivqoma6 wrote
Not having looked into either lathes or printing myself at all, would 3D printing a lathe be feasible? Building the tools to build the tools, as it were.
DarthElevator t1_ivs4ado wrote
3d printing a lathe isn't feasible with current 3d printing technology, due to accuracy, surface finish, etc. But interestingly enough a metal lathe is a machine that can be used to make a better version of itself.
pauljs75 t1_ivyovfw wrote
In that regard, a crappy 3D printed lathe is about 3 generations away from a somewhat decent lathe. (As machined by subsequent creations with improving tolerances.)
MadDonnelaith t1_ivrowod wrote
There is a fantastic book called "Build Your Own Metal Working Shop From Scrap" that details how to make a working metal foundry and build a lathe and a drill press. I've worked through parts of it, I was able to build a metal foundry and cast some of the first lathe parts. It's totally doable on your own. 3d printing a lathe probably wouldn't be super feasible, but it's doable by a determined person with the know-how.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivzu5h1 wrote
You can but they’re pretty bank lathes. It would just be better to buy one yourself due to how much trouble it is and how finicky a 3D printed one is
KarNoud98 t1_ivsth7l wrote
How so? Can’t they just have core code that does the same as what they do with copy machines and money
I know it’s not that simple but i didnt want to right an essay
ThingSuch t1_ivt56vb wrote
No. Lots of the software is open source. Even if they'll make manufacturers to put code that prevents printing of some liberator, people will use old firmware to control the printer.
Also any measures they can come up with can be circumvenented by changing dimensions/priting in more parts than necessary/mirroring/printing more and sawing useless parts/etc - not something you can do with money where end result is fixed.
Also there's only fixed number of designs of $100 bills. There's an infinite designs for guns.
KarNoud98 t1_ivt63k8 wrote
Fuck ur right. That’s pretty worrying.
johno_mendo t1_ivpctf3 wrote
So giant corporations print millions of weapons basically untracked and anyone is basically able to buy as many as they want and sell them to whoever they want but that's no need for new legislation but the second those corporate profits get threatened cue the pearl clutching and need for sudden legislation.
CthuluTheGrand t1_ivpwusw wrote
Also currently have a war in Europe that will lead to thousands on ghost guns as they are scavenged and sold.
seamustheseagull t1_ivppspz wrote
Yeah, I'd expect America to fuck this up alright.
In a sane world possession of an unlicensed or unregistered weapon would carry a jail term of 5-10 years, and likewise possession of a 3D printing schematic without being licenced to produce weapons would carry 5-10 in prison.
It wouldn't stop the problem, but would make it a fuck load harder to distribute.
But in America, they'll go "muh freedom" and some mouth breather will create an open library of weapon schematics and think that because they're only providing weapons and not using them, that they're morally OK.
Donotaskmedontellme t1_ivpvsr0 wrote
Literally none of my firearms are registered, nor are they required to be. In fact, in my state I can manufacture whatever non-NFA firearms I want, without license. I just can't sell them.
bitfriend6 t1_ivpwlxc wrote
Using a War on Drugs strategy can only lead to failure, similar punishments were doled out to weed possession/sales and look at how that has utterly collapsed. If people want guns they will get them. Post-facto policing and prison will just cause people to not report certain crimes to the police, creating an underground black market that criminals flourish in. Just as what happened during Prohibition when alcohol possession carried a 5 year prison sentence. Putting random people in jail for having guns at a checkpoint or door-to-door sweep means they are sent to prisons where they are introduced to gangs who are likely to recruit them. This is jet fuel for organized crime that can actually harm the government's operations.
Any effective government would address the reasons why people want to arm themselves. Usually, this is a result of ineffective policing, maladjusted courts, and poor social policies. Organized terrorism usually has the same origins.
Orc_ t1_ivqg8k2 wrote
This is why 3D printed guns will win and you can cope all you want.
rickyh7 t1_ivpzk1r wrote
Okay so I’m a senior level engineer in aerospace, an expert 3d printer with a decade of experience, and have been working with and around firearms for nearly 20 years so I’m poised to talk about this. Furthermore I also have a black belt in martial arts so weapons defense and use is something I am also very experienced with.
Long story short, yes you can 3d print a very inaccurate firearm that will shoot once before it destroys itself. Not much more effective than a knife to be frank. At least a knife works more than once.
The other Avenue is the infamous ‘ghost gun’. As it stands in the United States (and much of the rest of the world as I understand it) the lower receiver (holds the trigger and is basically the handle and the frame of the weapon) is the only piece that needs to be serialized and tracked. It is possible to 3d print a lower receiver and have it work. This often requires a specialized or at least very well tuned machine though. It’s easier to make a pistol lower than a rifle as well. The amount of G’s a rifle imparts on the weapon system is immense. On a rifle it will not work for long unless it’s printed out of a material like glass or CF nylon. (Again back to expensive specialized machine). The interesting thing here is all the rest of the firearm pieces can’t be printed ESPECIALLY the barrel. The barrel is an extremely precise marvel of engineering that is hardened to obscene levels and machined to ridiculous tolerances. Plastic will blow up, and even if you have access to a metal printer good luck getting the tolerances acceptable to not cause a host of other issues including but not limited to blowing the weapon up in your hand.
This is mostly a fools errand being pursued by people who have little to know engineering knowledge, 3d printing knowledge, and especially firearms knowledge. At the point someone is 3d printing a firearm that actually works well, they have sank thousands of dollars into the project, and have incredible engineering skills. So much so that they are likely skilled enough to make a metal one on cheap desktop CNC machine. Or buy an ‘80% lower’ which just needs a drill and some patience to turn into a ‘ghost gun’. Or go to the coke dealer on the corner of the bad part of town and buy a firearm with the serial number sanded off.
Anyway if you have questions feel free to ask and I’ll answer them to the best of my ability. But key takeaway, this isn’t nearly as big of an issue as people think
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivsjh8b wrote
r/fosscad makes fully working rifles and pistols all the time from PLA and PLA+ that last for thousands upon thousands of rounds lmao
You don’t need a specialized machine either, most people using DEFCAD files own Creality Ender 3s. Used ones can be found for like 100 dollars. With how common auto bed leveling is, the only tuning really needed is temp, bed, adhesion, and dragging and dropping the files into cura or prusaslicer.
Additionally, when you manufacture a normal gun in the US, you do not need to serialize or register it UNLESS you plan to distribute/sell/transfer ownership to another person and that act requires a manufacturer’s license.
If you want to see how simple and easy it actually is, get into the 3D printing firearms groups or just watch Print Shoot Repeat on YouTube. He makes tons of guns constantly this way.
And for reference, this is all legal in the US because otherwise, 12 gauge pipes would become illegal. Personal use firearms are 100% legal to make, following NFA laws ofc.
For someone who claims to be qualified about this topic, the readily available info out there seems to elude you…
EDIT: Print Shoot Repeat just released a video saying YouTube is forcing him to take down all his 3D printer gun videos lmao fosscad is still a good resource for seeing what can be done, though
rickyh7 t1_ivthmpe wrote
Cool community. New member. Yep I’m well aware it’s completely legal in the US for the most part (there are a handful of states where it’s illegal so be careful) perusing this community I see 2 things that go against your claims. Not very many people specify the type of plastic, PLA and PLA+ won’t last for very long, definitely not thousands and thousands of rounds (most barrels are only rated for 10,000-20,000 rounds anyway, there’s a mill-std that military weapon accessories like scopes only need to be certified to 50,000 rounds which isn’t a lot for a machine gun, civilian standards were even lower). Happy to be wrong but I see no one claiming survivability of thousands of rounds. It’s very tough to tell what plastic is in pictures with only a few exceptions but I expect much of that is PETG. Also looking at the raw print quality I’m certain some of them are from something like an ender but a basic ender doesn’t print nice enough to just work. Those printers are going to be well upgraded and the raw prints carefully cleaned and sanded after. (Again I said specialized like the guy who did an SLS nylon ar lower in the last few days on that Reddit, or well tuned which is still not a trivial task). Basically what I’m saying in my original comment is it’s not buy printer download gun go shoot things. Without a good understanding of printers AND guns you ain’t making something effective which is why I say it’s a fools errand because if you possess both those things AND mal intent, you’re smart enough and resourceful enough to go do something else besides print a gun and use it. I found some data to back this up too claiming 44 3d printed weapon crimes in 2022 (check one of the other comments for the source). Seems governments are waisting a lot of resources on targeting dangerous 3d printers when truthfully this isn’t actually a widespread problem like so many articles are claiming
The_Dirty_Carl t1_iw03p7j wrote
>Not very many people specify the type of plastic, PLA and PLA+ won’t last for very long, definitely not thousands and thousands of rounds
They're using PLA+. PETG is a bad idea for a firearm, as I'm sure you know since this you say this is your area of expertise.
Lot of people have thousands of rounds through their printed firearms. Not just .22LR either. Google the Amigo Grande, a .308 rifle. Will they last as long as steel or aluminum? Nah. But they're well beyond where you think they are.
>Those printers are going to be well upgraded and the raw prints carefully cleaned and sanded after. (Again I said specialized like the guy who did an SLS nylon ar lower in the last few days on that Reddit, or well tuned which is still not a trivial task).
There's some sanding involved of course, but lots of people are using completely stock Ender 3's. There are people who go benchy -> glock frame.
>Basically what I’m saying in my original comment is it’s not buy printer download gun go shoot things.
It pretty much is though, and the barrier to entry is dropping week by week.
C0rvex t1_ivqpdfb wrote
You don't need a very specialized printer for CF/Glass nylon. An ender 3 ($100-200) with an all-metal hotend ($25) and a hardened nozzle ($10) will print nylons just fine. Now if you want continous strand stuff like markforge it'll cost you $5-10k, but you're only getting a slight increase in strength from that.
rickyh7 t1_ivqpwdv wrote
Print them sure, print them with enough accuracy to actually work with a firearm no. Enough sanding might get the job done but it won’t work reliably for long if at all
Edit: little more explanation, the holes and alignments need to be just right for the trigger group and the slide rails are the hardest parts. They’re fairly small but need to be very smooth and induce very little friction (for a pistol) on a rifle it’s a little different since the moving parts are in the upper sans the trigger group. Even then the threads have to come out pretty darn nice for the buffer tube and accuracy on the mag well especially where the hammer goes is really important. Can it be done? Sure, are you going to have to be a pretty darn good understanding of mechanics to get it done? Absolutely. Now we’re back to someone who has the skill to 3d print a weapon with the current state of technology probably has the skill to do it other more effective ways
Xaionara t1_ivsf59l wrote
You should take a look at this video, its quite interesting!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlB2QV5wVxg (Its a documentary about a guy who 3d print weapons)
[deleted] t1_ivqemnh wrote
[removed]
Wheream_I t1_ivsfbbg wrote
I just went and looked at my S&W M&P 2.0 and woulda look at that. The polymer “lower” (lowers don’t apply to handguns, only rifles like the AR15) isn’t serialized, but the metal slide is.
This is because the polymer “lower” only houses the magazine, the trigger, and some basic stuff. Everything that makes the gun go bang is on the metal slide
rickyh7 t1_ivsh5c1 wrote
You’re right I should have been more clear. It’s a lower in a rifle, and a frame on a pistol. Functionally they serve a similar purpose and neither of them have the equipment that makes a gun go bang (just trigger, mag well, some pins maybe springs). Regardless, per ATF 27 CFR 478.92 the serial number must be conspicuously marked on the frame or lower receiver of the firearm (US only not sure for rest of the world). What you’re seeing on the M&P 2.0 might be the rest of the required markings which can go on the slide but there is still a serial number on a metal piece which is embedded in the frame on the right side of the gun just below the slide! If you take the slide off that piece will stay behind
Wheream_I t1_ivskg78 wrote
Holy shit you’re right… just noticed it on the frame in a TINY window, next to what looks like a QR code, separate from the slide. How tf did I NEVER notice this??
I always thought the ATF considered the slide as the pistol, but I guess they consider the receiver the pistol. That’s surprising to me
HighPlains_oath t1_ivynzzg wrote
You and the guy above have the same avatar so I was super confused for a second hah.
Frame is the firearm, or at least whatever holds the trigger, I am sure the atf has some legal nonsense that specifically defines this, but that is mostly it. You can buy after market slides all day long.
Though, some pistols, like one of the sigs. Actually use a "chassis" as the legal identifiable part. It's not the "grip" portion of the pistol per se, but instead they have a separate mechanical assembly that holds the trigger and slide rails, independent of the grip. this fits into the polymer grip of the sig. That's about the only pistol that I know is a bit different
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivzul20 wrote
People use this law to their advantage by having 1 lower receiver or frame that they like but buying many different uppers/slides for their pistol or rifle. This way, they can have very different setups for whatever they feel like shooting but officially owning just “1” gun
microChasm t1_ivu66j1 wrote
I second this. Go ahead, let the criminals print these up and test them and see how effective they are and how reliable.
At least a few of them will be taken out of action.
Gun laws are for control. Criminals run outside of control so it doesn’t even apply to them.
With any emerging technologies that get better over time, there will always be a balance where the use or effect will be investigated, tested etc. There are curious people out there that will think outside the box 📦.
That’s when law enforcement pops up and complains about it and wants to control it because they can’t or don’t want to think hard enough about it to suggest ways of dealing with it from a societal perspective.
TheWildLifeFilms t1_ivyk3s1 wrote
As someone who’s not an engineer I was able to design, draw& print most of the components for a M202 Rocket launcher and the only off the shelve parts I needed were a carbon fiber & aluminum tube. It’s fully functional and the rockets themselves are going to be a mix of printed parts and composite materials . I also had a Fliegerfaust printed mostly in 3d printed metal and worked great
The barrier to entry is constantly getting lower and the advancements in design are greatly increasing
Toridog1 t1_iw008ce wrote
That information is all very out of touch with the current state of 3d printed firearms. While the barrel is still the crucial part holding them back, there are many 3d printed guns which require no registered parts such as the FGC-9 and can be built using regular pipes and springs from a hardware store inside a 3d printed frame
ehhh_yeah t1_ivqsgpt wrote
Yes but a person of sufficient knowledge with mal intentions (or just a deeply rooted libertarian streak like Cody Wilson) could invest thousands of hours into developing it, then release the design and any necessary build/assembly instructions to the internet to be available for the rest of the existence of the internet. That’s the concern.
Plastic lowers are already a thing, and they tend to be fiber filled as you mentioned. With the right understanding of relevant materials, concepts, manufacturing techniques, and familiarity with a certain MSR platform, it wouldn’t take long for a competent individual to design a tactically relevant printed lower. Someone with a remedial understanding who already owned an upper/bcg/etc could probably iterate their way to something effective, assuming the first few attempts don’t fatally fail. If said individual was banned from owning firearms, that right there is the incentive to spend the time making one.
-another aerospace engineer who’s printed a lot of stuff
rickyh7 t1_ivqvtop wrote
Now I think that goes down a very different path here than the article describes of restricting engineering software or 3d printers as a whole. And that’s at least attempting to restrict the availability of the files themselves because you’re right that’s certainly a risk. The article did mention the FGC-9 which is fundamentally exactly that. (As a weapons guy I’m interested in giving it a shot since I’m in a place where that would be completely legal, see if it’s actually any good).
I think that’s where a lot of people get stuck, someone with the right understanding and experience in materials is usually required even if they do get the files. Now I’m not saying no one out there with mal intent has that, what I am saying is it’s not exactly common so it goes back to the risk profile. Go after the 44 cases of 3d printed weapon arrests in the world in 2022 (according to 3dprint.com no idea how legit that number is so take it with a grain of salt but I suspect it’s quite small) or go after the 10’s of thousands of weapon crimes that are happening with illegally acquired firearms. That’s really why I think it’s a fools errand. Besides I suspect if you were to serialize barrels, the one piece that could not be 3d printed and can barely be machined by an expert machinist, the problem of 3d printed firearms goes away entirely.
ehhh_yeah t1_ivrcbrg wrote
So, moving past the small arms application, the other larger and more lethal applications that they’re worried about are probably drones and light duty “missiles”. Ukraine has pretty effectively demonstrated that a basic quadcopter can drop grenades. I recall reading somewhere that they’re printing the latch mechanism and have probably played around printing stabilizer fins for said grenades.
It wouldn’t be a stretch to start printing chassis’ or parts for literally anything. Yeah you’d need to incorporate a much deeper design understanding of things like mechanical and aerospace engineering, but there are skilled engineers all around the world living in areas under ITAR export restrictions from the west. Give them a printer and some high performance raw materials and you’ve got yourself some control surfaces and a camera gimbal for a loitering munition.
rickyh7 t1_ivs4mem wrote
Now THAT is a very hard thing to do, and also an area of interest for me and my friends. Check out a guy named Joe Barnard at BPS space on YouTube if you want to see exactly that in action. Requires a wicked amount of electronics and coding experience thought. To make it dangerous you also need to know how to mix explosives which is already a common watch item anyway. Restricting printers won’t fix that though because anyone smart enough to do what you are saying can make a printer from scratch
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_ivs6st3 wrote
Sounds like what I keep trying to tell people as well. I may not have your experience, but I have been 3D printing for years. No way would I EVER print a barrel.
I also had a friend who said the lowers would suck, with him never having luck with plastic like lowers in the past.
Also any metal based printer is going to be SUPER expensive, and dangerous (as they usually need proper ventilation). And like you also point out, you need to have a well calibrated machine. Not something a simple Ender 3 will do (I belt my taz 6 could, but even then, I question how well it will produce the quality needed)
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivzudtt wrote
The majority of modern firearm designs use polymer lowers. r/fosscad has them all the time and they work great
A barrel should be printed but you can just get a metal pipe from Home Depot…
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_iw0f16z wrote
A metal pipe? You do realize the machining and accuracy that goes into the production a barrel right? They are literally perfect, as the bullet must travel down them perfectly (no bouncing around)
SouthEasternGuy t1_iw0gaws wrote
A pipe that is durable enough and has added rifling to it is an effective barrel. Those of us on r/fosscad do it all the time and thats what a majority of the rebels of Myanmar have been doing when actual rifle barrels have not been available. And no, lol barrels are not "perfect" lmao
Sirhc978 t1_ivpincl wrote
>“We are facing a serious threat if legal measures are not taken to control the production of printers and printing materials necessary for their use,” he said.
>
>“The software that allows for the production of these types of weapons should, as far as possible, be banned from the market,” he added, explaining that this could prove difficult because the weapons are often sold in parallel markets. It includes selling on the darknet and in closed forums that can be difficult for law enforcement to access.
Decent printers are $200 (you can obviously spend way more). Most of the slicing software is free and open source. Printing a gun isn't as simple as "download file and hit print", but it is easier than making an 80% lower.
There is a company that sells a table top 5-axis milling machine that can automagically make a AR-15 lower from a solid block of aluminum.
rickyh7 t1_ivq0p4q wrote
“Software that allows for the production of these weapons….banned from the market”
Soooo CAD? Rip literally every single engineer ever
modelvillager t1_ivqc6s9 wrote
No, this can be done under standards and failsafes. Almost all commercially available printers and photocopires will blank refuse to make a copy of a banknote, for example.
Is it 100% effective? No.
But just like the security of money is based on the principle of it just has to cost more to counterfeit than the face value of the note; for guns, it just needs safeguards to make it more difficult to print illegally a weapon, than illegally source one.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqe13u wrote
Banknotes have the property that they must be identical to 99.999% rate with no exceptions, so there is really no way to circumvent a single copy detection system. Also, banknotes are screened multiple times over the cycle of use with high resolution multi-feature scanners, so there's already two easy points to attack.
Meanwhile, guns do not share any specific shape or property that could define them as a "gun". There are countless devices that share similar features, cordless drills for example resemble pistol grips. Also, it would be easy to engineer the parts to pass these simple detection systems, or print them in two or more parts and fix them together.
Also, all programs and software should follow the universal code, which should be updated continuously. All it needs is one open source software, that essentially rips the source code of the market leader program, but with that crap detection property disabled, and it renders the whole thing ineffective.
modelvillager t1_ivqfcl4 wrote
I reckon you can define a gun for pattern recognition. It must have a mechanism to propel a firing pin for standard ammunition, and it must have a chamber to hold a round, of standard ammunition. It likely needs at least some form of barrel to contain the gas and enable acceleration.
And pattern recognition does not have be to software, you can hard code it into the device.
It doesn't need to be perfect, just a PITA to get around.
From a public policy perspective, this could be relatively easy. "3D printers that can be used to manufacture firearms are illegal." Engineers will quickly figure out the rest.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqihxk wrote
From that perspective, any machine or tool will have to be rendered obsolete, and frankly, that includes everything, starting from basic machine tooling to a blacksmith's hammer or a casting mold. This phenomenon is called "dual use", and if it gets too common, it just loses it's purpose. Also, restricting certain products will only cause market to figure out a method around it.
Pressure-bearing parts are not 3D printed, never, unless you've got a laser sintering machine at your disposal, which currently cost +100k and beyond, and the materials, planetary ball milled metallic powders, that ignite upon contact with atmospheric oxygen, cost $300/kg and above.
Also, there are countless items that share similar mechanisms. If you know gun mechanics, you know how universal shapes those are. For common people, you only need 1-2 seconds with a gun to disassemble it into two or more parts to make it unrecognizable as a firearm to most of them, and that's only with guns that look like guns.
This is not black and white scenario. This is a scenario with technology that supports other technologies. While making pressure bearing parts from metal is easy-ish with basic machine tooling, frames, receivers, grips, stocks and many secondary parts isn't - but then you can 3D print them. Now you have a gun that has all important - but simple - parts made out of high strength alloys, but all secondary parts 3D printed.
dnaH_notnA t1_ivs7wp9 wrote
This terms me you know nothing about CAD, 3d printing, or firearms.
The 3d printed part is not usually the pressure holding part, and is not distinguishable from, say, a custom nerf gun part or a whole host of other things you can’t even think up as an individual. There would either be so many false positives in a hypothetical AI gun detector that the software would be unusable, or it would do nothing.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivsjolp wrote
There’s entire 3D printed model guns that do not function outside of being a novelty toy. You want to attempt to ban that as well?
rickyh7 t1_ivqfc23 wrote
That’s fair however I will say it would be extremely difficult to do from a software perspective. The reason photo copiers refuse to print money is because all money looks the same. Pretty easy to say ‘is this money?’ Issue is with CAD, or even at the lower level, a slicer, you would need a ridiculously powerful AI of some sort to confidently say yeah this isn’t a weapon. The only reasonable way to achieve this would be by requiring all softwares to be cloud based (which many companies can’t easily do if they’re working with sensitive information IE ITAR rockets) so that the AI’s on the cloud can keep an eye on all models. But then a manual review process would be necessary when it inevitably flags a false positive (see googles AI that deletes shit from people’s Google drive all the time). It also completely demolishes the opportunity for prop weapons since they would get flagged as well and that would totally suck. (Me as a guy who cosplays in a full suit of halo Spartan armor and 3d prints prop weapons). I will say as it stands now (at least in the United States) it’s significantly easier to illegally source a weapon than print one. (It’s also completely legal to print one and register it as the gun laws currently stand anyway in many states)
modelvillager t1_ivqg59p wrote
Yeah, that's fair. But I'd point out what makes a firearm a firearm isn't it being shaped like a firearm. It is the ability to detonate the firing cap of standard ammunition in a contained space with trapped expanding gas behind it. Those components can likely be found in their functions in combination (and probably shape - a gun won't work unless the barrel is exact to standard ammunition sizes.
rickyh7 t1_ivqlnqs wrote
That could potentially be used in cad for sure. Not a bad idea. I think it still leaves the risk open for 3d printed lowers or other components. Most of the time the firing pin and chamber will be acquired by other means. They’re not tracked in any way currently so why design it when you can buy it from anywhere. Not totally sure how much benefit having an AI look for a firing pin assembly or chamber assembly
Toofast4yall t1_ivyxseq wrote
You're not 3d printing the whole gun, you 3d print the frame. The slide, barrel, firing pin, and recoil spring are still metal.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivsjljf wrote
I mean tbh, if your shit is tuned in and you know how to change the very few settings needed for a printed receiver it’s not too far off from download, slice, save, print…
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_ivs6jr7 wrote
Do they still sell these? I remember seeing them years back, but then the whole 3D printed lowers and other parts came out years ago and everyone freaked out and the government went after that site
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivzusf7 wrote
r/fosscad can help you out. Make sure to follow the law regarding making guns though
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_iw0f3gy wrote
Yep same group. And of course
beepboopbeepem t1_ivsehl7 wrote
Automagically is a great word.
gh0stwriter88 t1_ivrzjjo wrote
Costs about $5k though...i assume you mean PocketNC?
dircs t1_ivpyym1 wrote
>Printing a gun isn't as simple as "download file and hit print", but it is easier than making an 80% lower.
Disagree, milling out an 80% lower is easier if you have the right tools for it.
>There is a company that sells a table top 5-axis milling machine that can automagically make a AR-15 lower from a solid block of aluminum.
The GG can't do the buffer tower if I recall correctly, so it can't make a lower from a solid aluminum block.
Sirhc978 t1_ivpzhy2 wrote
>The GG can't do the buffer tower if I recall correctly
GG sells the parts you need, or the raw material to make one. Just look up Zero percent lower on their site.
Chr1s78987x t1_iw9a43i wrote
Exactly. Every single part except the lower is readily available and the lower being plastic doesn't really make a difference because there's no moving parts on it and it won't overheat or anything. There's no real way to ban weapons and I'd argue that banning them will just force people to turn to less safe homemade alternatives
Sarabando t1_ivq96tt wrote
you can make a gun with a hammer, a drill and a file. Are you going to ban those next? just admit gun control has failed and look into other ways to reduce violence.
Evideyear t1_ivqqgz2 wrote
Also noting the fact that someone taking the time to print a gun is not going to ask permission from a government. Short of banning printing itself they have an impossible task
[deleted] t1_ivr85h8 wrote
[removed]
WatchingUShlick t1_ivs01yi wrote
"Failed," except for all the countries with solid gun control laws, that don't have massive firearm crime problems.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivsjyxd wrote
Most of the guns that have low gun crime and gun ownership rate also just have low crime in general…They’re also generally in Asia… Japan, Singapore, and especially Korea(where all men know how to use a firearm). Look outside Asia and you’ll find the same pattern. Canada, Netherlands, etc. There are also countries like Switzerland, New Zealand, and Norway that have high gun ownership rates but exceptionally low crime rates.
Gun crime is a cultural and criminal issue rather than a manufacturing issue
Toridog1 t1_iw00lda wrote
And look at the countries with strict gun control laws that do have high firearms crime problems like Brazil and Mexico. Or the countries with relatively lax gun laws and extremely low gun crime rates like Switzerland and the Czech Republic.
WatchingUShlick t1_iw0lj4d wrote
Two countries where the gangs have as much power as the government? Also, most of the guns in Mexico came from the US. Hard for your gun control laws to have much effect when they're flowing over the border like a river. Not sure about Brazil, but I can't imagine why they wouldn't make their way down there from the US.
Toridog1 t1_iw1omkm wrote
Brazilian gangs are famous for making their own guns from pipes and scrap metal, they don’t buy them from the US.
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/22/common-illicitly-homemade-submachine-guns-brazil/
The fact is that guns really aren’t that complicated and anyone with basic engineering and machining knowledge can make one with hand tools. Sure it won’t be accurate or reliable but you don’t need either of those things to rob an unarmed civilian.
wolfkeeper t1_ivs1ppn wrote
Gun control, as with other legalistic ways to control or limit human behavior is never perfect, but lack of perfection doesn't mean it doesn't work.
[deleted] t1_ivs8v7q wrote
[removed]
ttkciar t1_ivpb1wf wrote
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9 is really fascinating reading.
derpderpderpfizzfizz t1_ivpcphq wrote
So wait, the guy that did this got tracked down and raided.
Nothing was found and he was let go but decides to kill himself anyway?
Um okay...
FrozenIceman t1_ivpfa4h wrote
They allegedly found the guy. They found no evidence he was actually the guy or evidence that was admissible in a court
derpderpderpfizzfizz t1_ivpfvv8 wrote
But yet he kills himself... 'spicious
FrozenIceman t1_ivpgx4l wrote
Also worth noting, there was no cause of death determined by the coroner. Apperently the Coroner thought the corpse he was working on was in fact alive.
yodamiles t1_ivpk802 wrote
He didn’t kill himself. No cause of death could be established according to law enforcement and coroner.
BoredCop t1_ivpuraf wrote
That's not uncommon, actually, they cannot always determine exactly why someone died. Especially when the deceased had one or more serious health conditions, which apparently this person did.
ttkciar t1_ivpnrhw wrote
No conspiracy theories, please.
derpderpderpfizzfizz t1_ivpu5ri wrote
No cover ups then? I find it suspicious my myself
dnaH_notnA t1_ivs84c2 wrote
You trust governments not to outright kill people who do downright subversive shit? Have you never heard of the FBI or the CIA in your entire life? Do you think European countries are any less like that?
KRed75 t1_ivs27j3 wrote
Even if you could wipe all existing firearms off the face of the earth and made it illegal to manufacture firearms, you cannot stop people from illegally making firearms. They are very simple devices and very easy to manufacture. There's nothing stopping criminals and criminal organizations from illegally manufacturing firearms and ammunition in large quantities. Law abiding citizens would have no equal defensive tools.
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_ivs735a wrote
If guns were made illegal, only criminals would own them
KRed75 t1_ivsiwkw wrote
Thank you for paraphrasing my comment.
CthuluTheGrand t1_ivpwdvz wrote
The cat is out of the bag. Don't even try.
The software is free and open source. You can build an entire printer at home without a degree in electrical engineering. 3D printers are widely used by professionals and hobbyists. They are too available at this point to try and limit them.
friver86 t1_ivqz8ee wrote
Hoffman tactical is a pretty cool place to find Ar lower files for free. He designs the whole thing and even sells hardware to finish the build.
DicknosePrickGoblin t1_ivpnkxf wrote
Ammo is as controlled as guns where I'm from so no printed guns for us.
Donotaskmedontellme t1_ivpvw2w wrote
I guess you don't know how easy to manufacture ammo is.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqgd9d wrote
I don't know, and I would like to know. I have been researching the topic for quite a long time now, and manufacturing a reliable, consistent quality cased ammo with primer and propellant is very difficult. You can write theory how you can "just do some NC and reload and shoot", but it's far, far from that.
Something that may occasionally go off and shoot a low powered projectile does not count.
Donotaskmedontellme t1_ivqgnf1 wrote
Cased ammo is pretty difficult but only because of the primer. If you don't intend to reload or go any bigger than 5.56 then 3d printed plastic casings are serviceable, but for a muzzle loader there's recipes online for black powder from scratch, and lead can easily be melted into a mold for shot.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqhbbx wrote
https://www.reddit.com/r/reloading/comments/yjht7t/diy_primer_cupping_tool_is_probably_mostly_ready/
https://www.reddit.com/r/reloading/comments/xqjf17/are_there_reasons_why_modern_primer_anvils_are/
I am actually pretty involved in the subject. Also, I won't care about muzzle loaders, they were phased out for obvious reasons and would be of little effect in modern day, melee weapons would likely be better option.
BP does not suit automatic weapons, and it's 1/3 of NC power.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivsk4rc wrote
The gun that killed Shinzou Abe was a muzzle loader so don’t necessarily discount how effective they can be. For posterity reasons, I do not recommend killing anyone at all, ideally no one dies even in self defense but the world isn’t like that. Please use gun knowledge responsibly
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivtuerp wrote
Like I stated, assassination is another matter compared to combat or self defense. If you get one shot and miss it, you are essentially going full melee. With automatic gun, you have a lot bigger margin of error.
Sqwill t1_ivpy4o5 wrote
More difficult than making a gun that's for sure.
gh0stwriter88 t1_ivrzr7t wrote
Depends on the ammo.... black powder or even absorbic acid based propellant isn't hard.
Its also less demanding on the weapon... but also results in a more clumsy weapon (like most BP weapons) fouling, greasing etc...
hidude398 t1_ivzouqc wrote
There’s a DIY smokeless project coming out this year, but also a BWA guide that talks about where to find and scavenge smokeless.
hidude398 t1_ivzoqul wrote
Easier, honestly.
LiberalFartsMajor t1_ivu266x wrote
Prohibition doesn't work, we can not control the sale and distribution of weapons. We can combat rampages by giving people a life worth living.
Free housing and healthcare for all!!
ObjectivelyCorrect2 t1_ivvicj7 wrote
Good. All gun laws are infringements on your rights and no government has the moral authority to tell you that you can't use your 3d printer to make weapons.
VW-187 t1_ivxzod6 wrote
This makes it harder for go ernments and police to oppress their people. This is for the assholes who are supposed to be LEO but shoot people and peoles pets.
[deleted] t1_ivp70ge wrote
[removed]
FuturologyBot t1_ivpbm4r wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/mossadnik:
Submission Statement:
>Experts are concerned about how fast 3D-printing technology is evolving, as several countries worldwide still do not have legal frameworks to prohibit or limit the creation of these weapons. “We are facing a serious threat if legal measures are not taken to control the production of printers and printing materials necessary for their use,” he said. “The software that allows for the production of these types of weapons should, as far as possible, be banned from the market,” he added, explaining that this could prove difficult because the weapons are often sold in parallel markets. It includes selling on the darknet and in closed forums that can be difficult for law enforcement to access.
>Although the production of 3D-printed weapons is currently limited to small arms and light weapons (SALW), it is expected that the capabilities of this technology and the quality of printing materials will evolve and lead to more powerful and sophisticated weapons. “There are already some impressions of weapons of a military nature with appreciable fire potential. The evolution of printing materials will impact the increasing sophistication and production of these weapons and the threat they represent,” the Interpol spokesperson added. Interpol urged “necessary measures” to stop the potential use of 3D-printed weapons for “illegal means.” “If this does not happen, it will be natural that the threat evolves towards producing increasingly sophisticated forms of 3D weapons that are more powerful and reliable, which poses increasing challenges to preventing and controlling their use in the future.”
>According to Interpol, “3D-printed weapons” can be categorized as fully 3D-printed firearms, hybrid 3D-printed guns and firearms whose frame is produced in 3D printing. “They can go from things like the Liberator, which is this single shot, entirely 3D-printed weapon that’s all plastic except for the firing pin and obviously the ammunition which might be able to shoot five to 10 times before it suffers a catastrophic failure, all the way to something called the FGC9, which, if built correctly, is essentially as lethal, as durable, as effective, and as accurate as a commercially purchased firearm.” Entirely 3D printed firearms are weapons on which all major components are printed, in some cases with only minor non-printed parts. These weapons have a “limited capacity of use due to the absence of metallic components and their fragile structure,” the international policing body told. Hybrid 3D Printed Firearms are weapons with printed elements used in conjunction with non-controllable metallic parts, such as springs and metallic tubes.
>3D-printed guns are illegal from the moment of creation because they lack serial numbers and are not submitted to any official test bench.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/yqnqbl/3dprinted_weapons_interpol_and_defense_experts/ivp7fe2/
[deleted] t1_ivpcbuj wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_ivpoiv0 wrote
[removed]
Donotaskmedontellme t1_ivpvloy wrote
I wonder if they realize that's the whole point. To circumvent. And there is no stopping it without outlawing 3D printers entirely.
[deleted] t1_ivqw432 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_ivry13o wrote
[removed]
Spaventoo t1_ivs4e6w wrote
Didn't we learn about this threat from when John Malkovich tried to kill the president?
[deleted] t1_ivs7hlv wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_ivs8nc1 wrote
[removed]
Accurate_Condition_8 t1_ivsfeq1 wrote
Would a 3D printed weapon also be able to pass metal detectors? That shit would be crazy
hidude398 t1_ivzpfra wrote
Not a reliable one. Most printed guns use the parts kit from a traditionally manufactured firearm or a homemade barrel that’s electrochemically machined from hydraulic tubing.
[deleted] t1_ivsg1um wrote
[removed]
indoildguy t1_ivsuofn wrote
The refusal by governments to reduce weaponry will only make idle minds more brazen
CL0UD_CREAT0R t1_ivsyttn wrote
We need real education about mental health at a younger age. We all saw this coming many years ago... If people have a will, they have a way. It's by education, understanding, compassion is when things will change. I bet this is nothing compared to what's really out there in the hands of the wrong people. This took me back in time LMAO
[deleted] t1_ivt20t2 wrote
[removed]
Echo3dream t1_ivwz6bm wrote
Legit looks like a post that would be on the top page of a "I'm from the future & have photos to prove it" reddit.
[deleted] t1_ivzgoxy wrote
[removed]
Chr1s78987x t1_iw99qvp wrote
You cannot ban weapons because people will create them themselves if you deny access to firearms. Plastic guns are far less safe because the "manufacturing" relies on inconsistent machines that melt plastic
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_ivs6a1h wrote
I love these people who freak out about this. A Cheap $200 printer isn't going to pull off high quality. Even more it takes time to dial one in.
Plus if you want to 3D print a barrel, be my guess.
Even if that wasn't the case this is a losing battle. 3D printing is mostly open source. 3D printers themselves can be built with 3D printers (see Lulzbots and Prusas). And most Slicing software is free. Hosting sites, free! 3D modeling software, yep go plenty of free ones too.
HathanDart t1_ivsggsi wrote
What you said is simply false. A $180 Ender is more than enough to create any gatz you have the file for.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivske49 wrote
Ender 3s can be had for under 200 and print as small as 5 microns as well as be accurate down to 1 micron lol. Print Shoot Repeat does this all the time with his ender.
Bed adhesion is solved with Elmer’s glue sticks
Temp and layer and infill are solved in the software and take 2 seconds to change the number
Save onto a file(or print remotely with octoprint)
Start the print, watch first layer, let it go for like 18 hours. Boom, gun receiver.
Ange1ofD4rkness t1_ivtaze2 wrote
I've seen what Ender's can produce by many friends, and then what my Buddy does with his and then what I can do with my Taz 6. There's clear differences when the price goes up
mossadnik OP t1_ivp7fe2 wrote
Submission Statement:
>Experts are concerned about how fast 3D-printing technology is evolving, as several countries worldwide still do not have legal frameworks to prohibit or limit the creation of these weapons. “We are facing a serious threat if legal measures are not taken to control the production of printers and printing materials necessary for their use,” he said. “The software that allows for the production of these types of weapons should, as far as possible, be banned from the market,” he added, explaining that this could prove difficult because the weapons are often sold in parallel markets. It includes selling on the darknet and in closed forums that can be difficult for law enforcement to access.
>Although the production of 3D-printed weapons is currently limited to small arms and light weapons (SALW), it is expected that the capabilities of this technology and the quality of printing materials will evolve and lead to more powerful and sophisticated weapons. “There are already some impressions of weapons of a military nature with appreciable fire potential. The evolution of printing materials will impact the increasing sophistication and production of these weapons and the threat they represent,” the Interpol spokesperson added. Interpol urged “necessary measures” to stop the potential use of 3D-printed weapons for “illegal means.” “If this does not happen, it will be natural that the threat evolves towards producing increasingly sophisticated forms of 3D weapons that are more powerful and reliable, which poses increasing challenges to preventing and controlling their use in the future.”
>According to Interpol, “3D-printed weapons” can be categorized as fully 3D-printed firearms, hybrid 3D-printed guns and firearms whose frame is produced in 3D printing. “They can go from things like the Liberator, which is this single shot, entirely 3D-printed weapon that’s all plastic except for the firing pin and obviously the ammunition which might be able to shoot five to 10 times before it suffers a catastrophic failure, all the way to something called the FGC9, which, if built correctly, is essentially as lethal, as durable, as effective, and as accurate as a commercially purchased firearm.” Entirely 3D printed firearms are weapons on which all major components are printed, in some cases with only minor non-printed parts. These weapons have a “limited capacity of use due to the absence of metallic components and their fragile structure,” the international policing body told. Hybrid 3D Printed Firearms are weapons with printed elements used in conjunction with non-controllable metallic parts, such as springs and metallic tubes.
>3D-printed guns are illegal from the moment of creation because they lack serial numbers and are not submitted to any official test bench.
SouthEasternGuy t1_iw04ljn wrote
3D printed guns are NOT illegal to manufacture in the US. Any normal gun(non NFA) can be manufactured for personal use at any times. This means no SBRs or full auto weapons, essentially. Most guns do not fall into this category and are totally legal to make. This is firstly due to the fact that the US has the 2nd amendment. secondly, disallowing such manufacturing would make metal pipes illegal because a pipe shotgun can be accidentally or intentionally created this way which would essentially outlaw benign objects like that. They only need to be serialized when they are distributed(sold, gifted, etc) because they requires an actual manufacturers’ license.
Of course, the world does not revolve around the US, so for many parts of the world, yes it could Be illegal. However, those that are manufacturing these are either doing so explicitly knowing it is criminal to commit crimes or also to rebel against tyrannical governments like in Iran. The second case is where the guns are used as intended and the first case encompasses a broader issue regarding why someone would want to commit a crime with them to begin with.
chews-your-name t1_ivpmjpw wrote
Can't they print bullets? Guns don't kill people, it's how they fire bullets
CthuluTheGrand t1_ivpxwfp wrote
Gunpowder can be manufactured at home and I'm sure it's not that hard to import empty shells. I'm sure there will be (if it does not already exist) plans for 3D printed shotguns using mad max style ammo that can very easily be made at home.
Far too late to do anything about this. Everything is too available for those that really want to do it.
gh0stwriter88 t1_ivrzxzr wrote
You don't even need bullets... round balls will do.
KRed75 t1_ivs32yb wrote
Guns can easily be made to fire bullets without the case. I made bullets out of lead when I was 8 at a civil war museum. Cartridge ammunition just made things standardized and much easier to fire and reload a weapon.
Departure_Sea t1_ivpthvl wrote
No. Primers (what make the gun go bang) are made by highly delicate manufacturing processes using some real nasty chemicals. There are only a few factories on the world that actually create primers.
Donotaskmedontellme t1_ivpw0hy wrote
No primers in Black Powder muzzle loaders.
Departure_Sea t1_ivpwkiq wrote
You'd be wrong, unless you're talking about flintlocks which haven't been in wide use for 100 years.
Donotaskmedontellme t1_ivpwqcg wrote
How about the gun just used to assassinate a former Japanese Prime Minister? Homemade black powder ignited with a battery.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqh07h wrote
Lol single shot guns don't count. Yes, those can be built from scratch, but they are pretty much as effective as melee weapons.
Black powder does not also suit in automatic weapons, it leaves over 50% solid residue, which will foul the mechanism and cause a jam quickly. It also has 1/3 of power of smokeless propellants. There is formulation called ammonpulver which is based on ammonium nitrate, and is currently being researched as a substitute for NC.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivskju1 wrote
As effective as melee weapons? Shinzo Abe had no vitals after 10 minutes
If someone is essentially gone that fast, that’s extremely effective as a weapon. It took hours to declare him dead by doctor but he was actually dead the entire time
Shocked the whole world
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivtu65u wrote
Single shot assassin guns are a totally different animal than combat weapons. The guy could have lodged a diy grenade at Abe, worse yet, do it Middle East style.
ttkciar t1_ivpogfb wrote
> Can't they print bullets?
Not yet, no, but that might change.
The hardest part of making ammunition is the lead azide primers. Their chemistry has to be just right, and they need to be machined to moderate precision.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqgrtm wrote
https://www.reddit.com/r/reloading/comments/yjht7t/diy_primer_cupping_tool_is_probably_mostly_ready/
https://www.reddit.com/r/reloading/comments/xqjf17/are_there_reasons_why_modern_primer_anvils_are/
I proudly present. Also, the primer composition used is H-48, that is chlorate based primer. It was used primarily to the 50's, and some countries like soviet bloc used it far beyond that, and it's proven and reliable.
kindofastoryteller t1_ivrftu7 wrote
Why every good piece of technology must be used for something harmful on the side. Fucking people. 🤦
Departure_Sea t1_ivplfjc wrote
There is absolutely zero way they can control the software or machines to prevent weapons production. They print what the code tells them to, just like a CNC machine.
Even if they could control it, by doing so they would severely impact the already terrible domestic manufacturing market and all the little to medium sized shops will no longer exist.