Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Technology Your Rights Online

The First Fully 3D-Printed Gun Has Been Successfully Test-Fired 717

Posted by timothy
from the I-certainly-want-one dept.
On Friday, we mentioned that Defense Distributed had created a (near-enough-to) fully 3-D printed pistol. Sparrowvsrevolution now writes that "Last week, the Liberator was fired for the first time at a firing range and successfully shot a .380 caliber bullet using a remote firing setup. Over the weekend, Defense Distributed's founder, the anarchist and radical libertarian Cody Wilson, was bold enough to try firing it by hand. The results of that test, witnessed by a reporter, indicate that the era of the 3D-printed firearm may be upon us, for better or for worse." Predictably, certain politicians are — so to speak — up in arms about it.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The First Fully 3D-Printed Gun Has Been Successfully Test-Fired

Comments Filter:
  • That's nice (Score:4, Funny)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:05AM (#43639903)

    Predictably, certain politicians are â" so to speak â" up in arms about it.

    Considering how often these gun bills have come up, and then gone flaccid, it's going to take some industrial-strength Viagra to get gun control advocates to mount a campaign to put to bed any criticism and pass the climax of votes necessary for it to become a law.

    • Re: That's nice (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:22AM (#43639961)

      Nah its about the bribery. The gun industry needs their profits so they lobby for no gun control. 3d printing guns would reduce profits so it must be banned.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This isn't about guns, this is about speech (the ability to communicate this design or download the design from the internet). So Congress shouldn't have any problem passing a law. All that they would need is someone to explain that you could design a pressure cooker with it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by peragrin (659227)

      The three real points to gun control are

      It is a state right not a federal one. Just like drivers licenses , you can't really regulate it at the federal level. Therefore federal laws are mostly worthless.

      and Like pirates with DRM most gun laws only hurt and hinder those who lawfully own the guns. Like the shooting in Newton. The guns were legally locked up and stored. The insane son killed his own mother and then stole her guns. Now gun law would have stopped that.

      Lastly they want to ban guns that look

  • by Pecisk (688001) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:13AM (#43639929)

    While 3D printing looks cool and interesting in general, this is really far fetched. You already can make assassination weapons from schematics from Internet - if you have skills and good understanding of physics involved.

    And no, you can't really use this are argument against gun control laws.

    • Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:22AM (#43639963)

      You already can make assassination weapons from schematics from Internet - if you have skills and good understanding of physics involved.

      This is why 3D printed guns are a game changer: the average Joe Blow can get himself a gun without needing any sort of gunsmithing skills.

      • by Pecisk (688001)

        If you have really read articles about it, no, you really can't. 3D printing is tool here, not magic wand which will make reliable and fully functional weapon.

      • Re:Not really (Score:4, Informative)

        by mrchew1982 (2569335) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:39AM (#43640031)
        um, you could already make a pretty scary shotgun out of a piece of iron pipe, a cap and a nail. google "zip guns" sometime.

        really it's a non issue, most of these homemade guns are pretty useless, including this 3d printed one. With a lifetime measured in tens of rounds, it really isn't all that special.

        and as always, you still get the same time in the federal pokey if you get caught doing something naughty with it.

      • Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Trepidity (597) <delirium-slashdotNO@SPAMhackish.org> on Monday May 06, 2013 @06:19AM (#43640157)

        It's perhaps a commentary on the state of craftworking skills in the U.S. that making a rudimentary, one-shot gun is now considered too high-skilled for a regular person to do. The level of skill and equipment needed is basically at the level of a 1950s high-school metalworking class.

        • by flyneye (84093)

          Oh, I don't think it'll just be in the U.S. The internet kinda does away with borders or at least has less stopping power than our borders ( which is one of the jobs our government IS responsible to protect, above even the phony power they've given themselves) I'm sure you will find easy ways to download the file to print one EVERYWHERE.
          I bet China couldn't keep it out.

      • by rvw (755107)

        You already can make assassination weapons from schematics from Internet - if you have skills and good understanding of physics involved.

        This is why 3D printed guns are a game changer: the average Joe Blow can get himself a gun without needing any sort of gunsmithing skills.

        Another game changer: you can melt them when the crime is done. No hassles with getting rid of the gun, just melt it. Traces on bullets won't have any value then.

      • Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)

        by wienerschnizzel (1409447) on Monday May 06, 2013 @07:09AM (#43640353)

        Gun related crimes are not being done using legally held weapons. You're no better off with a printed gun than you are with a black market S&W. In one case you leave traces of your presence in the black market, in the other you leave traces of downloading the schematics from the internet. In the long run owning a 3D printer and gun schematics will be equal to having the means to murder someone. If your average Joe Blow has an opportunity and a motive on top of that, he'd still get busted.

      • There is not that much to know about a catapult. And with an arm-piece and a trigger they can be made quite accurate, and (armed with an M24 nut) more destructive than your basic pistol.
    • by jamesh (87723)

      While 3D printing looks cool and interesting in general, this is really far fetched. You already can make assassination weapons from schematics from Internet - if you have skills and good understanding of physics involved.

      And no, you can't really use this are argument against gun control laws.

      An understanding of physics you say... we'll need to look into the school system to ensure a safer America for all.

  • by ProzakLord (1087161) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:13AM (#43639931)
    Now militia style groups mostly in rural areas are going to be recruiting geeks to operate the 3D printers. Anyone fancy making up a t-shirt saying: "Will print for moonshine"
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Don't care if OP likes Mr. Wilson or not, but spreading false information is simply childish. Cody Wilson is not an "anarchist". He is a CRYPTO-ANARCHIST. There is a tremendous difference. I would have thought the /. crowd would know the difference, but I guess ignorance knows no boundaries.

  • that's the gun this is.. and it exploded on second shot.

    the design should use some metal pipe, imho.

    • Agree that metal would be better, but that's defeating the entire purpose, eh?
      Gun exploded when a larger-capacity, (says "rifle") cartridge was used. Too much power for the plastic, I suppose.

      But of course you're right in essence; it's a piece of crap.

  • by jonwil (467024) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:30AM (#43639989)

    The law says that its not illegal to produce a gun at home. People have been making guns at home for years.
    Why is it suddenly a problem that someone can 3D print a gun instead of making one out of a block of metal with machine tools?

    • by GNious (953874)

      Level of entry - the 3D printed version is likely easier to make (requiring less skill in some areas)

    • Why is it suddenly a problem that someone can 3D print a gun

      because when the price of the 3D printers will drop, and the guns CAD models become available anywhere on the Net, the first retarded person will be able to make one in no time and play with it in his closest mall or school.

    • by will_die (586523)
      Doing out of metal would be ok, it is the creation of a gun that is not detectable which is against the law. They get around this by adding a block of metal, besides the firing pin, which makes it legal.
  • by Bearhouse (1034238) on Monday May 06, 2013 @05:33AM (#43640001)

    Video here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22421185 [bbc.co.uk]

    From the video, looks like despite the modest cartridge used, there's quite a kick. Guess the plastic is rather light.
    So, no need to get excited folks; a one-shot weapon with really poor accuracy, which needs a 3D printer.
    Thus more difficult and costly to produce, yet no more effective, than a 'saturday night special', 'zip gun' or 'bang stick', plans for which have been freely available for a long time.
    Probably equally as likely to blow up in your face, too...

  • A printable nuclear missile?

    Technology is fun and all, but I sure hope we'll never reach the point where people can print stuff like that in their basement.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      A printable nuclear missile?

      Technology is fun and all, but I sure hope we'll never reach the point where people can print stuff like that in their basement.

      Hey, at least we're one step closer to solving the Fermi paradox!

  • The First Fully 3D-Printed Gun Has Been Successfully Test-Fired

    Shortly followed by the first fully 3D-printed pun.

  • Of the four test shots it worked twice, misfired once and exploded once. Not exactly something I would want to rely upon.

  • "the anarchist and radical libertarian"

    I'm gonna have to stop you right there. The total number of fucks I give about anything Greenberg has to say is now exactly zero. I don't know who you're pandering to with such blatant manipulation, but I'm not sure the people who would fall for it are literate anyway.
    • Why do we care about his political views?

      Yeah, it's not like the looming possibility of mass circumvention of gun control laws is a political issue, or anything.

  • Is find a way to Darwinize the fringies using it. Excellent.
  • by Required Snark (1702878) on Monday May 06, 2013 @06:18AM (#43640155)
    This is a repost. I first put this up when the previous article about printed guns went up, and I was modded down to minus one million, which was no big surprise. Gun nuts live in a fantasy universe where they are John Wayne, and the bad guys wear black hats and are always destroyed by the guy in the white hat (i.e the gun owner). If you even hint that there are negative consequences from guns, they scream like you are trying to remove their dicks. So I post this again, and I expect the same mod down and moronic replies.

    Sill, I would like one pro gun person to admit that a printed gun will kill somebody, and not just some drug dealing child molesting scum, but a real live human being who didn't deserve to die. Like a kid who thinks that it's a toy. So man up for once, and admit that guns kill people. Just face the truth once, and stop complaining that I'm a "stupid liberul", or that you have a constitutional right to own a gun. That's not relevant. Dead people are relevant. So if you have a shred of integrity, stop dodging the question. Who will be the first person to be murdered by a printed gun? And all the other examples that follow:

    When will the first murder occur with a printed gun?

    When will the first accidental shooting occur with a printed gun?

    When will the first child be killed with a printed gun?

    When will the first suicide occur with a printed gun?

    When will the first robbery occur with a printed gun?

    When will the first car jacking occur with a printed gun?

    When will the first plane hijack attempt occur with a printed gun?

    These are the real world events that no-one in the pro-gun world is willing to acknowledge. It's not a case of if these will happen, but when.

    • by Kaitiff (167826)

      Well, lets answer some of these pressing questions, shall we?

      The first murder with a printed gun will occur some 100's of 1000's of years after the FIRST murder, and the untold millions since that had nothing to do with guns, or printed guns to be precise.

      Ditto with the first accidental shooting.

      Child to be killed.. hmm. I'll get back to you on that one, don't have a way to separate out the reports of children killed due to EVERY OTHER dangerous situation on the planet.

      First suicide.. lets see.. around ab

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Monday May 06, 2013 @06:19AM (#43640159)

    Does ANYONE think that someone who wanted a gun for nefarious reasons could only now get one?

  • of gravestones will soon become a booming businness.

  • by fearofcarpet (654438) on Monday May 06, 2013 @06:49AM (#43640255)

    From TFA:

    In the Forbes article, other than "a single nail that is used as a firing pin", the gun also includes another nonprintable part. The group, the article says, added a six-ounce chunk of steel into the body to make it detectable by metal detectors in order to comply with the undetectable firearms act. The act, Congressman Steve Israel says, is set to expire at the end of the year. "The very least we should do, as a matter of common sense, is extend the undetectable firearms act so that a plastic gun or component can't be brought onto planes because a metal detector can't detect them," notes Israel.

    I could never understand why people have no problem with a law that categorically bans ALL guns that are made from non-ferrous materials, and/or that do not look like a gun by X-Ray, but run around like crazy people talking about armed citizens overthrowing the government over limitations on assault rifles and high-capacity magazines--or f***ing background checks. The only way a citizens group would ever have a chance at affecting change in government with guns would be by assassinating a politician--you have no chance against the military or police, sorry. And the Undetectable Firearms Act was written pretty much with that problem in mind (and, obviously other public places like airports.) Why then aren't people pooping their pants over this clear restriction to the supposed core principle of the Second Amendment?

    Seriously, where are the protests and demonstrations against the banning of plastic guns 25 years ago? Where were all the threats to vote politicians out of office for violating their constitutional rights? If the answer to the theater shooting in Aurora was that movie-goers should have been carrying guns, and the answer to school shootings is armed teachers, then why not airplanes? Wouldn't we all feel safer if everyone in an airplane was carrying an undetectable plastic gun? I mean, what can box cutters do against bullets? This cognitive dissonance (and the total capitulation of the trampling of the rest of the Bill of Rights) perplexes me.

    (This is a re-post because I genuinely want to know the answer)

  • by sl4shd0rk (755837) on Monday May 06, 2013 @07:08AM (#43640343)

    These things have been around forever (image google it). The predecessors usually lasted for more than one or two shots however. But they have been fashioned from every imaginable material. The only reason this is going to gain any legislation traction will be due to A) frenzied knee-jerk reactionaries running amok screaming "Think of the children!" B) Politicians proxying legislation from corporations with an agenda in one direction or the other. It's stupid to give this thing much more attention than slapping a "21 only" label on it. Anything else will be a waste of time, money and energy.

  • by Karmashock (2415832) on Monday May 06, 2013 @07:09AM (#43640355)

    But I think I just need to say... I'm for it.

    I know the anti gun people aren't going stop. That's fine. Neither will we stop.

    I am not a violent person. I don't believe in using violence as anything but a means of defense. Truly.

    That said, I few my right to own a gun as the same thing as my right to vote. Literally the same. And I feel the same way about both.

    Imagine if someone came to take away your right to vote? Would it matter what reasons they came up for it... what excuses? Unlikely. That is where I am on the issue. And I'm not alone for what that is worth. I don't think most of us are violent or desire violence. We simply believe we're entitled to be dangerous. I'm free. I'm a citizen. You should fear me. Not because I'm crazy. But because the free are powerful.

    This gun... this technology... It made me cry the first time I saw it. To me, its beautiful. And I will protect it. This is a flame that will not go out.

    I regret if this offends anyone. That is not my desire. I see in this a weapon that might one day free the world. Naive? Perhaps... but possibly this is the beginning of something glorious.

    • by tekrat (242117) on Monday May 06, 2013 @09:32AM (#43641379) Homepage Journal

      Dude; have you not been following the last 30 years of elections? When was the last time *anyone* running for an office actually represented *you*?

      Campaigns now cost millions of dollars, even for local elections. The only people that can run are people with "connections" to money, meaning they are already friends of the elite, and therefore, represent the elite. They are not interested in, nor do they represent the common people.

      And never mind big, federal elections, We're talking hundreds of millions of dollars needed. The bar has been raised so high that no common man can ever run for a Congressional Office.

      So really, what's your "vote" doing for you? You can vote for representative (D), who represents the elite, or representative (R), who represents the elite. Neither choice is for you. So your vote has already been taken away -- they just didn't take it away in a form you recognize!!

      I'm sorry to say that the real world isn't like the movies. It doesn't take a stormtrooper in a black uniform to take away your rights, it can be done in a much more subtle way, in a way you'll end up going along with, and NOT rebelling against.

      And in fact, you'll end up working *for* the oppression of other people's rights. And all the time, your guns will sit idle, because you trust your government while they continue to screw you.

  • Simple math (Score:4, Insightful)

    by JustOK (667959) on Monday May 06, 2013 @08:05AM (#43640647) Journal

    1st ammendment + 2nd ammendment = right to print arms

Save a little money each month and at the end of the year you'll be surprised at how little you have. -- Ernest Haskins

Working...