Reason #5382 to not live in California.
The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
171–180 of 491 posts
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
[Primers are a legitimately difficult thing to manufacture] thats a problem that may not endure. if a firearm is reengineered to use an electrode to detonate charge rather than a chemical primer, there is no need for murcury fulminate, just a piezo electric spark generator, and a few square cm of cerebral cortex.
Electronic primers are a thing that already exists commercially. In the early 2000s, Remington sold electronically primed hunting rifles next to their non-electronic equivalent (see: "EtronX"). It is a mature technology. The main issue is cost and simplicity, since it often requires adding electronics to weapons that normally would not require them. The military uses electronically primed cartridges for things like c…
yes ive seen them they are called exotic by most people around me.
yes the very nature of a chain cannon, makes electronic priming,the easier way to go.
so far we can still go to the store with 20$ and come back with a 200pk of 209s, someday that might be not so easy, and electronic is the better/only way.
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#173Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…
> You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. Why would you buy a pipe at Home Depot? A gun barrel is not a firearm, and is not required to be registered or serialized. You can drive to Arizona or Nevada and buy an actual barrel, with rifling, manufactured to meet well-known specifications, without showing an ID.…
For the adventurous, there may be a desire for all-plastic construction. Print a cylinder in high-temp filament, wrap it in CF tow, ream to size.
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#174Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…
> any real attempt to regulate guns Any real attempt would need to be at the national level, not that I would advocate for it, but it's simply a pipe dream to create a "gun free zone" in a country with 100s of millions of firearms. There are plenty of gun enthusiasts in California, they just don't flaunt it or talk about it.
A gun-free zone is not such a good idea, much like an encryption-free zone would be, or an alcohol-free zone (the latter has been tried).
I would rather go for Swiss-stye mandatory gun training, and keeping a gun in (almost) every home. But, like the Swiss, I would require not just storing the gun in a certified safe box, but also providing an ID + a proof of mental sanity, and registering the gun. That would raise a much larger wave of protest though, both from the "left" and the "right". Even though, IMHO, it's the only sane way.
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Omitting subtractive methods makes it rather toothless, since there have been places you can go to push a button to start a mill making you a receiver (which is the part that is considered "the gun" to address ship-of-theseus questions aboug guns), then you can add the other parts yourself.
I believe these events/places where folks were pressing a button to go from billet to receiver were shut down by BATFE some years ago (see ATF Ruling 2015-1 - https://www.atf.gov/media/19161/download ) > An FFL or unlicensed machine shop may also desire to make available its machinery (e.g., a computer numeric control or "CNC" machine), tools, or equipment to individuals who bring in raw materials, blanks, unfinished…
Thanks for the correction. I haven't really been following this stuff closely.
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
[Primers are a legitimately difficult thing to manufacture] thats a problem that may not endure. if a firearm is reengineered to use an electrode to detonate charge rather than a chemical primer, there is no need for murcury fulminate, just a piezo electric spark generator, and a few square cm of cerebral cortex.
Electronic primers are a thing that already exists commercially. In the early 2000s, Remington sold electronically primed hunting rifles next to their non-electronic equivalent (see: "EtronX"). It is a mature technology. The main issue is cost and simplicity, since it often requires adding electronics to weapons that normally would not require them. The military uses electronically primed cartridges for things like c…
What advantage do they have over chemical primers?
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#177Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…
> So my assumption is immediately that some relatively large lobbying group feels threatened by 3d printing... I'd say the real groups behind this are the anti-gun ideologues, the "do whatever it takes to stop my panic attacks over Bad Things maybe happening" left-wing control freaks, and the old-fashioned "big state" authoritarian crowd. And the only reason they're paying attention to 3d printers is that some pro-gu…
Or the gun lobby isn't really happy that anyone can "print" a gun.
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#178I'm surprised the EFF didn't address the issue that traditional printer manufacturers already comply with law enforcement, specifically that a fingerprint of yellow tracking dots [1] are printed and printers will often refuse to or fail to copy images of money. My point is there's already precedent for printers cooperating with authorities so one can see this as simply an extension to 3D printer manufacturers. I susp…
The bottom of that wiki page has links to EFF pages. However you are correct that they view it as a lost battle:
(Added 2015) Some of the documents that we previously received through FOIA suggested that all major manufacturers of color laser printers entered a secret agreement with governments to ensure that the output of those printers is forensically traceable. Although we still don't know if this is correct, or how subsequent generations of forensic tracking technologies might work, it is probably safest to assume that all modern color laser printers do include some form of tracking information that associates documents with the printer's serial number. (If any manufacturer wishes to go on record with a statement to the contrary, we'll be happy to publish that here.)
(Added 2017) REMINDER: IT APPEARS LIKELY THAT ALL RECENT COMMERCIAL COLOR LASER PRINTERS PRINT SOME KIND OF FORENSIC TRACKING CODES, NOT NECESSARILY USING YELLOW DOTS. THIS IS TRUE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE CODES ARE VISIBLE TO THE EYE AND WHETHER OR NOT THE PRINTER MODELS ARE LISTED HERE. THIS ALSO INCLUDES THE PRINTERS THAT ARE LISTED HERE AS NOT PRODUCING YELLOW DOTS.
This list is no longer being updated.Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Electronic primers are a thing that already exists commercially. In the early 2000s, Remington sold electronically primed hunting rifles next to their non-electronic equivalent (see: "EtronX"). It is a mature technology. The main issue is cost and simplicity, since it often requires adding electronics to weapons that normally would not require them. The military uses electronically primed cartridges for things like c…
What advantage do they have over chemical primers?
mechanical parts only move so fast, heat up and wear.
when you have a chain cannon rof 100 rnds per second, it gets intense.
a spark discharge solves a lot of kinetic issues with engineering the mechanism and its timing.
Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing
#180Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…
square tubes is the solution