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

Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

techworld.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 55 posts

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#31

Post by angersock »

RealGeek wrote: post #25
k-mcgrady wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm less laid back regarding this than most of the people in this thread (I think it is a problem) but your comment is ridiculous. First of all what has this got to do with bombs? It's a story about a home made gun. Also: Terrorism: The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Until someone uses this to cause terror it isn't terrorism. >> "I see someone creating guns and killing people to be…

This gun is godsend for terrorists. It is a gun that you can easily create at home, and it can be carried on planes and other high risk places without detection. This is even better than bombs for terrorism. Additionally, mass murders with guns kill more people in US than terrorism. Why shouldn't we classify New Town and Aurora shooting as terrorism? Terrorism is not only about politics. Moreover, guns are probably t…

Better than bombs for terrorism? Tell that to the plane hijackers of 911 or to McVeigh.

You're not making any sense. Why are you so scared of guns?

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#32

Post by chiph »

marshray wrote: post #23

Is it possible to make a worse gun? I.e., a higher ratio of danger-to-shooter to danger-to-target.

Of course - if you build a zip gun and use a barrel that isn't seamless (it was bent & welded into it's tube shape) you'll have a bad time. There's also guns like the Lorcin -- it's made from pot metal and is as dangerous to the wielder as it is to the target. There's no point in buying more than one box of ammo for it...

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#33

Post by C1D »

nsxwolf wrote: post #19
orangekawi wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better still, did they mention what ammunition was used? Police typically use +P+ ammunition, especially in smaller calibers like .32 and .380. I have no doubt that the original inventor used standard pressure loads or even sub sonics to decrease the chance of a failure such as this. In the end the gun was a POC anyways, designed to show what could be done. What I find more disconcerting is the continue emphasis on h…

Defense Distributed added a piece of steel to the final build to make it detectible and legal. It's entirely possible most metal detectors won't pick it up. Anecdote: I went to traffic court years ago, and after exiting the courthouse stuck my hand in my pocket and realized I had forgotten to remove a handful of .22 LR cartridges. They did not activate the detector.

They did add a piece of steel to the build but you can build it with out adding in the metal. They added that to the instructions so it could be detectable and legal but it was obvious that any one could just not add in the metal.

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#34

Post by waffle_ss »

ck2 wrote: post #7

I am not sure why we care about people making plastic guns when they can make full-auto AK47s that are not traceable in the slightest. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/ak-47-semi-autom...

The guy in the article didn't build a full-auto AK-47, although he did commit a couple felonies along the way[1]. First, he mounted the magazine lock too too far back, which allows the magazine to be detached without the use of a tool - a felony in California on a semi-auto rifle with a pistol grip. Secondly, he says

    Back in my garage I use a grinding wheel to cut the receiver in half and the other components into pieces. I put the scraps back in the cardboard box the kit came in and leave it for the garbage truck.
This is an improper demill. To demill a receiver you must cut it into three pieces. Therefore, when he left the receiver out for the garbage truck he effectively transferred his rifle to the garbage truck without going through an FFL, which is another felony.

Finally, the process for actually obtaining or building a fully automatic rifle (assuming it's not outlawed by your state) is arduous and expensive. The short answer is that you have to go through extensive background checks by the FBI and BATFE in order to get a $200 NFA tax stamp, which takes months to be approved for. You also have to get a signature from your local sheriff, who can just decide he/she doesn't want you to have one if they wish (alternatively, you can go to a lawyer to set up a special trust to assign NFA devices to). Finally, the actual cost for a select-fire AK receiver, of which there are limited supply as they have to have been registered with the ATF before May 19, 1986 (and there are no more being manufactured for civilian use), is between $15-20K (here's a current gunbroker auction[2] for reference). For a longer description of this whole process see: http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/MediaPages/ArticleDetail.aspx...

[1]: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=767020

[2]: http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=34324298...

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#35

Post by mseebach »

RealGeek wrote: post #9
jgoewert wrote: post #2

I can understand the worry about 3d printed weapons, but I don't see much of a difference between this an a zipgun besides that a common zipgun uses a metal tube for a barrel so it would show up on a metal detector. I am completely disinterested in any of the fearmongering about this weapon. There is no way to hold back technology to prevent violence, we just need to accept that and deal with not being asshats to eac…

So is it perfectly acceptable to kill people with home made guns and bombs for the progression of technology? This is actually terrorism. I see someone creating guns and killing people to be no different than boston bombers.

Yeah, you're right. The Oklahoma City bomb was homemade, and as we all recall, for that reason it was widely considered a completely justified bombing.

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#36

Post by InclinedPlane »

RealGeek wrote: post #9
jgoewert wrote: post #2

I can understand the worry about 3d printed weapons, but I don't see much of a difference between this an a zipgun besides that a common zipgun uses a metal tube for a barrel so it would show up on a metal detector. I am completely disinterested in any of the fearmongering about this weapon. There is no way to hold back technology to prevent violence, we just need to accept that and deal with not being asshats to eac…

So is it perfectly acceptable to kill people with home made guns and bombs for the progression of technology? This is actually terrorism. I see someone creating guns and killing people to be no different than boston bombers.

The answer is obvious. Is it ok to kill someone with a kitchen knife, or a frying pan? What world do you live in where these answers aren't obvious?

Your comment adds no value to this discussion whatsoever.

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#38

Post by mseebach »

RealGeek wrote: post #25
k-mcgrady wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm less laid back regarding this than most of the people in this thread (I think it is a problem) but your comment is ridiculous. First of all what has this got to do with bombs? It's a story about a home made gun. Also: Terrorism: The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Until someone uses this to cause terror it isn't terrorism. >> "I see someone creating guns and killing people to be…

This gun is godsend for terrorists. It is a gun that you can easily create at home, and it can be carried on planes and other high risk places without detection. This is even better than bombs for terrorism. Additionally, mass murders with guns kill more people in US than terrorism. Why shouldn't we classify New Town and Aurora shooting as terrorism? Terrorism is not only about politics. Moreover, guns are probably t…

A gun on a plane is widely useless post 9-11. One of the sane responses to those attacks was a requirement that bullet proof cockpit doors be installed on all aircrafts.

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#39

Post by cobrausn »

corresation wrote: post #22
ck2 wrote: post #7

I am not sure why we care about people making plastic guns when they can make full-auto AK47s that are not traceable in the slightest. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/ak-47-semi-autom...

Most people fail putting an Ikea cabinet together. You cannot compare a simple print job with custom construction (even a zip gun is beyond the skills or available tools of many people). 3D printers are currently rare and expensive, however they are bound to become mainstream and inexpensive very quickly. When every angsty teenager has the capability to print a gun simply by hitting "print" with the $69 3D printer in…

Some guns are useful as clubs without the bullets, but this one is just useless. Unless that same angsty teenager can also acquire bullets, there isn't really a problem - the legal age to purchase ammo is (as far as I know) the same as purchasing guns.

Re: Australian police issue warning on 3D printed guns

#40

Post by C1D »

This is very scared as 3D printers are becoming cheaper soon any one could print out a gun with litte effort. As people said, you can create your own guns but whats different is this takes little work which any one could do. This could be a world problem as soon as 3D printers become mainstream, especially in countries with tight gun regulation.
Post reply on HN