Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
A US project to create a printable gun has been derailed after the company supplying the 3D printer withdrew it.
In a letter published on the Wiki Weapon website, Stratasys said that it did not allow its printers "to be used for illegal purposes".
Defense Distributed, the group behind the project, had planned to share 3D weapon blueprints online.
Currently it is legal in the US to manufacture a gun at home without a licence.
Defense Distributed raised $20,000 (£12,400) online to get the Wiki Weapon project started.
It planned to develop a fully printable 3D gun, initially with no moving parts.
"This project could very well change the way we think about gun control and consumption," it said on its site.
"How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the internet?"
But the project hit a snag when the firm supplying the 3D printer got wind of what they were planning.
In a letter to Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson, Stratasys said that it had taken the decision to withdraw the printer "based on your lack of a [firearms] licence and your public statements regarding your intentions in using our printer".
"It is the policy of Stratasys not to knowingly allow its printers to be used for illegal purposes. Therefore please be advised that your lease of the Stratasys uPrint SE is cancelled at this time."
The firm collected the machine several days later.
Printing trainers
Government laws on the manufacture of guns will need quick revision to catch up with the age of 3D printing, thinks Marc Goodman, head of the Future Crimes Institute.
"This appears to be a grey area under US law and the laws of other countries. The question is: how do you control technology that can do illegal things?" he said.
"In this case, this was being done very overtly and trying to prove a point. I am far more concerned about the people who aren't publicising it."
Mr Goodman predicts that 3D printing could be the next battleground in the fight against organised crime and terrorism. And it won't just be weapons that will be printed online.
"It will be the next frontier in IP [Intellectual Property] theft when you are able to manufacture a Rolex watch, Gucci handbags, Nike sneakers," he said.
I'm not quite sure what to think of this...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/03 16:12:55
No it won't. Being able to "print" a gun at home is a terrible idea. Don't get me wrong, I love guns. This would be a horrible mistake, even with the wonderful Darwinism that would play itself out...
Unless you can print something with the strength of steel this is just stupid.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
The guy's plan is to make it so that anyone with access to a 3D printer or the ability to gain access to one can get a gun, with no oversight involved, on the basis that--quoting here:
"How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the internet?"
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
The guy's plan is to make it so that anyone with access to a 3D printer or the ability to gain access to one can get a gun, with no oversight involved, on the basis that--quoting here:
"How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the internet?"
It's the typical backwoods militia/McVeigh talk.
However nothing is Illegal in this case. Unless the gun would be illegal to posess.
IIRC, oddly enough, while many guns are illegal, owning the parts of those guns is not. The parts that make a semi-auto weapon into a select fire automatic weapon are not illegal. A gun with the part on it is, but the part is perfectly legal to own.
So I could have an AR-15, print off the parts needed to make it full auto, and as long as the weapon is disassembled its all legal.
People that pass gun control laws are sooo stupuid
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/03 17:28:00
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
It is not people manufacturing guns at home though, it is people buying guns printed by wikiweapons.
And as I am sure many Americans are in favour of companies being able to do whatever they want, what is the problem with one company deciding that they don't want to supply something to another?
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
It is not people manufacturing guns at home though, it is people buying guns printed by wikiweapons.
And as I am sure many Americans are in favour of companies being able to do whatever they want, what is the problem with one company deciding that they don't want to supply something to another?
Depends if there was a contract or not with the 3-D printer company. If there was and the company is withdrawing for the other party breaking the law that is breach of contract as no law has been violated. If there was no contract, which I highly doubt, then they could withdraw at any time.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
The guy's plan is to make it so that anyone with access to a 3D printer or the ability to gain access to one can get a gun, with no oversight involved, on the basis that--quoting here:
"How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the internet?"
It's the typical backwoods militia/McVeigh talk.
However nothing is Illegal in this case. Unless the gun would be illegal to posess.
You really, really, really need to look at the context of this situation.
IIRC, oddly enough, while many guns are illegal, owning the parts of those guns is not. The parts that make a semi-auto weapon into a select fire automatic weapon are not illegal. A gun with the part on it is, but the part is perfectly legal to own.
So I could have an AR-15, print off the parts needed to make it full auto, and as long as the weapon is disassembled its all legal.
But when you assemble that weapon, it's illegal.
And if you were to take the parts for a M1911 and have them unassembled, then assemble them without a firearms license--it's illegal.
People that pass gun control laws are sooo stupid
People that don't bother to actually read articles are soooo silly when they get into debates.
The whole point of this "WikiWeapon" venture is to make a firearm which is supplied fully assembled to anyone who purchases the plans/schematics from Wiki Weapon(aka Defense Distributed). Once again, Stratasys withdrew the printer due to "the lack of a firearms license and the public statements regarding your intentions in using our printer".
Those public statements are: "The project could very well change the way we think about gun control and consumption" and "How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the internet?".
What the hell is a firearm's license? Although I own no firearms, a bunch of them fell into my trunk and I've not heard of such a thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/03 19:06:15
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
The centre of a massive brood chamber, heaving and pulsating.
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
I would counter argue that the law allowing people to make homemade weapons is stupid.
Squigsquasher, resident ban magnet, White Knight, and general fethwit.
buddha wrote: I've decided that these GW is dead/dying threads that pop up every-week must be followers and cultists of nurgle perpetuating the need for decay. I therefore declare that that such threads are heresy and subject to exterminatus. So says the Inquisition!
Kanluwen wrote: And if you were to take the parts for a M1911 and have them unassembled, then assemble them without a firearms license--it's illegal.
So if I were to craft all the parts of a 1911 myself, and assemble them without a "firearms license," whatever that is, that would be illegal?
A firearms licence (also known as a gun licence) is a licence or permit issued by some governments (typically by the police) of a country (or state or municipality thereof), that allows the licensee to buy, own, possess, and use firearms, often subject to a number of conditions or restrictions, especially with regards to storage requirements or the completion of a firearms safety course, as well as background checks, etc. Firearms licences are not required in all jurisdictions.
The permit or licence scope varies in what firearm(s) and or activity(s) they allow the holder to legally do with their firearms. For example, a licence may allow the holder to engage in hunting, target shooting, and/or collecting, or permit the owner to own firearms for self defence, carry a concealed firearm, or operate a business (such as being a gun dealer or a gunsmith). Rifles, shotguns, and handguns may require separate licences (depending on jurisdiction).
Yeah, we don't have those in most states - any that I'm aware of, in fact - so I'm not entirely sure how it's relevant.
The very article you quoted stated it's legal to manufacture a firearm in your home. Which is why I asked my question about your assertion regarding the 1911.
Edit: Looks like Illinois and New Jersey require you to have a permit to purchase both handguns and long guns.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/03 19:29:54
Grey Templar wrote: If I were the Wikiweapons guys I'd sue. As its not illegal to manufacture weapons at home I would say the Printer Company has no right to withdraw the printer on legal grounds. Unless I've missed something.
I would counter argue that the law allowing people to make homemade weapons is stupid.
Hey hey ou have against torches and pitchforks buddy? You can't have a riot without proper homemade torches and pitchforks. If we outlaw torches then the terrorists have already won.
Kanluwen wrote: And if you were to take the parts for a M1911 and have them unassembled, then assemble them without a firearms license--it's illegal.
So if I were to craft all the parts of a 1911 myself, and assemble them without a "firearms license," whatever that is, that would be illegal?
A firearms licence (also known as a gun licence) is a licence or permit issued by some governments (typically by the police) of a country (or state or municipality thereof), that allows the licensee to buy, own, possess, and use firearms, often subject to a number of conditions or restrictions, especially with regards to storage requirements or the completion of a firearms safety course, as well as background checks, etc. Firearms licences are not required in all jurisdictions.
The permit or licence scope varies in what firearm(s) and or activity(s) they allow the holder to legally do with their firearms. For example, a licence may allow the holder to engage in hunting, target shooting, and/or collecting, or permit the owner to own firearms for self defence, carry a concealed firearm, or operate a business (such as being a gun dealer or a gunsmith). Rifles, shotguns, and handguns may require separate licences (depending on jurisdiction).
Thats godless unconstitutional commie pinkoism there. Must be a CHicago or NY thing. EDIT: Oh wow based on the follow on post I nailed it. America Hurr!
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/10/03 19:38:12
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
BlapBlapBlap wrote: So now, thanks to the fact that 3D printing is supposed to move to the family home, anybody who knows squat about a computer can obtain a firearm?
Bad move. Free arms trade without any needs of true verification of mental competence or age is a very bad move.
BlapBlapBlap wrote: So now, thanks to the fact that 3D printing is supposed to move to the family home, anybody who knows squat about a computer can obtain a firearm?
Bad move. Free arms trade without any needs of true verification of mental competence or age is a very bad move.
Meanwhile, more inventive people are looking up plans for chem bombs and back pack nukes, or even better a 1964 full size working Ford Mustang.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Seaward wrote: Yeah, we don't have those in most states - any that I'm aware of, in fact - so I'm not entirely sure how it's relevant.
The very article you quoted stated it's legal to manufacture a firearm in your home. Which is why I asked my question about your assertion regarding the 1911.
Edit: Looks like Illinois and New Jersey require you to have a permit to purchase both handguns and long guns.
Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, North Carolina, New York, Minnesota (partial), Michigan, Massachussetts, Maryland, Iowa, and Hawaii all require permits to purchase handguns.
Oh and just for fun, in case anyone has not clicked the link in the article:
There are many states that require people to have a license to own a pistol, so this kind of thing would present a problem here, I'd imagine, but I don't know how this law applies to home-made firearms. Also, I don't know of any state that allows convicted felons to own firearms, though the same issue arises with states that don't require background checks to own a gun, I suppose. These are the big issues I see with this kind of thing (even though it's probably not even viable for the overwhelming majority of people to make their own gun with a 3D printer).
I've got no problem with gun ownership, and would like to own guns myself at some point, but this sounds like a pretty bad idea.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Except you will need to invest in a 3-D printer to make any use of it, and as it stands anyone can get a firearm right now anyway. Legally or Illegally, getting a gun is easy.
If anything this will be easier to track as you can track who is purchasing the templates.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
I would counter argue that the law allowing people to make homemade weapons is stupid.
Yet the peasantry tinkering with firearms resulted (indirectly or directly) in some of the worlds most vicious small arms.
And if you were to take the parts for a M1911 and have them unassembled, then assemble them without a firearms license--it's illegal.
Wat? Barring state law to the contrary, the only time a FFL (Or, technically, a serial number.) is required for building guns is:
A: I Wanna make sum moneh!
B: I want to make machine guns (Hello SOT fees.)
C: I wanna make some money!
Everything else is handled without paperwork of any kind, or through ATF form 1 in the case of wanting to build a silencer, short barreled rifle/shotgun, AOW, etc. Don't build anything that violates the National Firearms Act, or your local laws, and generally you're golden...Particularly that whole "Constructive posession" concept. Be real careful of that.
...All this said, if the 3d printing company doesn't want to partake, even though no laws have yet been broken, that's their deal. I think it's a bit overboard at this moment, but if you aren't breaching contract... plenty of competition out there for that sort of machine in the next few years.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/03 19:57:54
Kanluwen wrote: Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, North Carolina, New York, Minnesota (partial), Michigan, Massachussetts, Maryland, Iowa, and Hawaii all require permits to purchase handguns.
Yep. And in all but New Jersey and Illinois you can walk into Wal-mart and pick up a shotgun.
In all but two states, you do not need a "firearms license" to purchase a gun. In the overwhelming majority of states, you do not need a license of any sort to purchase non-selective fire handguns and long arms.
What does any of that have to do with firearms manufacturing, out of curiosity?
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Yeah, purchasing a weapon and building it yourself are 2 different things.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Wat? Barring state law to the contrary, the only time a FFL (Or, technically, a serial number.) is required for building guns is:
A: I Wanna make sum moneh!
B: I want to make machine guns (Hello SOT fees.)
C: I wanna make some money!
Everything else is handled without paperwork of any kind, or through ATF form 1 in the case of wanting to build a silencer, short barreled rifle/shotgun, AOW, etc.
Don't build anything that violates the National Firearms Act, or your local laws, and generally you're golden...Particularly that whole "Constructive posession" concept. Be real careful of that.
This is what I was driving at, but Kan unfortunately eschewed that line of questioning.
Honestly, I don't understand why people who are anti-gun do not know more about both firearms and the actual laws governing them. It's like trying to fight a war by going, "Intel? Get that away from me. I need to know nothing at all to win."
Kanluwen wrote: Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, North Carolina, New York, Minnesota (partial), Michigan, Massachussetts, Maryland, Iowa, and Hawaii all require permits to purchase handguns.
Yep. And in all but New Jersey and Illinois you can walk into Wal-mart and pick up a shotgun.
In all but two states, you do not need a "firearms license" to purchase a gun. In the overwhelming majority of states, you do not need a license of any sort to purchase non-selective fire handguns and long arms.
I understand this is complicated for you.
But bear with me.
Since you seem so insistent upon the "firearms license" idea, read the definition that I posted earlier. It can also be referred to as a "permit".
That list of states that I listed require permits to purchase handguns.
By the way:
Out of 50 states, there are 4 (Hawaii, Iowa, New Jersey, and Illinois) not 2 which require permits for longarms and handguns.
What does any of that have to do with firearms manufacturing, out of curiosity?
It's not "firearms manufacturing". The whole point of this is to make a distribution system that is not regulated in the same way.
The company which is doing the design work has made it abundantly clear that it is being done with the intent to arm any citizen who has "access to the Internet".
And since you so cutely tried to insinuate that I am "anti-gun", as the pro-gun lobby is so wont to do, I think I should make it abundantly clear that is not the case.
I'm pro-gun, but anti-conspiracy theorist nutjobs getting their hands on guns.
And this entire thing is a way for the second to happen. Seriously. Just look at the website for this venture.
