# Controversial Topic: 3D printed guns



## Phishfry (Aug 1, 2018)

NOTE: This is a controversial topic. I feel it touches the community because of the 3D printing aspect. Plus we should all care about free speech.


The state that held the first constitutional congress in 1775, Pennsylvania has went to court to ban anyone in their state
from downloading a 3D model of a gun to print.

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/31/6344...ry-restraining-order-blocking-3d-printer-guns

On PBS the PA State Attorney General stated that you could print one of these guns on the $140 printer that the Philadelphia school system has .

As a person who works on blueprints and electronic drawings all day long This is outrageous and totally untrue.

On top of that how useful is a plastic gun. Look at Glock. You have to have a metal barrel. Period. End of Story.

This Attorney General has got a Federal Judge to require that no IP's from the state of Pennsylvania be allowed to download these documents.

I never thought in a Million Years that technical drawing would become illegal in the USA. Isn't a 3D Model a technical drawing in electronic form?

Free speech is no longer a constitutional right? How is this not free speech? This is not some Top Secret nuclear plans.

There are people out there that have no idea what manufacturing products involves.

PBS doling out Fake news. I challenge anyone to prove that you can print a gun on a $140 3D printer.

I couldn't make a 3D printer out of parts for $140 that would produce a gun. PERIOD.


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 1, 2018)

In some ways this is a kneejerk reaction to modern technology.

The Government sees it is losing the ability to control people if they can make their own products.

They can't have that and will limit it. Think of the children.

The Jetsons was just a TV show, Imagine if people could hit a button and produce whatever they wanted.

OH the madness! We must figure out a way to stop it!


----------



## SirDice (Aug 1, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> On top of that how useful is a plastic gun. Look at Glock. You have to have a metal barrel. Period. End of Story.


Technically not a 3D printer but a CNC machine: https://ghostgunner.net/

It's what they started to sell when they were first ordered to take the designs for the "Liberator" offline. 
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...t-ends-after-3-years-in-gun-publishers-favor/

Interesting subject surely but this thread has the potential of turning into a political debate. So tread carefully.


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 1, 2018)

Free speech issue for me. My gosh limiting the flow of information will only make people flock to it.

Can you imagine that they think they can outlaw a digital model. Fools.

Blocking one states IP's from a file. How exactly do yo do that? Is this China now? Do we build the great Patriot firewall now?
That's my political statement. We are better than this mess.


----------



## SirDice (Aug 1, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> My gosh limiting the flow of information will only make people flock to it.


Indeed. It's more or less the Streisand effect. I had never heard of them until the US government tried to block the publications. Now I want one those printers


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 1, 2018)

Just reminds me of the stupidness of the DeCSS code case.
https://www.wired.com/2000/08/court-to-address-decss-t-shirt/

But worse US Gov. State Department 'Export Control' involved for a gun that will probably blow up in your face..


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 1, 2018)

Thank You for the ARS article. I missed it. But the real scam is this.
Companies in FLA are selling AR15 upper recievers missing only 2 holes. The upper receiver contains the serial number.
All the other parts are open market. As such they are just machine parts, so no regulations.
These companies include a jig so you can drill these 2 holes in their precise location.
Now that is questionable, as a machinist. Obviously skirting the intentions of the laws,

So this is a real phenomena compared to a hysteria of a 3D printed plastic gun. Which needs a steel liner.
How many people have been killed with a 100% plastic gun (not including the inventor)?

The whole thing in a way comes back to manufacturing. Gunsmithing has been a metalworkers hobby for generations.
Hard to regulate gunsmithing.


----------



## SirDice (Aug 1, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> Just reminds me of the stupidness of the DeCSS code case.


I was just about to mention that. You've also been around long enough to remember the export restrictions on certain encryption standards, both Netscape and Internet Explorer had a weak 40 bit encryption on the "International" versions. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 1, 2018)

Yes that was why I had to preface "Top Secret Nukes".
As machinists we have always been limited there.
Locksmithing too, I could tell you some stories.

This is a weird truth; I have more people ask me to make silencers than you would ever believe.
That would be the shortest way to the big house.


----------



## ShelLuser (Aug 1, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> I never thought in a Million Years that technical drawing would become illegal in the USA. Isn't a 3D Model a technical drawing in electronic form?


To be honest I am not surprised at all, because of 2 reasons.

First, I don't know how old you are but we've seen things like this happening more times throughout history. Although not directly related I do think it's an important issue: the ban on the export of encryption. For a US citizen it is illegal to 'export' software which provides a strong method of encryption. This law became famous when Phil Zimmerman (author of PGP, which is a program providing encryption) found a loophole: books didn't have this limitation and as such he faxed his sourcecode as if it were a book, and soon we had 2 PGP versions: the original PGP with a low encryption engine, and PGPi, the international version which was developed outside of the US and therefor fully legal to use everywhere with a strong encryption engine.

Why would a government deny the right of someone or some organization to share their own work within the field of data encryption? I think you and me both know the answer to that. But here's also a parallel (or so I think): not understanding the underlying concepts.

And as a sidenote: this was also hurting their own businesses. In the 90's I've been on several IT congresses to try and keep up with the market and talked to many vendors of security software. Only to ask that dreadful question: "_But aren't you guys a US based company? Doesn't that mean your encryption standards are way lower than the competition?_". 'auch', they could only acknowledge the fact but "it wouldn't be any problem"   (I often asked this during public presentations).

Another reason is because I cannot help but sense a growing desire amongst different governments alike to outlaw certain aspects "for the greater good" instead of simply holding people accountable for their own actions. You know: innocent until proven guilty?

In many cases I cannot help but get the impression that they're going for the easy way out. And in my impression this situation itself is no different.

Banning such blueprints makes it look as if the government is actively doing something against the possible problems (they're usually not), makes it easier to fine offenders even if they haven't done anything and hopefully makes the government look good.

Especially because I also get the impression that many people of the "modern generation" (yes, I am generalizing here) don't really seem to care all that much anymore about such details. I guess they don't care to think about where such bans could lead us to.


----------



## alexseitsinger (Aug 7, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> Free speech issue for me. My gosh limiting the flow of information will only make people flock to it.
> 
> Can you imagine that they think they can outlaw a digital model. Fools.
> 
> ...



This is a tough situation. On one hand you have free speech which is very important. On the other, you have the safety of the average citizen. Which do you choose? Is access to building a plastic gun really more dangerous than just buying a metal one that its plans need to be made restricted? Banning access to information is wrong. These kinds of things are going to happen, but hopefully things evolve to something more appropriate because It could spell trouble.


----------



## Birdy (Aug 7, 2018)

alexseitsinger said:


> ... hopefully things evolve to something more appropriate because It could spell trouble.


_"__History is a succession of stupidities by the ruling classes__."_
- Emmanuel Todd


----------



## Crivens (Aug 7, 2018)

What do you all expect? The best thing is, here we can see that they do stupid things. Who would bet some that the level of professionalism is better in areas we have no experience in? Anyone?

Civilisation does not work because of politics, but despite politics.


----------



## Deleted member 48958 (Aug 7, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> https://www.npr.org/2018/07/31/6344...ry-restraining-order-blocking-3d-printer-guns


Modern society may be more dangerous than ancient Nigerian tribes.


----------



## ralphbsz (Aug 10, 2018)

Yes, difficult and controversial topic.  All sides of the debate have some valid arguments.  Personally, I would refuse to own a gun that is not made by highly skilled craftsmen (ideally, highly skilled Swiss craftsmen, although Germans, Czechs, Israelis, and Americans also qualify).  And I've long been an advocate of free speech in all forms, and happen to know one of the people who worked at PGP when they did the stunt with the book and the T-shirt (a great use of the freedom of speech).

On the other hand: We live in a very safe and civilized society.  I live in Silicon Valley, where the probability of being killed by crime or violence is very low.  Some of the moderators of this forum live in the Netherlands, which is a very polite and civilized (and safe) society.  We have the luxury to argue over things like gun rights and free speech rights, while having lots of money, lot of personal freedom, and the absence of fear.  Contrast that (given the example of Nigeria) above with Africa.  An interesting example is to learn about the Hutu-Tutsi conflict, and the atrocities committed there.  Often without guns, because the offenders didn't have guns, only machetes and clubs; yet they managed to kill hundreds of thousands of people.  Not a good thing.


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 10, 2018)

ralphbsz said:


> On the other hand: We live in a very safe and civilized society.


https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/05/us/chicago-weekend-shootings/index.html
In my city they build all the homeless shelters, drug rehabilitation shelters and public housing all right at the edge of the city,
As to infect the city next to us. They move the homeless from the oceanfront to appease the rich hotel owners.
My little 1950's neighborhood is in the middle of this failing social experiment.


----------



## Deleted member 48958 (Aug 10, 2018)

ralphbsz said:


> I live in Silicon Valley, where the probability of being killed by crime or violence is very low.


Really? Few months ago: Four people have been shot at YouTube HQ in Silicon Valley.
I used to live in several countries, including EU, like France,
for example. IMO life in most of EU countries is not safe at all,
with thousands of Arabic fanatics, rapists, thugs, and other degenerates,
so if you're living in such countries, you really should buy a big
large-caliber machine gun, that any printer couldn't print,
or a metal baseball bat, at least


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 10, 2018)

Can I make an engineering statement.
From a person who made zip guns when I was young, This whole thing is crap.
Do you know how many pounds per square inch of engery is released on firing a bullet.
The breech has to be metal along with the barrel. Of course the firing pin too(these 3D printer guys use a nail !!)
As a substitute for a metal barrel, a ceramic liner could be substituted. I would want an all metal breech.
Please remember the USS Iowa when working with firearms.


----------



## nactusberrilli (Aug 10, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> This whole thing is crap.


No argument there. It *"screams"* unnecessary gov.restriction.


----------



## ralphbsz (Aug 11, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/05/us/chicago-weekend-shootings/index.html


A: I don't live in Chicago.  It's about 5 ours by airplane from us to Chicago.
B: Even if you look at Chicago (I have relatives there), large parts are very civilized and safe.  The high shooting statistics come from some other parts, which are very poor, and have serious drug and gang problems.



ILUXA said:


> Really? Few months ago: Four people have been shot at YouTube HQ in Silicon Valley.


Oh, I remember that very well.  I have two friends who work at YouTube, including one in that building that was evacuated (very very scary).  Yet, only one person died ... the attacker, by suicide; the other three victims were treated in hospitals, and have recovered.  From the point of view of the overall homicide (including suicide) statistic, this event is not relevant.



> IMO life in most of EU countries is not safe at all,
> with thousands of Arabic fanatics, rapists, thugs, and other degenerates,


I was in Europe last summer for an extended period: Belgium, Netherlands, and northwestern Germany, including the Ruhr area (Essen, Dortmund, Duesseldorf).  It felt perfectly safe.  While there are a few more dark-skinned people visible in the shopping streets and stores and on the bus, I didn't see any violence.  My friends and relatives there all seem perfectly calm and safe.  If there were any degenerates, they were more the local population at 11pm in the Altstadt in Duesseldorf, after drinking one too many beers (or a dozen too many), but that has been happening for at least the last 50 years.


----------



## Birdy (Aug 11, 2018)

ralphbsz said:


> I was in Europe last summer for an extended period... While there are a few more dark-skinned people visible,... I didn't see any violence.


I do (*), whether in the US or Europe. Even though the picture might be photoshop'd. As for the perpetrators, unless I'm mistaken, they're predominantly white-skinned.
(*) Though off-topic, there's a link to an interesting paper further below that feed.



ralphbsz said:


> My friends and relatives there all seem perfectly calm and safe.


I wish them well. What goes around, oftentimes comes around though. Especially when highly traumatic experiences remain 3D-imprinted in the targeted people's collective memory.


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 11, 2018)

This seems like the classic case of a Texas company poking people with a stick.
This is not about the gun but politics of gun control meeting free speech.
The confluence of control and freedom.
All my rumbling above about blocking PA residents IP's was moot when a federal judge in the 9th circuit took it national later that same day.
Nevermind that these digital models have been released 2 years ago as torrents.
The opponents can't show a single shot fired, let alone actual harm to someone.
I imagine you could probably get one shot off. I would not be the one holding it.
I consider myself a materials scientist and I know of no plastic that can take the heat involved with a controlled explosion.
That is what the breech does. Controls an explosion in your hand.


----------



## ralphbsz (Aug 11, 2018)

Phishfry said:


> I imagine you could probably get one shot off.


If you use a metal liner tube as the barrel (strengthened with plastic around), the first shot would probably work.

At home I have two barrels that are built in such a fashion.  One is a lightweight alloy (aluminum+scandium) barrel that has a thin stainless liner, and can handle the pretty high pressure of a .38sp.  The second one is very lightweight, carbon fiber epoxy, with a stainless steel liner, but it can only handle .22LR.  But these are not 3D printed, but instead built by very high tech companies that specialize in guns, and the steel liner tube is very carefully bonded to the outside material that provides tensile strength.

And if the plastic barrel survives the first shot, it would probably not survive the second one: The cartridge would probably contain much of the charge, but the cartridge would definitely bulge, and that would destroy (widen) the chamber.  The second time, the cartridge would rupture, and the whole mess would come flying out the back, right into the face of the shooter.

And even if it survives one or two shots, the accuracy would be bad, quickly going towards awful.  A gun that throws a bullet in a random direction is not actually useful, other than to scare the public.



> I would not be the one holding it.


Hell no.  I would put it in a vise, attach a long string to the trigger, and hide behind a wall or tree nearby.  And after pulling the string, I would probably laugh maniacally.  Or look like the coyote from the cartoon, all burned up.


----------



## Phishfry (Aug 11, 2018)

The Wikipedia page on zip guns was really informative to me. I never heard of a 'deer gun' from Nam and I have many relatives that survived their tours. All branches covered.

We use a speciality plastics company called Thorndon from Ontario. Usually the USN is really picky about foreign materials.
They actually specify Thorndon only in many applications now. Not just because of connections, they have good material recipes.
They have some very unique formulas. Some could handle the force with a thick wall breech, but not the heat. Even if you wire mesh impregnated it, I would have no faith. You make a good point of barrel problems too. I didn't even consider those.


----------

