Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Your Rights Online Build

Printable Gun Downloads Top 100k In 2 Days, Thanks to Kim Dotcom 656

Posted by timothy
from the please-be-careful-out-there dept.
Sparrowvsrevolution writes "The promise of a fully 3D-printable gun is that it can spread via the Internet and entirely circumvent gun control laws. Two days after that digital weapon's blueprint first appeared online, it seems to be fulfilling that promise. Files for the printable gun known as that 'Liberator' have been downloaded more than 100,000 times in two days, according to Defense Distributed, the group that created it. Those downloads were facilitated by Kim Dotcom's startup Mega, which Defense Distributed is using to host the Liberator's CAD files. And it's also been uploaded to the Pirate Bay, where it's one of the most popular files in the filesharing site's uncensorable 3D printing category."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Printable Gun Downloads Top 100k In 2 Days, Thanks to Kim Dotcom

Comments Filter:
  • How many printed? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by schneidafunk (795759) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @11:10AM (#43675055)
    100,000 sounds like a lot of downloads, but I would bet that less than 10% will actually go through the process of printing one. Of those printed, many hobbyists will just do it to see if it's possible. How many people are going to be willing to fire one?
  • by Feyshtey (1523799) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @11:11AM (#43675063)
    Aside from the fact that you assume anyone that is a proponent of the 2nd Amendment is too incompetent to evaluate and safely utilize this technology, you also demonstrate that this whole argument really has nothing to do with saving lives. You're perfectly willing to sacrafice innocent lives so long as their loss serves your political agenda.
  • by PortHaven (242123) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @11:17AM (#43675149) Homepage

    Really, cause I think he nailed it.

    I'd also point out that the very first "metal" guns weren't all that safe and reliable as well. So this is a generation 1 prototype. Consider in 20 years, when 3D printers are in most middle class homes (if we still have a middle class). What do you think 20 years of tweaking and discovery will do? Might these become more reliable, & safer,... there was a time that folk though using a polymer frame on a handgun was ludicrus. Glocks and many others have shown that is NOT the case.

  • by Mr. Slippery (47854) <tms.infamous@net> on Thursday May 09, 2013 @11:51AM (#43675563) Homepage

    BEFORE: Skilled Blue Collared metal workers could make a zip gun.

    Skilled metal workers? Zip guns are more like the work of juvenile delinquents [brooklynpu...ibrary.org] and prison inmates [correctionsone.com]. Skilled black market machinists can make much better weapons, like submachine guns [military.com].

  • Re:Yawn (Score:4, Interesting)

    by HornWumpus (783565) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @12:23PM (#43676057)

    A zip gun factory is a drill press, a vice and a chamber reamer. Lowes will cut the black pipe for you for free. Though Getting a 20 foot length cut into 40 6 inch pieces, each with one end threaded and 40 caps might get you the stink eye and a followup visit from the feds. Best to use someone else's car and pay cash.

  • Re:Yawn (Score:5, Interesting)

    by HornWumpus (783565) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @12:26PM (#43676099)

    Hicks know better and already own a bunch of real guns.

    What you'd get with the modified version is the urban script kiddies. New York City hicks (they think the world ends at the border of their home town).

  • Re:Yawn (Score:5, Interesting)

    by HornWumpus (783565) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @12:30PM (#43676147)

    I don't know of anything illegal or unethical about making a bunch of zip guns and turning them in for a gun buy-back. I'd go so far as to say it's a moral imperative. If you don't drain the gun buy-back fund with profitable junk, quality guns will be destroyed and utility will be lost.

  • Re:Yawn (Score:4, Interesting)

    by harrkev (623093) <[gro.ylimafnoslerrah] [ta] [dsmfk]> on Thursday May 09, 2013 @12:36PM (#43676253) Homepage

    Not to mention that eventually, this process could produce a weapons superior to the crap that it creates now.

    Seriously? A plastic magazine I can understand (I have a couple). A plastic receiver? Maybe, just maybe. Even real "plastic pistols" have steel rails reinforcing them. A plastic barrel? No thank you. Without a decent source of steel barrels, I do not see ANYTHING good coming from this except for more "Darwin Award" candidates.

    Not to mention that the "Liberators" (aka "the Darwinator") is a single-shot. Not a lot of room for improvement in single-shot guns. The tech is pretty much down to a science at this point (open action, replace bullet).

    Now, if 3d printing has a way to use stronger plastics in the future, the MAYBE this will lead to some unique designs, but I would still want steel in the barrel and the bolt. And how exactly would you 3D print an extractor claw, small pins and springs, etc. that are strong enough to survive more than one shot?

  • by Myopic (18616) * on Thursday May 09, 2013 @01:14PM (#43676719)

    Who pretty much has that anyway? We don't register, license, or inspect guns in most places in America [wikipedia.org], certainly not anywhere I've lived (Alaska, New Hampshire, Vermont, Nevada, Wisconsin). When I got my first gun I asked, "so how do I register it?" and people laughed at me. "Register it? Why would you do that?"

    The answer to "come up with some meaningful way to get people to lock up firearms" is insurance. If people had to buy insurance against mis-use of their firearms then that would be a 90% solution to the problem. Insurers would do inspections of homes and come up with rubrics by which to judge risk that a person would allow their gun to be used improperly. People who securely lock their guns would pay low rates, wackaloon rednecks with small cocks who wave guns around like it was the end times would pay high rates, perhaps high enough to be prohibitive.

    Like having laws against child abuse, we don't let people "get their progeny killed". We here in Western Civilization consider that bad because it is a violation of individual rights -- you don't get to do just any fuck-all thing you want to your children, because your children are people not property. Only an asshat would suggest that as a good reason to let fucktards be negligent with guns.

  • Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperKendall (25149) on Thursday May 09, 2013 @01:33PM (#43676983)

    For a criminal, the prospect to creating guns without serial numbers is potentially very appealing.

    That's a really ignorant statement, because it assumes criminals buy from sources where serial numbers can be tracked.

    In reality criminals don't care about serial numbers, because they are buying from illegal gun suppliers. Not having to abide by any rules, illegal guns are cheaper and easier to acquire and not traceable to boot.

    So being able to print out a far less usable gun holds zero appeal to the criminal element.

All life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities. -- Dawkins

Working...