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

The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 491 posts

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#261

Post by lynndotpy »

nine_k wrote: post #174
hypeatei wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> a proof of mental sanity

A "proof of mental sanity" would be a far more concerning overreach than 3D printer bans or gun bans, especially as we see things which are mandatory in a society become something tantamount to personhood. I don't really know how one would even envision implementing such a thing.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#262

Post by lazide »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #209
mjmas wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> was a thing Still a thing in Australia.

I never understood banning nunchucks. They kind of ban themselves. If you've ever been a kid copying TMNT Michelangelo with home made nunchucks you've almost certainly smacked yourself in the face. Y'know what's martially better than two sticks with a string between them? A single big stick.

Cuz ninja, of course.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#263

Post by elephanlemon »

iwontberude wrote: post #105
favorited wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.…

Like everything in the United States, it’s actually gun manufacturers that want to clamp down on this cottage industry which threatens their profits. I don’t buy for a second that this is some gun control attempt.

Any gun company caught funding anything remotely anti-2A would be met with an unbelievably negative reaction from the firearms community and face boycotts and massive reputational damage. It absolutely would not be worth it for them to do this. I can maybe see the arguments that perhaps it’s really a proxy for the anti right to repair groups, but absolutely not the firearms manufacturers.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#264

Post by lynndotpy »

subhobroto wrote: post #8

I don't understand the problem solving mindset that thinks banning guns would solve the problem of a person intent on causing harm. In the U.K., where I feel guns are only showpieces (do even cops have them?), stabbing is a known problem. In India, where ammo is way more expensive than machetes and knives, people are literally murdered with them. The only argument I can understand, when it comes to banning guns, is t…

I'm not in the interest of rehashing decades of the same arguments about guns in society on HackerNews, and per Poe's law, I can't actually tell if you're sincere or not. Assuming you are, it bears summary:

You basically have it with "it reduces the blast radius". Guns are a great tool for damaging soft tissue to the point of death. Gun control advocates believe, with less access to guns, people will kill less.

It is also worth adding that most gun deaths in thbe US are from suicides. Means reduction is well-understood as a way to decrease suicides.

> So what's next, lock down the air, radio, roads, internet, water, food supply chains because these are all attack vectors?

We don't need to get stuck in a hypothetical, since we can look at other countries and see how they manage these public goods. Guns are unique in that they're exclusively for killing, and provide scant other value outside sport.

Notably, nowhere that had success in tighter gun regulation needed to censor 3D printing. This legislation is something 'both sides' of the gun debate should be able to get behind and oppose. There is very little potential benefit for the cause of "gun control", and very much potential harm.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#265

Post by linksnapzz »

rolph wrote: post #16
asdff wrote: post #3

Why don't these bills go after ammo or gunpowder access? Seems as long as you have access to a cylinder, and ammunition, you can make a gun.

blackpowder is just barely chemistry, more like engineering. carbon, sulphur, and potassium nitrate, in a particular ratio. potassium nitrate is watched, and reported in large quantities, or particular form, but can be manufactured by most people that can follow a recipe. regulating the propellant cant stop it from being made. also someone really didnt think it through by regulating "receivers" they regulated what is…

Sigh. None of the ammunition used in modern (i.e. made in the past 125 years) uses black powder propellant.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#266

Post by nine_k »

lynndotpy wrote: post #261
nine_k wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> a proof of mental sanity A "proof of mental sanity" would be a far more concerning overreach than 3D printer bans or gun bans, especially as we see things which are mandatory in a society become something tantamount to personhood. I don't really know how one would even envision implementing such a thing.

Can you get a driver's license if you're visibly insane? The same standard should apply to getting a gun. A gun is comparably lethal.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#267

Post by rolph »

linksnapzz wrote: post #258
rolph wrote: post #111

Earlier 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.

AFAIK, nobody uses fulminate of mercury in primers anymore.

its a good thing too, it not very stable, and mercury is not nice.

but its not difficult to manufacture, if we are in the scenario of shortage or absconderance of products.

lead styphnate is common use, but not everyone is happy with lead either. i have a couple boxes of non lead primers, they smell different when they go off but i havnt encountered noticible difference compared to lead primers.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#268

Post by esseph »

iwontberude wrote: post #105
favorited wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.…

Like everything in the United States, it’s actually gun manufacturers that want to clamp down on this cottage industry which threatens their profits. I don’t buy for a second that this is some gun control attempt.

> Like everything in the United States, it’s actually gun manufacturers that want to clamp down on this cottage industry which threatens their profits.

I have 0 reason to believe this.

That is some pretty wild speculation, and a terribly risky proposition for any company because they would instantly get blackballed by the 2a community.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#269

Post by robot-wrangler »

nickff wrote: post #101
favorited wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.…

The device the parent is describing has a long history, and they're known as 'zip guns'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_firearm

Quite a page. Featuring the work of ted k and a toy pop-gun that's un-toyed

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#270

Post by [deleted] »

remarkEon wrote: post #233
sheikhnbake wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3D gun printing has come a long way in a short amount of time. 3D printed lower receivers can weather several hundred rounds of 7.62 at this point

That makes it useful for a hobbyist, but it is by no means a replacement for a properly manufactured lower.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN