Posted on Apr 4, 2024
What Are 3D-Printed Guns, and Why Are They Controversial?
351
8
3
3
3
0
Posted in these groups: 
Firearms and Guns
Firearms and Guns
Posted 8 mo ago
Responses: 2
4
4
0
SGT (Join to see)
Why is cigarettes and alcohol legal, because it can be taxed, even if it's been proved that the two kills. The government see's dollar$ with wide open pockets, and that's the fact, if the govenment finds a way to tax the 3D printing, it'll be legal.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
3D printing gives an average person the ability to make something that LOOKS LIKE a gun. That is enough to allow politicians and anti-gun fanatics to generate panic among suburban soccer moms.
Just like many things that people want to panic about, many of the assumptions in the debate are false or conflate things that are completely different. For example there really are "3D Printers" that make things out of metal that can be durable and can withstand some pressure, but those machines are large, cost many thousand dollars, and still have many limitations. Consumer-grade "3D Printers" print by squirting melted plastic. But the people pushing to ban or regulate 3D Printers talk about them as if they were Star Trek "Replicators" that can magically produce everything imaginable and can duplicate complex items by somehow "scanning" the item.
It is possible to 3D print a working "gun" entirely of plastic -- and yes such an all-plastic "gun" won't be detected by a metal detector -- on the other hand, that all-plastic "gun" will show up on more modern scanners like those used at airports, require metallic ammunition (easily detected) and will self-destruct by firing one shot.
The closest thing to 3D printing a real gun is that you can 3D print the plastic grip frame compatible with the frame of some plastic guns like the Glock pistols or 3D print a plastic copy of the lower receiver for an AR pattern rifle. In either case, you then assemble the complete firearm using the regular metal parts. The "problem" is that the 3D printed part just happens to be the part that the ATF defines as the "receiver" which makes it the part that is legally "the gun" and that would be required to have a serial number if it were commercially manufactured and sold. This makes 3D printed guns "untraceable" because they don't have a registered serial number.
What the anti-gun fanatics don't mention is that 3D printing even just the receiver or frame is generally slower and arguably more complicated than machining a receiver or frame using an unfinished "80%" receiver or frame (which they also want to ban).
What they also don't mention is that almost no crimes are solved by "tracing" firearms (which is almost always an after-the-fact activity) or that there are millions of "untraceable" guns in use all across America.
What guns are "untraceable"?
- 3D printed guns
- Guns made from 80% receivers and frames
- All guns manufactured before 1968
- All guns that have been stolen
- All guns that have ever been sold by the original purchaser (even guns sold to or through a federally licensed gun dealer)
- All guns where the original owner has died
- All guns where the original owner no longer has the gun
The simple fact is that most guns used in crimes are "untraceable"
Just like many things that people want to panic about, many of the assumptions in the debate are false or conflate things that are completely different. For example there really are "3D Printers" that make things out of metal that can be durable and can withstand some pressure, but those machines are large, cost many thousand dollars, and still have many limitations. Consumer-grade "3D Printers" print by squirting melted plastic. But the people pushing to ban or regulate 3D Printers talk about them as if they were Star Trek "Replicators" that can magically produce everything imaginable and can duplicate complex items by somehow "scanning" the item.
It is possible to 3D print a working "gun" entirely of plastic -- and yes such an all-plastic "gun" won't be detected by a metal detector -- on the other hand, that all-plastic "gun" will show up on more modern scanners like those used at airports, require metallic ammunition (easily detected) and will self-destruct by firing one shot.
The closest thing to 3D printing a real gun is that you can 3D print the plastic grip frame compatible with the frame of some plastic guns like the Glock pistols or 3D print a plastic copy of the lower receiver for an AR pattern rifle. In either case, you then assemble the complete firearm using the regular metal parts. The "problem" is that the 3D printed part just happens to be the part that the ATF defines as the "receiver" which makes it the part that is legally "the gun" and that would be required to have a serial number if it were commercially manufactured and sold. This makes 3D printed guns "untraceable" because they don't have a registered serial number.
What the anti-gun fanatics don't mention is that 3D printing even just the receiver or frame is generally slower and arguably more complicated than machining a receiver or frame using an unfinished "80%" receiver or frame (which they also want to ban).
What they also don't mention is that almost no crimes are solved by "tracing" firearms (which is almost always an after-the-fact activity) or that there are millions of "untraceable" guns in use all across America.
What guns are "untraceable"?
- 3D printed guns
- Guns made from 80% receivers and frames
- All guns manufactured before 1968
- All guns that have been stolen
- All guns that have ever been sold by the original purchaser (even guns sold to or through a federally licensed gun dealer)
- All guns where the original owner has died
- All guns where the original owner no longer has the gun
The simple fact is that most guns used in crimes are "untraceable"
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google