I understand the intent, but feel that there are so many other loopholes that put much worse weapons on the street than a printer. Besides, my prints can barely sustain normal use, much less a bullet being fired from them. I would think that this is more of a risk to the person holding the gun than who it’s pointing at.
Is this a real problem? How many crimes are being committed with 3D printed guns?
It’s a rounding error… basically just politicians virtue signalling that they’re doing something.
I’m reminded of Leland Yee. California politician who was in favor of gun control all while doing gun running stuff himself. Guess he felt gun control was good for business.
No, but often gun control is an “if it stops even one” type of thing. Most of it is predicated on mass shootings which are .001% of gun violence in an attempt to ban the gun that kills <500 out of 60,000 people a year.
Owning a ghost gun is a crime, right?
Nearly 500 were recovered last year. https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/public-safety/2023/09/20/nypd-unit-combatting-the-growing-problem-of-ghost-guns
Owning a ghost gun is a crime, right?
(Ignoring the fact that “ghost gun” is a meaningless and intentionally emotionally charged term)
In New York, yes. In the vast majority of the US, no. It’s illegal to file the serial number off an existing firearm, but 100% legal in most states to manufacture your own unserialized firearms for personal use. Just cannot be sold/transferred.
I’d note the article you linked says nothing about how many of those are actually 3D printed, it is infinitely easier to deface the serial number on an existing firearm than it is to 3D print one.
From the picture in that article, those guns would blow up in the shooter’s hand.
What a shame that would be
What the fuck? You dont even need that for buying a fucking knife
Will they require a background check for CNC machines and lathes as well?
Do I need a background check to buy a CNC? Or a lathe?
I mean, kind of, yes. CNCs have been one of the big items for export controls. Especially if they can be used to build weapons, parts for nuclear subs, etc.
Generally speaking, lathes and milling machines must be licensed for export if their accuracy exceeds six microns. Grinding machines are controlled at four microns. The Wassenaar Arrangement controls all machine tools capable of simultaneous, five-axis motion, regardless of machining accuracy.
Besides not needing a license for export controlled items within the country, you don’t need a 6 micron precision lathe
Until you want to replicate your dick
In the US you don’t need a license to purchase a CNC. Even items with export restrictions like night vision goggles (Under ITAR) can be bought by anyone and shipped to your door. The export controls would only come into effect upon you exporting them.
six microns
Given that human chromosomes are on the order of 5 to 10 microns, I am thinking this export regulation doesn’t apply to the hobby market. This is “use the machine in a clean room” level precision.
Just export controls though?
Oh wow, TIL! I guess I’m not surprised, consumer GPS is kneecapped at a lower accuracy for similar reasons
It used to be. It was called selective availability, where the DoD could dial up/down the accuracy for commercial receivers. However, it was discontinued in 2000.
In other news: virtue signaling politicians are considering banning [scary items that their core voters know nothing about] in order to appear tough on crime, while avoiding doing the logical things experts recommend, because that would look bad in the eyes of the voters. Instead the only consequence is extending the stigma related to excons resulting in greater recidivism
Googling 3d printed gun homicide returns a story from Rhode Island in 2020 (where the police can’t figure out if the gun was actually printed), an attempted murder in Reykjavík in 2022, and this story from 2022 that claims a total of 44 arrests were made related to 3d printed guns… world wide https://3dprint.com/291684/3d-printed-gun-arrests-tripled-in-less-than-two-years-3dprint-com-investigates/amp/
In contrast there were 48117 firearms related deaths in the US during the same period.
Maybe statistics and proportions should be a core part of math from an early age?
These guns are increasingly being found at crime scenes. You may not like NY’s solution, but the problem is growing.
Some things cannot be effectively regulated in this manner. At all.
There is simply no way to stop people from building their own 3D printers. There are too many open source designs, and they can be built with very simple parts that are readily available at the hardware store. Most hobbyist-level 3D printers basically come as a kit that they have to assemble themselves anyways. What happens next? Background checks to buy stepper motors? Background checks to buy a microcontroller?
To me this is like trying to mandate government backdoors in encryption algorithms. There is literally nothing that would stop criminals from just using an open source encryption algorithm that doesn’t have a backdoor, so you end up just making it so all legitimate communications are less secure than they should be.
I have two issues with your comment, and the tldr is this “I don’t think the problem warrants the resources needed” and “I don’t think the proposed bill will solve anything, problem or not”.
These guns are increasingly being found at crime scenes.
Probably, I don’t have a source for that, but I suspect that you’re not wrong. What I would like to know is the proportions of gun grimes involving 3d-printed guns vs gun crimes in total. I suspect what others have said in this post, about the percentage of gun related crimes that involve 3d-printed guns, to be within a rounding error, to also be correct.
You may not like NY’s solution, […]
It’s not that I don’t like the “solution”. It’s that I don’t accept the proposed ban as being a solution in the first place. I don’t want to come off as being snarky, I just wanted to make sure that my understanding of the word “solution” was correct. English not being my first language, I sometime miss the salient details. So, I took a moment and googled “definition solution”. According to “Oxford Languages” a solution is a means of solving a problem or dealing with a difficult situation.
Can you in all honesty claim, that you believe that limiting acquiring 3d-printing capabilities, in a single state, will reduce the use of 3d-printed parts in gun crimes?
[…] but the problem is growing.
Again, the occurrence of 3d-printed guns or gun parts may be growing, but is it actually a problem big enough that it has to be dealt with? And with the resources necessary to enforce this proposal? Isn’t gun manufacturing already limited? As others have pointed out, why not limit access to other tools you could use to make guns?
As OP pointed out, the intent may be noble, but the attempt is futile.
There’s a community that builds 3d printed guns, and those don’t last very long either. They’re not printing barrels, they’re just printing the trigger housing and grip. They go out and buy the dangerous bits.
This is all a bit pointless.
Even more pointless when you consider that once you have a 3d printer, you can make a lot of the components for a second 3d printer, and go out and buy the other parts, without ever buying a 3d printer. Now you have two ghost gun machines!! Oh the horror.
This is the reason why I need education. CNc machines are the only tools you need. Fast food is probably just CNC assembled.
It’s all CNC. All the way down. Always was.
Seriously, 3d printers are just CNC machines, they use the same code the mill I use that was built in 1989 uses.
Yes, they added some new g codes for the extruder bit (even that is just used as an axis), but otherwise you could hand code a 3d print. Probably not a good idea, but could be done. CNC is cool
A self replicating 3D printer? I like it.
As others have said, the RepRap concept was trying to be that. At first the idea was to 3D print as much of the machine as possible, but what it realistically achieved was you would buy metal frame rails, nuts & bolts, the hot end assembly (a glorified hot glue gun), motors, and a controller board (in many cases literally an arduino) and 3D print connectors and bracketry necessary to hold the thing together. Josef Prusa took the “Mendel” pattern Reprap and simplified it into his now ubiquitous upright plate style “Prusa i3” pattern.
I’ve built several 3D printers from “scratch” and at least 20 from kits. My own 3D printer has printed many of its own parts.
Yeah it’s called RepRap
The reprap movement was exactly that. A self replicating rapid prototyper. While it never reached true replication, it got close enough to cause an explosive growth of the community. That, in turn led to the huge number of low cost suppliers and designs we have now.
