Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

webpronews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 158 posts

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#91

Post by mgarfias »

grecy wrote: post #68
angersock wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I resent your (probably intentional) choice of names. Were you trying to pick on rednecks/hicks? Anyways, most likely: he does nothing. Your option A is silly. First, 1000 rounds of .223 is fairly heavy (that's > 30 magazines of normal size). Second, "Unregistered"? "Unlicensed"? What good is paperwork going to do if he decides to shoot someone? We already have ( http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#background ) f…

> I resent your (probably intentional) choice of names. Were you trying to pick on rednecks/hicks? Apologies. I was trying to use a "generic" name. > Second, "Unregistered"? "Unlicensed"? What good is paperwork going to do if he decides to shoot someone? I expect he'll be less likely to kill people if he knows the weapon is tied to him. (and he might not have it in the first place, which is the case if I try to buy o…

Bolt Action means less killing power? WTF. You claim to be a hunter with an '06, yet you think a .223 is more powerful? The .30-06 is roughly 3x more powerful than the .223 fired by an AR15 which is really just a glorified varmint round.

I seriously doubt you really shoot/hunt/own weapons based on the statements you just made.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#92

Post by yason »

pielud wrote: post #48
grecy wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course. Let's pretend Billy Bob is a heated rage because he just found out so-and-so slept with so-and-so (or whatever). What's more likely? a) He walks around to so-and-sos house with his legally purchased, unlicensed, unregistered semi automatic assault rifle and 1000+ rounds, and kills the whole family, and anyone else unlucky enough to be nearby. or b) He spends days (weeks?) making his own gun, gunpowder and…

Why wouldn't he just grab a knife from his kitchen? Or run them down with his car? Or a bat? Or set their house on fire? Not having a gun isn't going to stop a person who wants to hurt someone else from doing it. It's just a tool.

He probably would but the probability of actually killing the victim would be much lower.

You can kill a lot more people more easily and more accidentally with a gun and also with quite a high probability compared to a knife. Guns just require one click to inflict a fatal wound if you know the tinies imaginable bit of knowledge of where to aim.

So you can just shoot another person off the bat but with a knife or another close-range weapon you have someone who realizes that a) you have a knife and b) you intend to fatally use it against him. That means combat.

I don't know which person attacked is more determined or more difficult to stop, a parent with kids or a person who's just running for life but they're both damn fucking hard. You will have to catch your victim first and if you just did, s/he will try nothing but escape again.

Now, with a knife (or a bat or...) you're likely to be able to wound that other person but actually killing him/her always requires an extra mile. All kinds of odds are stacked against not only the victim but the attacker as well, and as stabbing requires an intimate range and takes time, the outcome is far from certain unless you're really, really good.

I'd much rather be attacked by an amateur knifer than an amateur gunner.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#93

Post by JabavuAdams »

mc32 wrote: post #44
grecy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the United States ever got serious about banning firearms, a massive homebrew industry would grow up overnight. Do you have any stats or experience to back that up? It might happen, but you are stating as fact something that's not been tested. Anecdotally, in Australia where gun laws are very strict, it's difficult to get firearms. Yes, serious hardened criminals still get their hands on them, which certainly is…

I think you're right. Japan which has a very strict sword and firearms law, afaik, has not seen a "homebrew" industry spruot since they passed the laws back in the '70s. And, it's not as though there are no criminals. The Yak syndicates are not, on principle, against the use of guns --they do occasionally used smuggled guns to settle things. Now, Japan does allow some kinds of firearms, typically to farmers and such…

Japan has a completely different culture from the US (obviously). You can't ignore the effects of such different attitudes towards individualism, income disparity, acceptable levels of violence, and trust in government. Never mind that the US is a multicultural society, whereas Japan isn't really.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#94

Post by Wilya »

WiseWeasel wrote: post #62
mc32 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But people need to get to places. People don't need guns for daily survival. Japan annually sees double digit gun-deaths. In the US we see triple digit accidental gun deaths.

There is still a significant number of people in the US who hunt for subsistence, or to supplement their diet. If you live in rural Alaska, you might rely on your gun for daily survival in a very real and immediate sense. Some cynics might say the same for Compton or Detroit.

In quite a few countries where weapons are heavily regulated, you can get a permit. The structure obviously depends on the country, but if you have a genuine reason (mostly hunting or sport) and satisfy some basic requirements (no criminal record, mentally sane, etc), getting a reasonable weapon is possible.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#95

Post by drhayes9 »

derleth wrote: post #74
drhayes9 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things. Whenever I see arguments about how we should ban cars because they kill more people than guns per year, I always think about that. Cars are good for all kinds of things, and they happen to incidentally cause death. Guns are pretty much only good for killing things. I live in the U.S. I'm not saying we should uniformly ban all weapons, period; I think the issue…

> To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things. If you ignore all of the other recreational uses, sure; you can also say that motorcycles only have one use: To kill people who ride them and the people those riders hit.

Are you lobbying for the restriction of vehicles? Or are you making a point by analogy with guns that I'm missing?

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#96

Post by sneak »

To be clear: he made a lower receiver, a very simple part and the one that has the serial number stamped onto it, it is the "gun" part as far as the legal authorities are concerned.

Every other part (upper receiver, barrel, magazine, trigger, hammer, etc) are just "parts" that one can order untracked.

Making an entire functional weapon is still beyond the scope of most inexpensive printers.

http://www.quora.com/3D-Printing/How-much-does-it-cost-today... (my question about this on Quora.)

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#97

Post by lgbr »

drhayes9 wrote: post #58
nitrogen wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a murder rate twice any other developed country[1], the United States clearly has a serious violence problem, and taking guns out of the hands of the average Joe would surely help reduce it. The second clause does not follow from the first. Murder in the US is heavily demographically biased, and most gun owners are not murderers. Furthermore, will you be the one going door to door to collect everyone's firearms?…

To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things. Whenever I see arguments about how we should ban cars because they kill more people than guns per year, I always think about that. Cars are good for all kinds of things, and they happen to incidentally cause death. Guns are pretty much only good for killing things. I live in the U.S. I'm not saying we should uniformly ban all weapons, period; I think the issue…

> To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things.

I disagree. A gun's primary use for law abiding citizens is that it intimidates things. The most effective way to use a gun is simply to deter crime.

You wouldn't say that the reason the United States and the Soviet Union stockpiled nuclear weapons was because they wanted to level each others' cities. It was simply deterrence.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#98

Post by joshuahedlund »

drhayes9 wrote: post #58
nitrogen wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a murder rate twice any other developed country[1], the United States clearly has a serious violence problem, and taking guns out of the hands of the average Joe would surely help reduce it. The second clause does not follow from the first. Murder in the US is heavily demographically biased, and most gun owners are not murderers. Furthermore, will you be the one going door to door to collect everyone's firearms?…

To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things. Whenever I see arguments about how we should ban cars because they kill more people than guns per year, I always think about that. Cars are good for all kinds of things, and they happen to incidentally cause death. Guns are pretty much only good for killing things. I live in the U.S. I'm not saying we should uniformly ban all weapons, period; I think the issue…

Neither risk can be realistically eliminated regardless of your personal assessment of what they're good for. The question is simply whether or not we've reduced the risk enough that society finds the current level more acceptable than the marginal costs of attempting to reduce it even further. The car argument is saying that the risk of guns is already so much lower than cars that it seems unreasonable to think the former is still at an unacceptable level, but not the latter.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#99

Post by loup-vaillant »

derleth wrote: post #74
drhayes9 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things. Whenever I see arguments about how we should ban cars because they kill more people than guns per year, I always think about that. Cars are good for all kinds of things, and they happen to incidentally cause death. Guns are pretty much only good for killing things. I live in the U.S. I'm not saying we should uniformly ban all weapons, period; I think the issue…

> To be fair, this tool has only one use: it kills things. If you ignore all of the other recreational uses, sure; you can also say that motorcycles only have one use: To kill people who ride them and the people those riders hit.

What is the primary, if not only, use for a weapon? That's hurting, killing, and threatening. Goals can be eating, revenge, crime deterrence, whatever. But the primary use of a weapon always did come from its ability to harm and kill.

I bet most pro-gun Americans would agree with me. They want a weapon to defend themselves. How? By threatening to hurt or kill, of course. They're not going to propose a foam sword contest to someone they deem dangerous to their property, their lives, or their families.

Recreational use? It sure counts. But if we suddenly ban weapons in the US, there won't be riots over a hobby. It will be over the ability to threaten with death when you need it for self defence.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#100

Post by InclinedPlane »

reitzensteinm wrote: post #34
ef4 wrote: post #26

Any competent machinist can make functional semiautomatic weapons. This is just the next step in making it even easier. If the United States ever got serious about banning firearms, a massive homebrew industry would grow up overnight. Gunpowder is not fundamentally harder to make than methamphetamine. People who quite rightly see our drug laws as pointless and ineffective somehow often miss that a gun ban would be no…

> People who quite rightly see our drug laws as pointless and ineffective somehow often miss that a gun ban would be no more effective in the United States. As an outsider, this is one of the most irrational things about American politics to me. Talk about guns, then talk about drugs, and each of the two major parties literally adopts the arguments of the other. Then again, it's a perfectly rational system from the p…

What's even more hilarious, about gun laws, is that the same folks who tell you that the entire system is corrupt (that you can't trust the military or the police because they're just a bunch of power hungry savages) are the ones who think that only the police and the military should be able to use guns. Not a very logically consistent worldview.
Post reply on HN