Live data from Hacker News

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

eff.org

371–380 of 491 posts

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

#371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you not imagine any motives that a person could have for printing a gun where they don't care about long term reliability?

Sure, I can imagine any number of motives and Rube Goldberg mechanisms for procuring a firearm to service that motive. My point is that if someone who is desperate to get a firearm has to 3D print one they’re going to pick a simple pistol lower. Not something for a rifle that fires a higher power cartridge. Most rifles that fire 7.62 are not in the AR format.

You don't think someone like Oswald exists in the present day?

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

#372

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…

Although people point out the occam's razor or whatever, i dont think this is true. As it happens with "protect children", "protect people" is the next blabbering speech to trick people accepting lobbied practices. Someone needs to track who is financing this stuff and I think it will make it much clearer. PS: I wouldnt be surprised if it was disney or something

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

#373
Its a reeling of the lawmakers against reality itself. If you read Jules Verne- you always could find and make dangerous chemicals from natural substances and thus by the power of chemistry - you where suddenly a owner of nitroglycerin and owner of a dangerous "substance".

So, the danger is in pre-emptive policing- aka capability reduction. In its extremes it results in what china does- which is producing dangerous objects on mass (every shop has a lathe that can make a gun) - while constantly looking over each other shoulders to see who might ferment revolution or amok. Same with chemistry. Same with software. The panopticon as patchwork counter measure to accumulating dangerous capabilities.

But it can not go much further. If you have a psychological normal individual that buckles under stress and hand it a photon torpedo- the spaceship goes boom. You need "unrealistic" humans, the angles of star trek to be able to handle that sort of capability. Its a whole group of problems, which started with nuclear power. Basically, the material science on humans and organizations is lousy - and the stress tests showed that we fall apart under duress.

Which is why california tries to limit it, while at the same time idealizing human nature as benevolent and at the same time driving onwards technologies, which wind up the lethal mouse-trap of capabilities with ever more potent dangers. Which as paradox as it is, is a expression of a inability to deal with reality.

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

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

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

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is Everytown USA model legislation. They wrote it, and are lobbying for it. https://everytownsupportfund.org/press/new-everytown-report-...

Yes, third paragraph: "The shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson ..." who was killed by Mangione with a 3D printed gun. Did you forget who the killer was?

>who was killed by Mangione

Isn't there presumption of innocence in the USA?

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

#376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily go through a couple hundred rounds in one visit to the range.

>You can easily go through a couple hundred rounds in one visit to the range. Range shooting is not what they're trying to legislate though. Whoever killed that healthcare CEO didn't need a hundred rounds. This legislation is insanely, horrendously bad and harmful, but "3D printed gun components are useless" isn't a solid argument against it. They're useful enough . The real arguments, as others said, are: 1. You can…

> Range shooting is not what they're trying to legislate though.

It's the thing gun manufacturers are selling to their customer base though. The theory was they were lobbying for this to prevent competition, but it's not good enough to actually compete with them.

> Whoever killed that healthcare CEO didn't need a hundred rounds.

Luigi Mangione didn't have a criminal record. Given his apparent political alignment, he presumably used 3D printed parts for trolling purposes since there was no actual need for him to do so. He could have bought any firearm from any of the places they're ordinarily sold.

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

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yeah, but at some point you're just banning "manufacturing". I mean I’m not in favor of this 3D printing law but manufacturing guns without appropriate licenses is illegal already. They’re trying to target consumer 3D printers for the same reason your paper printer refuses to print currency. Anyone with any engineering knowledge can see why the 3D printing analogy doesn’t work because there isn’t a fixed set of mod…

>Anyone with any engineering knowledge can see why the 3D printing analogy doesn’t work because there isn’t a fixed set of models being banned. Also because you can manufacture the exact thing with a lump that you just saw off later (or with a hole you fill with epoxy), or slightly larger / smaller / bent / etc., and it'll be functionally the same. A functional piece of counterfeit currency needs to be identical to l…

"It takes zero knowledge to" is sadly a statement that works only given common sense,

which too many people are sorely lacking

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

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a fundamental problem here is that people who don’t know any 2A/RKBA people think it’s like most political opinions. Oh, you’re a gun guy, you’re a Republican who like country music and hates them black folk. It isn’t. It’s a group of people, some of whom are country-music-loving Republicans who hate them black folk, but who also include a lot of them black folk, a lot of Democrats, and a lot of people who ha…

> I think a fundamental problem here is that people who don’t know any 2A/RKBA people think it’s like most political opinions. Oh, you’re a gun guy, you’re a Republican who like country music and hates them black folk. > It isn’t. It’s a group of people, some of whom are country-music-loving Republicans who hate them black folk, but who also include a lot of them black folk, a lot of Democrats, and a lot of people wh…

[deleted]

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

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with "80%" gun frames out there, which aren't too hard to get, and don't require any sort of background check in many jurisdictions, since its technically not a firearm, just a block of polymer you dremel down to spec.

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).

> While this is technically possible, it is not that easy.

Isn't the same thing true for 3D printers? The first time someone tries to print something they frequently end up with spaghetti and less technically competent people wouldn't even be able to get the thing to attempt printing anything.

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

#380

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…

I think the real issue is that 3d printing is a direct attack on products as a service (think roomba parts, fridge parts, anything with plastic clip assembly) that are planed to break and they don't sell replacement parts. lots of companies got fat and happy selling you plastic crap for a fortune, now 3d printers let you make plastic crap at home for pennies. If they must pass these laws, it must include protections…

No, contact your state reps and tell them you don't want these laws passed, period - they should vote against any such laws if they want to have a chance at being voted in. They won't do anything for the stated purpose while they will cripple a thriving sector.
Post reply on HN