3D printers and the universal death of gun control

Status
Not open for further replies.
Once the Black Market price of the printer, the materials and software needed to produce firearms becomes more expensive than buying

Ah, but a fundamental tenant of the print-at-home revolution is that, eventually, we will print things--appliances, consumer goods, and the like. Amazon would not deliver, but would sell 3D code, and you'd just make what you wanted at home. Which suggests having printers and feedstock available to make every kind of consumer goods. If you can print a toaster, or a cuisinart, or the like, you could print a gun.

Ok, today, that's absurd. However, 3D printing is as subject to Moore's Law as any other technology--where the capacity increases 100% every 18 months (or get cheaper; or more efficient, etc.). This will be slower in the precise, non-disposable, firearm world of exacting tolerances and finishes.
The nice people over at ARES had a study (which, of course, I cannot find to cite now :cuss:) which noted that, "freejack" gun manufactures are most likely to churn out open-bolt full autos with un rifled barrels. This, from the fact that such designs are simple, rugged, and quick to make. They had a follow-on where they were examining the "blank firing" arms made elsewhere in Europe, which can be, rudely, and under-safely, converted to cartridge weapons. Which, apparently, ar now the arm of choice for UK crime.
 
Y'all are missing the point.
Gun control isn't about banning guns.
Gun control is all about criminalizing the possession of guns.
The law-abiding will either turn in their guns or join the criminals, revolutionaries and anarchists that will remain armed.
Respect for the law and the state as it currently exists will be further diminished.
That is the first goal af the progressive movement.
 
Y'all are missing the point.
Gun control isn't about banning guns.
Gun control is all about criminalizing the possession of guns.
The law-abiding will either turn in their guns or join the criminals, revolutionaries and anarchists that will remain armed.
Respect for the law and the state as it currently exists will be further diminished.
That is the first goal af the progressive movement.
Well said except for the last sentence. I’d say it’s right. I’m not sure how you rate their goals. I think most of them don’t understand priorities. They just do what makes them feel good.
 
The gun control agenda has always been an essential or integral component of the Progressives’ long-promised “fundamental transformation,” and it’s not a pretty sight. That much everyone knows.

These people are true revolutionaries (engaged in “bringing about a major or fundamental change,” as Merriam-Webster puts it). They are strongly committed to replacing one societal structure–America’s constitutional, limited-government, free-enterprise system–with another–a socialist, wealth-redistributionist system run by an all-powerful, titanic central government.

Just reading a few pages into Saul Alinsky’s leftist playbook, Rules for Radicals, one encounters repeated confirmation that the very heart of radical “change” is keeping the populace angry, encouraging their grievances, stoking their resentments, and making sure they are continually upset.
 
However, 3D printing is as subject to Moore's Law as any other technology--where the capacity increases 100% every 18 months (or get cheaper; or more efficient, etc.).
Although your general point about technology not being static still stands, it's probably not quite kosher to quote Moore's law as support for that general point since it is a fairly specific observation about the density of transistors in integrated circuits.
 
Ah, but a fundamental tenant of the print-at-home revolution is that, eventually, we will print things--appliances, consumer goods, and the like. Amazon would not deliver, but would sell 3D code, and you'd just make what you wanted at home. Which suggests having printers and feedstock available to make every kind of consumer goods. If you can print a toaster, or a cuisinart, or the like, you could print a gun.

Still won't kill gun control. One can legally buy materials to make homemade bombs.......has not affected the laws against the possession and use. It may skirt gun control or make it difficult to enforce, but that doesn't mean it is going away. theotherwaldo gets it....


Y'all are missing the point.
Gun control isn't about banning guns.
Gun control is all about criminalizing the possession of guns.

Doesn't matter if those guns are bought on the Black Market or made on your kitchen table.
 
And prohibition ended and states are legalizing pot against federal laws. ;)

"We the people" have the means to change gun laws. I believe it's time to change them.

No way you say?

So just how did antis change gun laws in past decades?

That's right, the same means used to change gun laws cuts both ways :eek: ... and pro-gun laws can be written - Starting with allowing teachers to voluntarily arm themselves in all schools in all states for self-defense and defense of children and push hard on "rights" issue which may gain support from Democrats.
 
Last edited:
Well, that's the theory, anyhow.

Any road, the thing about printers and consumer grade machine tools, etc. is not that you can be kept from owning a gun, if you really want one.
The problem is, guns can be so restricted that your only possible use is in last ditch self defense, stay alive and go to jail. Like England. No practice, no sport involving the ever-lengthening list of Bad Guns.
 
We are not England and do not have to become the next England.

Just because 10 people jumped off the cliff doesn't mean we have to follow and jump too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top