US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans • Hacker News Board

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#91

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Fri, May 10, 2013, 10:27 AM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #64

huhtenberg wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be a better way to handle this situation? (edit) I'm not saying that this is the best option. The government is tasked with ensuring public safety and this is an issue with major public safety repercussions. They cannot just sit and watch this unfold, and what this guy said is basically the most obvious way of dealing with the situation.

It is not. Nobody was threatened with this, nobody will ever be threatened with this. This thing is un-concealable and unusable as a real-life weapon in any public safety scenario. If you think anybody with this prototype can threaten public safety you are badly mistaken. The idea that any time anything new happens the government should jump in and prohibit it until it is proven safe is exactly why politicians like t…

> This thing is un-concealable and unusable as a real-life weapon in any public safety scenario

True. My worry is that this is just the v0.1 and it is the shape of things to come. Desktop CNC milling machines are also getting better rapidly and can make metal parts. ( http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/otherfab/the-othermill-c... ).

Designing this gun was clearly an asshole move, but how do you prohibit it now? Cory Doctrow said something along the lines of DRM is "allowing a general-purpose computer to run any program except for the ones that I don't like". (http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html )

A 3d printer or cnc mill that can make anything "except for the shapes that I don't like" is equally laughable.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#92

Post by misnome » Fri, May 10, 2013, 10:28 AM UTC

gadders wrote: post #87

huhtenberg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing that one can carry it through the airport security easily enough. It's not that it's printed, it's the fact that it's printed in plastic .

How do you transport the bullets?

That's a different issue. Smuggling a small bullet past any security has got to be way easier than an entire gun.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#93

Post by jbester » Fri, May 10, 2013, 10:48 AM UTC

Keep in mind, ITAR and AECA regulations are concerned with export weapons and weapons systems to non-US entities. The munitions list (USML) includes everything from guns to airplanes. The regulations themselves go well beyond physical assets and include related software, documentation and design drawings. It is likely DEFCAD, if they survive any fines, could reopen if they can somehow verify the downloader does not require an export license.

This is the same set of regulations Robert Gates famously complained[1] restricted the export of F16 spare parts from the US. This platforms has been widely exported and this regulation applies to non-weapons related components i.e., canopy latches, flaps, etc.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/world/21export.html?_r=0

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#94

Post by mordae » Fri, May 10, 2013, 10:55 AM UTC

From here it looks like in two years it will be completely possible to arm thousands of people on a large demonstration without law enforcement being able to step in. It might add some weight to peoples' opinion on CISPA, INDECT and other fascist inventions as they walk towards the parliament. And that's talking about first world.

Remember Athens, Egypt? Try imagining it a few years from now. People will have affordable real-time mesh communication networks, high quality urban mapping, printed guns and home-made explosives. How exactly would you suppress crowd like that? I say with understanding and empathy, because anything else will hurt.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#95

Post by yummyfajitas » Fri, May 10, 2013, 10:57 AM UTC

huhtenberg wrote: post #78

smsm42 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been to any US airport recently? These guys grab my freaking nuts and touch me in places that usually only myself and my wife are allowed to access. And you say it'd be easy to get through them a piece of a size of a large brick without them noticing? Do you know what mayhem an explosive of a similar volume could create? Something does not add up here with your theory.

You put it in a bag, obviously. As a bonus, you redesign it into larger number of smaller pieces and spread them over several bags. You can stick your head in a sand as much as you want, but this is a game-changing development. If one can print a working gun, one can conceivably print other interesting things that to date were assumed to only exist in metal, the assumption that was the foundation of respective detect…

You put it in a bag, obviously.

You mean the bag that goes through an X-Ray scanner which detects high density objects?

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#96

Post by stelonix » Fri, May 10, 2013, 10:59 AM UTC

gjulianm wrote: post #73

smsm42 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize you just described the same process twice, only in different terms to appeal to different emotions? It's not like 3d-printed gun does not require design, does not need materials, does not require assembly and is guaranteed to work. And yes, controlling sale of basic chemicals on the premise that this somehow prevents criminals from using them for their nefarious goals is silly. The US government does it r…

You don't have to understand the design of the printed gun. You don't need to search materials apart from the big block of plastic to print and the percutor needle. The difficulty level is completely different. And I didn't say that I'm for controlled sale of basic chemicals. I said that the idea of not controlling 3d-printer gun designs because "you can also make your gun at home" is silly.

What I don't understand from you (and most anti-3D-printed-guns) is why you think it should be controlled in the first place?

Even if you somehow found a compelling argument, the kind of control you're asking for is impossible. It's like trying to stop piracy with DRM: you're gonna piss off users and someone is just going to break your "controlled environment" in the end.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#97

Post by vy8vWJlco » Fri, May 10, 2013, 11:02 AM UTC

"In Canada, it is legal to download the instructions, but there is a question of whether Canadians can legally print the components."

(from http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2013/05/09/technolog... )

That's not especially significant in itself either, only somewhat reassuring for any Canuckois out there wishing to download the models.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#98

Post by Turing_Machine » Fri, May 10, 2013, 11:03 AM UTC

ck2 wrote: post #32

What's going to be hilarious is when the NRA works against homemade guns because they don't actually represent gun owners but gun manufacturers and people finally start getting the point of lobbyists. Going to get some popcorn and watch y'all fight each other over who gets to have the most toys to accidentally kill their friends and family with.

"because they don't actually represent gun owners but gun manufacturers"

And your evidence for this would be?

Be specific.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#99

Post by jaibot » Fri, May 10, 2013, 11:34 AM UTC

stelonix wrote: post #96

gjulianm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to understand the design of the printed gun. You don't need to search materials apart from the big block of plastic to print and the percutor needle. The difficulty level is completely different. And I didn't say that I'm for controlled sale of basic chemicals. I said that the idea of not controlling 3d-printer gun designs because "you can also make your gun at home" is silly.

What I don't understand from you (and most anti-3D-printed-guns) is why you think it should be controlled in the first place? Even if you somehow found a compelling argument, the kind of control you're asking for is impossible . It's like trying to stop piracy with DRM: you're gonna piss off users and someone is just going to break your "controlled environment" in the end.

But you'll still stop _most instances_ of would-be piracy - the 14-year-old kids hanging out at a park, unable to _easily_ send a movie from one smartphone to another. Not impossible - just hard enough to not bother.

You can't absolutely stop 3D printing of dangerous artifacts. But you can lower the appeal by increasing penalties, requiring the party to take more steps to avoid being caught, attaching a strong social stigma to the practice.

It's physically impossible to keep someone from barreing their car at 80mph down the wring side of the highway into oncoming traffic, but this is one among countless potential potential disasters we almost never see in practice. It is worth considering why such things happen as rarely as they do.

Re: US Government Takes Down 3D Printed Gun Plans

#100

Post by gjulianm » Fri, May 10, 2013, 11:36 AM UTC

stelonix wrote: post #96

gjulianm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to understand the design of the printed gun. You don't need to search materials apart from the big block of plastic to print and the percutor needle. The difficulty level is completely different. And I didn't say that I'm for controlled sale of basic chemicals. I said that the idea of not controlling 3d-printer gun designs because "you can also make your gun at home" is silly.

What I don't understand from you (and most anti-3D-printed-guns) is why you think it should be controlled in the first place? Even if you somehow found a compelling argument, the kind of control you're asking for is impossible . It's like trying to stop piracy with DRM: you're gonna piss off users and someone is just going to break your "controlled environment" in the end.

I think that 3D-printed-guns should be controlled because, even when I'd like to think that everybody is responsible and there isn't need for control, I know there are dumb or bad people who can harm themselves and others using this. I think that every gun (3D printed or not) should be controlled because of that same reason.

Now, how can we control it? I don't really know. I'm not for DRM. I'm not for controlling 3D printers, or 3D materials. And making an automated system so 3D printers don't print guns is infeasible, error-prone and a hassle. Maybe the best alternative is leaving those 3D printed guns uncontrolled, because any other option is ineffective.

The fact that 3D printed guns control is infeasible doesn't mean that leaving them uncontrolled is a good idea.