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

101–110 of 158 posts

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#101

Post by drone »

fr0sty wrote: post #52
drone wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did not "print a rifle", he printed what is known as a "stripped lower receiver," which is only a shell that holds the trigger assembly, magazine, grip, and provides a mount point for the buffer tube and two pin mounts for the upper receiver. The upper receiver and buffer tube/buffer spring are the objects which have the force primarily exerted on them.

In the eyes of the ATF he DID print a gun. The lower receiver is a 'gun' for the purposes of manufacturing. The upper receiver, buffer tube, trigger group, etc. are just parts...

I'm not sure what you're getting at. I think you're trying to be pedantic?

I said he didn't print a "rifle," you say "in the eyes of the ATF, he DID print a gun." I respond with, if you're being pedantic, he printed a "part which the BATFE classifies as a firearm requiring the stamping of a serial number should the manufacturer transfer it to any other individual." A part which, we all know, in and of its self is NOT a rifle.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#102

Post by danielweber »

lgbr wrote: post #97
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. 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.

Only with open carry.

It's possible that pulling out a gun may defuse a situation, but lots of people seem to think "I'll just wave my gun and it'll stop the people harassing me."

You should only pull out a gun if the situation, at that time, is dangerous enough to warrant pulling the trigger.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#103

Post by jarek »

lgbr wrote: post #97
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. 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.

> 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.

A purpose they are quite clearly failing at. So the question is what, if anything, citizens of the U.S.A. wish to do about the fact that, empirically, legality and availability of guns has not resulted in crime rates comparable to comparable states.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#104

Post by lgbr »

danielweber wrote: post #102
lgbr wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Only with open carry. It's possible that pulling out a gun may defuse a situation, but lots of people seem to think "I'll just wave my gun and it'll stop the people harassing me." You should only pull out a gun if the situation, at that time, is dangerous enough to warrant pulling the trigger.

A gun doesn't have to be visible to deter crime. Just the possibility of a victim having a gun is plenty of deterrence. I'd much rather burgle an Australian or English home than one in the US, given how many homes in the US have guns.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#105

Post by grecy »

mgarfias wrote: post #91
grecy wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> Bolt Action means less killing power?

I meant "less" because it's so much slower to reload.

I was not commenting on the "power" of the rifle/round itself.

Obviously, a muzzle loading .50 has lots of "power", but I'd wager you couldn't kill many people in a movie theater with one, as apposed to a semi-auto (of any caliber, really).

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#106

Post by nsxwolf »

mc32 wrote: post #89
derleth wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Peopple have figured out how to do this. 'This' being 'taking firearms away from people willing to obey the laws in the first place'. What's the problem with using that logic to take firearms away from criminals?

Because by definition, criminals do not obey the law. If arms were taken out of circulation, there would be none to obtain except via smuggling --which is time consuming, requires connections, is costly, etc. It would certainly require advanced planning to carry out. The criminal could not just go down to Sears and buy one or down to the seedy area of town and then do a stick up later in the day.

Except that soon you'll be able to just print the guns out at home.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#107

Post by nsxwolf »

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…

Sometimes the only way to stop a criminal trying to kill you is to kill him or her first. To do that you'll need a tool designed to kill things.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#108

Post by ChuckMcM »

mgarfias wrote: post #75
mgarfias wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. The lower is the only part of the assembled weapon upon which a serial # is applied and a tax is paid. It is also the # that is recorded on the Form 4473 at the dealer when you purchase the weapon. There is no federal level firearms registration (excepting NFA items), and only a few states that do so as well.

Oh, and if you build it yourself (as this person has done), no tax need be paid, no serial # need be applied, and all perfectly legal provided you have not been restricted from purchasing a weapon through normal channels. That is, a felon making a weapon is now a felon-in-possession, where a citizen with full rights making one has not committed a crime.

One of the things we did in my machining class was we built miniature brass cannons. They were .177 caliber (In the US that is a common size of BB). They were fully functional. You put in some gun powder, a bit of wadding, and a BB, then you could fire them by putting a match to the touch hole.

Somewhat difficult to wield in a gun fight though, not that we didn't occasionally imagine the students holding off an attack by firing a broadside from cannon of various quality :-)

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#109

Post by derleth »

drhayes9 wrote: post #95
derleth wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

My point is, once you try to determine the primary uses of certain things, you come to the conclusion that certain popular items are primarily useless and serve mainly to keep emergency rooms in business.

Re: Gunsmith Uses 3D Printer To Make A Rifle

#110

Post by derleth »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #99
derleth wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 co…

> What is the primary, if not only, use for a weapon?

What is the primary, if not only, use for a really fast motorcycle? Separating morons from any organs that can be salvaged after that final crash.

Post reply on HN