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

311–320 of 491 posts

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

#311

Post by scarecrowbob »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #217
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…

I have never lived in a country where people are allowed to keep guns. That scares the crap out of me. Not just because of random strangers. I went through a mental health crisis, and there was a dark time where if I had had a gun I would be dead now. No amount of lockers or safe boxes or mental health tests would have saved me from that gun. And wtf do you need a gun for anyway? I have never, not once, been in a sit…

Just because you seem genuinely curious I will say this:

Yeah, it scares the crap out of me too.

I'm queer and very far to the left politically, and my neighbors all have a lot of guns and if you listen to what they say they think that queer leftists deserve to be murdered just out of principle.

I am not under any illusion that firearms make any situation with the government better; I have been assaulted by DHS (pepper spray) and in that situation I am certain that going from being "non-compliant" to "violent" would result in being murdered by the government in short, short order.

However, I am very worried about situations where my neighbors (who are all very well armed and very far to the right and very excited about 'interruptions in regular government') become violent.

There are many, many historical and current precedents for that situation.

So although the best situation would be unilateral disarmament, that isn't going to happen in the rural west of the US.

All that said, what do you think my position is? Owning "sporting rifles" and training on self-defense with my cadre of trans folks and anarchists seems to be the more realistic strategy than just hoping the US doesn't get suddenly worse, especially given the path it has been taking at the federal level.

Personally, I'd much prefer to be running around playing with my ham radios but here we are.

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

#312

Post by subhobroto »

nitwit005 wrote: post #153
dole wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Killers are going to kill. Guns don't democratize it, just makes it easier. Maybe at best YOU could kill one or two: https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/16/china/china-stabbing-yixing-c... (8 stabbed to death) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenpeng_Village_Primary_Schoo... (1 killed, 24 injured) So they should stop you from 3d-printing knives too.

Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare. Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you. Traditionally, arson was the means of mass killing, as it didn't have either problem. That's gotten much more difficult due to fire safety.

> Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you

I won't argue this as this sounds entirely hypothetical but let me ask you this: if you saw someone stabbing people, would you volunteer to tackle them or would you choose to delegate?

One, a knife never runs out of bullets and never needs to reload. Second, a knife doesn't make a sound. I'm unsure of what training you have but a knife is absolutely the tool of choice up close even if you had a gun on you. One can fatally stab dozens of people in a concert without even being noticed or detected.

I can't make those assertions about a gun.

The point is, a gun in the U.S. has been a weapon of choice but in other countries where a gun is very hard to get, stabbings are equally dangerous and widespread. I have been reading about fatal stabbings in the U.K for a decade now.

It's almost as if evil people will use whichever tool they have at their disposal to hurt people and we are just making it more difficult for good people to defend themselves against the evil.

> Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare

I mention 5 myself below but there are more. What I find surprising is how the term "mass murder" seems to be applied almost exclusively when a gun is used, but rarely a knife.

If you look for "mass murder due to stabbing", the media almost never frames it with that terminology, whereas they would immediately use it if a firearm was involved for the exact same number of victims.

When people hear "mass murder", they likely think of hundreds of people dying instantaneously to a volley of bullets, but that's a distortion of what "mass murder" actually looks like in the U.S:

By standard definitions, a mass killing involves 4 or more fatalities. While "mass murders" using a gun get wall-to-wall media coverage, mass murders with a knife rarely make it past local news. If you think these devastating knife attacks are just a myth, here are a few recent ones you can look up right now:

- February 24, 2026: A 32-year-old man fatally stabbed four people at a residence in the Purdy/Gig Harbor area. Responding deputies shot and killed the suspect at the scene.

- July 19, 2024: A grandmother, a mother, and two children (ages 4 and 5) were fatally stabbed in their Bensonhurst apartment. A 24-year-old family member was arrested.

- March 27, 2024: A 22-year-old man went on a "frenzied" spree, killing four people and injuring seven others. The attack involved a knife, an aluminum bat and a vehicle.

- March 10, 2024: In a domestic murder-suicide, a father fatally stabbed his wife and three children (ages 10, 12, and 17) before killing himself. It was the deadliest mass killing in Hawaii since 1999.

- December 3, 2023: A 38-year-old man used a kitchen knife to kill four relatives, two children and two adults, and injured three others (including two police officers) before being shot by police.

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

#313

Post by rozal »

leptons wrote: post #303
rpmisms wrote: post #215

As an unabashed American, guns are amazing and an insanely important part of our national culture. Any attempt to diminish this is an attack on the culture of America. We are a nation of dangerous freedoms and matching individual responsibility. In order to maintain a functional country without ruining what makes America special, we need to simply actually enforce laws and I'll take apart in making our national cultu…

I wouldn't be proud of having so many guns and the highest rate of gun deaths by far in the developed world (except maybe countries currently at war). "Guns are amazing"? Really? Nevermind, I know someone just like you. He refuses to fly on an airplane because he can't bring his precious guns with him on the plane . So he's really never been anywhere outside of the midwest. He has no idea how other countries are. And…

[dead]

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

#314

Post by smelendez »

abtinf wrote: post #168
pfannkuchen wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not like a schizo conspiracy theory? Like why would the grocery chains fund the bag bans? So they can save a tiny amount of money on paying for bags? But having to bring your own bags limits how much you can buy. If someone has a plan to just use their own bags, they will likely forgo purchases at a higher rate than if the bag is not in the equation for them. It's not obvious to me that the buying limit effec…

The grocery chain campaign is well documented. Just search for it. The short answer is that bags are a non-trivial cost for the larger chains. Now, they get to charge for them at an astounding markup and no longer have to compete with any grocery store on this point. All grocery stores are affected equally, which means it is disproportionately damaging to mom-and-pop stores and smaller chains.

People here are talking about two kinds of laws: minimum bag charges and outright bag bans.

In some jurisdictions, a grocery store isn’t allowed to give you a traditional disposable bag at any price. In others, there’s either a bag tax or a minimum price, usually five or ten cents, a store must charge per bag.

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

#315

Post by kube-system »

Aurornis wrote: post #293
WillPostForFood wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He 3d printed the frame, but you need dozens of parts, milled or stamped from steel to complete it and have a working gun. Even the 3d printed frame needs steel inserts. It is like 3d printing a case, then buying a motherboard, CPU and RAM at Best Buy, and claiming your built a 3d printed computer. There is some appeal to criminals, because the frame is the part that gets the serial number and is regulated. But if yo…

I’m not in favor of 3D printer controls but I feel like most of this comment section is out of touch with how far the 3D printed gun nuts have come along. It was 13 years ago that the first major fully 3D printed firearm was released and even the ATF admitted that most of their reproduction attempts were capable of firing bullets at lethal velocities https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/11/feds-get-in-on-3... I’m…

The liberator is the “hello world” of 3d printed guns. It is just barely functional enough to technically exist but practically isn’t of much use.

The barrel is so short and non existent that it basically does nothing except hold the (metal) cartridge in place. A liberator isn’t much different than simply holding a cartridge in a fixture and hitting it with a hammer.

In a conventional gun, the barrel serves to allow the projectile to build velocity and stabilize the trajectory by putting a spin on it. The liberator does neither, so the projectile will be moving quite slow and will be inaccurate.

And also, they do commonly explode, even on the first shot. It’s a gamble.

“Lethal velocities” doesn’t really mean much. A slingshot can propel a bullet at lethal velocities. And that would probably be a more suitable option for criminals as it would be more reliable and have more rapid fire capability.

Now it might be a viable one-shot gamble for a criminal in a place where guns are entire forbidden. But in those places, it is typically not easy to get a real .380 cartridge, so it doesn’t really change much. And in the US, there are much easier ways for criminals to get much better guns.

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

#316

Post by ScoobleDoodle »

horsawlarway wrote: post #38

Personally, 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…

If you're a California constituent and inclined to take action you can find your California Assemblymember and Senator here ( https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ ) to voice opposition to California bill A.B. 2047 "Firearms: 3-dimensional printing blocking technology."

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

#318

Post by remarkEon »

Supermancho wrote: post #301
remarkEon wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Hobbyist or not, this makes it useful for getting guns (and other gear) from other people.

What I'm saying is that no one is going to build a lower in this manner for a firearm chambered in 7.62 and do anything useful/important with it. Maybe the cartridge size here is a distraction, idk, but this isn't a specification that I would consider common and/or useful for 3D printing a firearm. Even if your nominal intent is just to "finish" a gun with parts you have laying around, it's not going to be something that's consistently reliable.

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

#319

Post by remarkEon »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #300
remarkEon wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is technically possible, it is not that easy. In other words, someone who is technical and experienced enough to manually create a lower like that is very likely to have extensive experience with firearms anyway (and likely owns many).

You'd be surprised how motivated someone in a gang could get watching a ton of videos on youtube just to get access to a gun police cannot "trace" in a meaningful way.

I would not be surprised at how motivated a gang member is to acquire a firearm, no. So, I guess point taken, however a) I was responding to a claim that's slightly different from 3D printing lower receivers, and b) I thought YouTube banned/got rid of content that actually taught you how to do this? I have not looked in a long time. In any case, milling out a block of material on your own to function as a lower is going to take a lot of time and skill, so my original point still stands.

Separately, I am always a little confused by the idea that you cannot "trace" these firearms. Maybe people do not widely understand what's going on here, but the serial number being traced is on this lower receiver, which can be swapped out (in most but not all cases). If a firearm with a 3D printed lower is used in a crime, I have to assume - though I am not an expert - that you could still connect spent casings to that weapon in the same manner. In other words, it does not matter that the lower doesn't have a factory-installed serial number plate or a stamped serial number. My guess is that this confusion is being injected intentionally in the debate by the people who support/push these badly constructed laws.

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

#320

Post by marcus_holmes »

scarecrowbob wrote: post #311
marcus_holmes wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never lived in a country where people are allowed to keep guns. That scares the crap out of me. Not just because of random strangers. I went through a mental health crisis, and there was a dark time where if I had had a gun I would be dead now. No amount of lockers or safe boxes or mental health tests would have saved me from that gun. And wtf do you need a gun for anyway? I have never, not once, been in a sit…

Just because you seem genuinely curious I will say this: Yeah, it scares the crap out of me too. I'm queer and very far to the left politically, and my neighbors all have a lot of guns and if you listen to what they say they think that queer leftists deserve to be murdered just out of principle. I am not under any illusion that firearms make any situation with the government better; I have been assaulted by DHS (pepp…

Hey, my sympathies on your plight :(

I don't know what I'd do in a similar situation. Again, I don't see how carrying a gun could improve the situation, except possibly that if everyone on the left was also carrying then the folks on the right might get scared and begin to think more rationally about gun control.

Statistically, though, you're safer than they are. Guns are much more likely to kill their owners than anyone else [0], so while it's obviously scary, maybe the thought that your neighbours are less likely to kill you than themselves or each other brings some comfort?

[0] https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/160/10/929/140...

Post reply on HN