US Court Says 'Ghost Gun' Plans Can Be Posted Online

Plans for 3D-printed, self-assembled "ghost guns" can be posted online without U.S. State Department approval, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday. From a report: A divided panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reinstated a Trump administration order that permitted removal of the guns from the State Department's Munitions List. Listed weapons need State Department approval for export. In 2015, federal courts applied the requirement to weapons posted online and intended for production on 3D printers, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. However, three years later the State Department under then-President Donald Trump settled a lawsuit by a 3D gun company and ordered their removal.

California, 21 other states and the District of Columbia sued and a federal judge in Seattle issued an injunction last year, saying that posting the designs without restrictions could put unregistered weapons into the hands of terrorists. In overturning the injunction, the appellate panel found 2-1 that a 1989 federal law prohibits courts from overruling the State Department's decision to add or remove a weapon from the Munitions List, the Chronicle reported.

Terrorists already have plenty of avenues

[PhrostyMcByte]

Metallica did a really nice job of preventing their music on Napster. I'm sure banning gun STLs would be just as effective.

3D printed guns are inferior to normal guns. I say let the terrorists have them.

I'd be more worried about some kid shooting up his school with them, but I don't think banning the designs is the right way to accomplish that.

Court overreach

[XXongo]

What's interesting is that the actual decision seems to be limiting court overreach; it says that the courts can't overrule federal law.

I find the first amendment more interesting: do individuals have a first amendment right to speech which tells people how to make guns? Apparently they did not rule on that.

Re:

[cayenne8]

I find the first amendment more interesting: do individuals have a first amendment right to speech which tells people how to make guns?

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that the original case that was settled before this, basically conceded that the files for printing gun parts was speech and therefore protected.

I mean, for instance, you can print a book that tells you how to make a nuclear weapon if you like.

I believe the same has been often ruled about computer code...whether source or mac

Re:

[XXongo]

I find the first amendment more interesting: do individuals have a first amendment right to speech which tells people how to make guns?

I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that the original case that was settled before this, basically conceded that the files for printing gun parts was speech and therefore protected.

Apparently not. If that were the case, then there would be no need for a court to rule that "Plans for 3D-printed, self-assembled "ghost guns" can be posted online without U.S. State Department approval" because it would already have been decided.

Re:

[jythie]

Where this gets tricky is the the whole 'export' thing. There are rules about what you can and can not export to other countries, and a lot of stuff, including IP, requires a special license and documentation, if you are going to be making it available outside the US. This has become a real mess since the internet took off, but the rules are still there and courts are struggling to deal with.

But to address your point, there are restrictions, even on things like books, source, or machine code. I work on

Re:

[Z80a]

Two steel pipes and a nail and you got a shotgun of sorts.

Re:

[jwhyche]

What about a 3d printed metal gun? You can get a 3d printer that prints with metal and not plastic.

Re:

[jythie]

If you have the resources to be using one of those printers, then you can probably just stand up a regular old machine shop and produce guns using traditional tools.

Re:Terrorists already have plenty of avenues

[tlhIngan]

What about a 3d printed metal gun? You can get a 3d printer that prints with metal and not plastic.

Still not strong enough - the metal pellets aren't adhered strong enough to each other.

Gunsmiths generally go for cast metal and machine it down. Even welding isn't really a trusted mechanism for holding together a barrel without the risk of it exploding in the user's hands.

3D printing doesn't adhere the materials together like either a proper cast or injection mold. Even injection molded fiber-reinforced plastic will be stronger.

Anyhow, the only big deal is that the guns can't be detected with a metal detector. If it matters, then security checkpoints will do full searches - the metal detector and x-rays are just optimizations to do it quicker. Feel free to have to show up at the airport 5 hours ahead of the flight because you'll be spending 4 hours in security as you have to unpack and repack your carry on luggage.

Heck, it might change things up - you get 10 minutes at security including removing and putting on clothes and unpacking and repacking your carry-on. Any longer and it'll cost you. So you can overstuff your carryon all you want, but you'll be charged for it, so either check it in or carry on less.

Or instead of looking for guns, they'll just refine the metal detectors and such to detect bullets. Can't have one without the other, after all.

Re:

[JeffOwl]

Anyhow, the only big deal is that the guns can't be detected with a metal detector. If it matters, then security checkpoints will do full searches - the metal detector and x-rays are just optimizations to do it quicker.

That is not the issue they are trying to solve here. Guns that are entirely plastic have a very short life, poor performance, and have not yet been a significant problem. They are worried about firearms NOT built by licensed firearms manufacturers and therefore do not contain serial numbers and are NOT sold through licensed dealers who are required to follow federal and local laws with regard to sales. The issue is that the receiver or frame of the weapon is the "gun" for purposes of laws regarding sales. Y

Re: Terrorists already have plenty of avenues

[BAReFO0t]

Read up about metalurgy.

Crystal structure is *essential* for steel's properties.
Carbon content, other ingredients, forgin, annealing, quenching, all with complex temperature curves, make a good metal thing with the right properties.

You cannot and will never be able to do that with just a metal 3D printer.
And even if you own a kiln and do it all after the printing, you still get an inferior product.
The industry alread uses a different but equivalent process, called sintering . You take metal powdee, press it

Re:

[cayenne8]

nope, i would only use top quality steel that was machined by competent gunsmiths

Well, computer controlled routers/mills are quickly becoming affordable.

That's what the competent gun companies are using these days....they are not all hand made and fitted anymore you know.

And really all you have to mill out is the part of a gun that is legally the serialized weapon.

In another post I gave the example of the AR lower receiver.

It is simply a single piece of hollow metal for the most part, not difficult to

Re:

[sjames]

I have even seen kits that provide you the billet, a very modest CNC mill, the software to run it,the gcode to make the serialized part from the billet, and an instruction manual. But technically the buyer makes the serialized part.

Re: Terrorists already have plenty of avenues

[Quila]

Most manufacturers use CNC matching to do most of the work. The gunsmiths do final fit and finish. Even old-style guns like Henry lever actions are made this way.

Re:

[MBGMorden]

The most commonly issued police sidearm today is the Glock which has a polymer (read: plastic) frame. The US military just adopted a variant of the SIG P320 as their sidearm which also has a plastic frame.

Many modern rifles like the Beretta ARX-100 and FN F-2000 are also mostly plastic. Plastic as a material is quite commonly used in firearms today. 3D printing as a technology might not be used (and likely wouldn't be even if the quality was equal - 3d printing isn't good for mass production), but there

Restricting people who can't simply buy a gun...

[XXongo]

yup, there is no way i would trust a plastic 3D printed gun, i would want any firearm i shoot to be made from steel and with a good brand name like Browning, Colt, Ruger or S&W something thats been around for darn near 100 years or more with a solid reputation as a reliable firearms manufacturer

Exactly; what the limitation on 3D-printing does to reduce the access to guns by people who are not able to simply buy or borrow a gun.

So the question is, is it a good thing to reduce ability of people who can't buy guns to obtain (lower quality) guns by other means.

I'd say, it mostly keeps 3D printed guns out of the hands of grade-school kids. (Hell yes, I probably would have 3D printed a gun if I could have when I was in 8th grade... I did a lot of other things that in retrospect were just as stupid.)

Re:

[mysidia]

So the question is, is it a good thing to reduce ability of people who can't buy guns to obtain (lower quality) guns by other means.

In this case it's reduce ability of people to make. If you 3D print something, then you are manufacturing it for yourself, not obtaining it.

I would say it's maybe not a practical pursuit to attempt, and a waste of resources -- the 3D designs are out there in the world of the internet and presumably will be accessible regardless of what lists they might end up placed on.

Bette

Re:

[cayenne8]

Better solution: The 3D Gun is a paperweight if you cannot find or create ammunition. Therefore, restrict the sale of bullets, projectile cartridges, and limit sale to consumers, possession, and transfer to the same level as guns:

There have been rulings to the effect that gun accessories, especially ammunition are afforded the same 2A protections as the weapons themselves.

And if it comes down to it...there are already states that are voting themselves to be "Sanctuary 2A States"...where they refuse to aid

Re:

[flink]

A state does not get to unilaterally decide what is and is not against the US Constitution. If they think the laws are illegal, then there is a mechanism for that which is not based on a single opinion.

States don't enforce federal law though: they don't have the jurisdiction. They often have criminal codes concomitant with federal code, so enforcing one is effectively enforcing the other. Or you may be arrested for a federal crime by state authorities and then referred to the feds for prosecution. However, state authorities are under no obligation to make the arrest and the feds obviously have discretion over when to prosecute.

This is how marijuana decriminalization works at the state level: The state

a distinction that does not exist

[XXongo]

So the question is, is it a good thing to reduce ability of people who can't buy guns to obtain (lower quality) guns by other means.

In this case it's reduce ability of people to make. If you 3D print something, then you are manufacturing it for yourself, not obtaining it.

If you 3D print a gun, you obtain the gun by doing so.

You are making a distinction that does not exist. Making something is a way to obtain it.

Re: Restricting people who can't simply buy a gun.

[kenh]

It is, and likely will be for the foreseeable future, much, much easier to simply buy a real gun on the black market. This "Ghost Gun" issue is nonsensical. The issue isn't the lack of a traceable serial number, its the ability for such a gun to pass thru a metal detector.

A plastic gun with no metal parts is not a viable weapon for a mass shooting, and as for taking such a gun thru a metal detector, let me know when we have bullets than can pass thru a metal detector.

Re:

[XXongo]

It is, and likely will be for the foreseeable future, much, much easier to simply buy a real gun on the black market.

When I was in grade school I wouldn't have had the slightest idea how to buy a real gun on the black market.

(Come to think of it, I still don't.)

For some people it would be simpler to buy a real gun on the black market, but not for everybody.

Re:

[jon3k]

I think no matter whether or not you think "ghost guns" should be illegal or not, we can all agree, if you're smart enough to get a 3D printed gun working, it would be far easier to just acquire a real gun, legally or illegally. I just don't see this as a big deal. You can buy a gun for a tiny fraction of the price of a 3D printer.

Re:

[jythie]

So while I agree, it is important to remember what the real target of these policies is : unlicensed manufacturers. Outside media and political speechs, no one really cares about terrorists or home smiths using these. What law enforcement is actually worried about (and seeing an increase in) is small shops using these increasingly accessible tools to produce unlicensed guns for sale. There have of course always been blackmarket producers, and a market filled with stolen guns, but the barrier to simply se

Re:

[cayenne8]

yup, there is no way i would trust a plastic 3D printed gun, i would want any firearm i shoot to be made from steel and with a good brand name like Browning, Colt, Ruger or S&W something thats been around for darn near 100 years or more with a solid reputation as a reliable firearms manufacturer

Well, you don't really print EVERYTHING in plastic.

As a matter of fact, rapidly coming at us, is affordable 3D printers that will print in metal, and if you combine that with affordable computer controlled mill

Re:

[GWXerog]

"Fud" is literally in his username

Reminds me of the Terrorist's Manual

[lsllll]

Back in the 80s when BBSing was a thing, I saw a file titled "Terrorist's Handbook", which had sections on everything a terrorist would want to do, including making bombs and stuff. It was written by someone who went to MIT or some other notable place and then had an "accident" with a bomb that wasn't made by him. Should a file like that be banned?

I can see the point in banning it, but I always fall back to "If someone sets their mind to do something, they'll do it." Child porn is illegal, but there's st

Re:

[UnknownSoldier]

> Should a file like that be banned?

Censorship is never the solution. It is precisely the problem.

Education is solution.

Re:

[IcyWolfy]

If allowing them online, but a law requires it to have a manufacturer, serial-number, and registration -- I can see the inevitable long discussion of "what is a gun" that is subject to this law. Water gun? A device that can projectile a small stone? metal dust in a woven encasement? solid fragments? Is there some arbitrary cutoff where a metal projectile is large enough? Is it a specific piece that creates the distinction? ... Society hasn't had time to debate the minutia.

By definition, as the fea

Re:

[GWXerog]

Arms like pistols, rifles, shotguns, short barreled rifles and shotguns, destructive devices, explosives, and *any other weapons* (AOW) are all clearly defined in current US law. Firearms and other arms that fall outside of those definitions are not subject to regulation, like smooth bore muskets and cap/ball revolvers

Re:

[IcyWolfy]

Thank you for this comment. Not being a gun person -- my quick attempt to find a legal definition was not terribly fruitful. With your terminology, I managed to find broad applicable sections of CFR and USC. I'll have to spend some time reading up on what the definitions actually are.

It sounds like that at least covers broad classifications of weapon are covered; in which each can be regulated as appropriate.

Re:

[GWXerog]

I have no idea what you're talking about. The parent was talking about the conversation of "what is a gun" and what is subject to this law. I'm pointing out that what is and is not a firearm, rifle, pistol, shotgun, etc etc, is already clearly defined and codified in US law (subject to arbitrary interpretation by the ATF of course) I make no argument for or against that regulation, only that it exists and is defined. Please don't be retarded

Re:

[cob666]

Regulation is NOT an infringement, it is a useful tool to keep track of not only who owns what weapons but also to keep said weapons out of the hands of those that have either proven that they can not be trusted to own a weapon or to ensure that people who DO obtain weapons are adequately trained in its safety and usage.

You just listed two categories of arms and said one is restricted. But the Constitution says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. How can you say someone is prohibited from keeping and bearing arms and argue that you're not directly infringing their right to keep and bear arms?

Re:

[GWXerog]

it is a useful tool to keep track of not only who owns what weapons

The US government does not keep track of who owns what weapons outside of arms subject to the NFA. There is no database anywhere of common arms ownership outside of the ones operated by a handful of states, which are largely inaccurate. All gun laws are infringements

Re:

[GWXerog]

I'd heard they we're going to try to get more of the 4473's from the FFLs, but I haven't watched this video yet, even though I'm already subscribed. Are they actually doing anything different with them other than sending them to the tracing center like they usually do?

Re:

[GWXerog]

I always suspected they were doing that, but I guess we have proof now. Looks like they're doing it through NICS though

Re:

[JesseMcDonald]

Regulation is NOT an infringement...

Are you arguing that this regulation does not in any way impact anyone's ability to keep and/or bear the items in question, or that the items are not "arms"? If neither of those is true then the regulation is unavoidably an infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. The text of the Constitution is clear and categorical—there are no exceptions which would permit attaching conditions or denying the exercise of the right to "undesirable" individuals. Any additional requirement such as registration

Re:

[jythie]

Well, except for the whole 'well regulated' part, no? The whole 'individual right' is very modern, made up out of whole cloth by separatists in the 60s and 70s and then turned into law by activist judges in the 80s.

Re:

[BrainJunkie]

The ATF makes the determination of what is or isn't a firearm and they typically aren't open to much "discussion". Once they make that determination that is the part that is required to carry a serial number, requires a Firearms Manufacturer license to produce commercially, an FFL to sell commercially, etc.

For example, the part of a Glock that the ATF considers a firearm is the plastic frame. A person can buy every part other than that....the slide, the barrel, the fire control group, etc. from any rando

Re:

[geekmux]

Back in the 80s when BBSing was a thing, I saw a file titled "Terrorist's Handbook", which had sections on everything a terrorist would want to do, including making bombs and stuff. It was written by someone who went to MIT or some other notable place and then had an "accident" with a bomb that wasn't made by him. Should a file like that be banned?

Dunno. Is the book currently available on Amazon? Slightly different title, but:

https://www.amazon.com/Anarchi... [amazon.com]

I can see the point in banning it, but I always fall back to "If someone sets their mind to do something, they'll do it." Child porn is illegal, but there's still a market for it, and this will be no different.

It's bad enough a "market" exists for child porn. Don't make it worse by conflating a legal requirement for a serial number on an otherwise legal object, with child abuse. It's not like you're going to convert child porn to be socially acceptable by adding credits and a director.

Re:

[Bodie1]

No, but it would make it easier to find them so I can shoot them with my "ghost" gun!

Re:

[geekmux]

No, but it would make it easier to find them so I can shoot them with my "ghost" gun!

OK, fair point.

Hell, I'd even make the gun legal for that.

Re:

[cob666]

The Terrorist's Handbook' is a somewhat derived from the Anarchist's Cookbook.
I used to run a BBS in the 90s and sure enough, I had a copy of The Cookbook in my fileshare.

Back in the 80s when BBSing was a thing, I saw a file titled "Terrorist's Handbook", which had sections on everything a terrorist would want to do, including making bombs and stuff. It was written by someone who went to MIT or some other notable place and then had an "accident" with a bomb that wasn't made by him. Should a file like that be banned?

Dunno. Is the book currently available on Amazon? Slightly different title, but:

https://www.amazon.com/Anarchi... [amazon.com]

I can see the point in banning it, but I always fall back to "If someone sets their mind to do something, they'll do it." Child porn is illegal, but there's still a market for it, and this will be no different.

It's bad enough a "market" exists for child porn. Don't make it worse by conflating a legal requirement for a serial number on an otherwise legal object, with child abuse. It's not like you're going to convert child porn to be socially acceptable by adding credits and a director.

Re:

[zerosomething]

The Anarchist Cookbook when through this ban and not based thing. It's simply an attempt to make knowledge illegal and control thought.

Re: Reminds me of the Terrorist's Manual

[e3m4n]

Sorry but the law already states you DONT. it isnt that there is an absence of a law. Its in contradiction to what they legally can do. The 10th amendment bans the federal government from enumerating powers to itself not already laid out in the constitution. This why the 18th amendment came into action because they had no power to regulate alcohol. Not only is the authority not enumerated to them, the 2A outright bans it. So in 1968 they got clever, knowing there was no chance of 75% of all states ratifying

Re:

[MBGMorden]

The solution may be to allow the plans to be made available online, but pass a law (if there aren't any on the books already), that if you make one, it has to have a "manufacturer" and a serial number and it has to be registered.

Even guns you buy from the store are not registered (they have a background check done but the gun model/serial number is never transmitted to the NICS system to link a specific individual to the gun). Making homemade guns require that would be stupid.

Plus just think about the reality of it: requiring that would just put further burdens on people who are going to grunt in frustration but comply - eg, the law abiding masses. People who were going to use the gun for a crime or murder are just going to print

Re:

[cayenne8]

Even guns you buy from the store are not registered (they have a background check done but the gun model/serial number is never transmitted to the NICS system to link a specific individual to the gun)."

False. When transferring (purchasing) a firearm the make/model/sn# must be on the Form 4473 that's submitted for the check.

Well, that's pretty much only on first sale of the gun.

Person to person sales in most states do not require a NICS check, so it goes from person to person to person....etc.

I'm gue

Re:

[MBGMorden]

The 4473 isn't submitted for the check. The 4473 is kept in the FFL's records which only ever get sent back to ATF if they go out of business.

When doing the actual NICS check they only convey the buyer's identity and broad type of firearm (eg, handgun, shotgun, rifle). At that point the FFL dealer will get back a denied, proceed, or hold.

The full make and model, and certainly not the serial #, are not reported to the NICS system.

Re:

[jythie]

I think a key point though is that people are, well, kinda lazy and impulsive. Someone who really sets their mind to something might find a way, but most people just utilize whatever they can easily get their hands on or learn quickly. With the 'terrorist handbook', what you ran into was a bunch of kids who would never have had the patience to sit and figure out material from a college level chemistry book being given easy(ier) to follow directions and thus doing things they would have never had the driv

Re:

[avandesande]

I've run into this, there are lots of shooter/hobbyist that like to build rare historic single shot rifles, but the run into a problem because there are a bunch of things their gunsmith can't do like thread the receiver for a barrel because they don't have a manufacturers license which is very expensive and difficult to keep. I wouldn't mind if there was a way for private individuals to buy a permit for nominal fee to build and remove this liability from other people working on it.

Re:

[iggymanz]

You have false information, it is perfectly legal for you to make your own gun, no permit is required. You can't sell it and you must legally be allowed to own firearms, but that's all.

https://www.criminaldefenselaw... [criminalde...lawyer.com].

Re:

[avandesande]

Did you even read what I put? You can't thread a receiver without expensive gunsmithing equipment. The gunsmith won't do it because of this grey area. There is no lawful way to get around this.
This doesn't apply to all types of home builds many of which you can do yourself, like 80% AR kits.

Re:

[cob666]

Pretty sure that this varies by state. In the OP article, it clearly states that in the state of CA, if you manufacture your own gun, you have to register it and put a serial number on it.

You have false information, it is perfectly legal for you to make your own gun, no permit is required. You can't sell it and you must legally be allowed to own firearms, but that's all.

https://www.criminaldefenselaw... [criminalde...lawyer.com].

Re:

[GWXerog]

The issue comes in with taking a craft built firearm to a gunsmith. If you build a firearm yourself and don't serialize and mark it, then it can't be sold or transferred at all, even to a gunsmith for normal work. That being said I don't know anything about a manufactures license. AFIK you just need to serialize and mark the receiver with your name and address.

Re: Reminds me of the Terrorist's Manual

[mrchew1982]

You're both kind of right. For your own personal use with *absolutely no plan to ever sell it* you can manufacture your own firearm using any technology including milling or threading. However, for a professional gunsmith, even one that can manufacture weapons legally by the atf (type 7), according to the state department you must purchase an ITAR permit for ~$2,250 to be able to machine a firearm in any capacity. This includes threading barrels or drilling the receiver to add a telescopic sight. This ha

Re:

[iggymanz]

Stripping of rights is part of punishment, perfectly legal. Don't be felon, easy.

Re:

[Mattcelt]

Don't be felon, easy.

I guarantee you - to the tune that I'd be willing to bet a year's wages on it - that if I knew everything you did this past year (and could prove that you did), I could have you convicted of a felony you didn't even know existed somewhere in the United States.

It is NOT easy not to be felon in the current criminal "justice" system in the States. You only need to be unlucky enough to get caught and come to the attention of an unsympathetic police officer or prosecutor. Felonies are handed out like candy these

It's just a matter of time

[fred6666]

before anyone can build an nuke from online instructions

Re:It's just a matter of time

[slacktide]

The knowledge needed to build a basic fission weapon has been in the public domain for years. The difficulty is acquiring the fissile material without your secret underground centrifuge complex randomly failing for no apparent reason.

Re:

[iggymanz]

Don't need centrifuges. There are other ways to separate fissile material. Either the Iranians are dumb or they're doing the smart easier thing faster while everyone is focused on their centrifuges.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[thrasher thetic]

This. I'm no genius, but I am a machinist. I could make a simple blowback style submachine gun out of readily available material in less than a day. This kind of legislation is about looking good, not doing good.

Re:

[srmalloy]

There was a science-fact article in Analog Science Fiction Magazine many years ago titled "Build Your Own A-Bomb and Wake Up the Neighborhood" that laid out the process of building a bomb; the article made the same point -- constructing a device to slam two hemispheres of fissile material together is orders of magnitude less difficult than getting sufficient material for the core of the bomb.

Re:

[geekmux]

before anyone can build an nuke from online instructions

Easy there, Nuke Laloosh. Just because you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy pipes and chemicals to make a pipe bomb, doesn't mean the baker is in the back making fresh U-235 cakes.

Governments still can't make nukes. That threat ain't coming to your neighbors garage, anytime soon.

Re:

[jwhyche]

That boat already sailed. Any reasonable intelligent person can build a little boy type atomic bomb out of parts from the local hardware store. The hardest thing about it is getting your hands on weapons grade U-235.

The second hardest thing is getting ahold of the trigger explosives. Which, to be honest, isn't that hard to get ahold of, or manufacture.

AKs are cheeper

[zerosomething]

In the open, world market, AK-47 run about $200. I'd rather have one of those in Somalia than a $2000 machine that will one AR receiver every day. Still have to find the trigger components and barrels.

Re:

[cayenne8]

Still have to find the trigger components and barrels.

Err...that's VERY easy to find and can be bought mail order or online.

Only one part of any firearm sold is serialized....if you can mill that, you can readily buy all the other parts legally with no checks, etc.

You know...spare parts?

Good!

[King_TJ]

It doesn't make any logical sense to try to ban instructions for creating something. That's essentially a ban on "pre crime".

America has always upheld the concept that you can explain how to construct an object for educational purposes, even when you wouldn't be legally allowed to own the final product if you did build it.

But beyond that? The "terrorists" argument is really old and tired. You want to deny law-abiding citizens the ability to try to construct a gun from 3D printed parts as a hobby interest be

who are the terrorists?

[sdinfoserv]

Exactly how many terrorist attacks or mass shootings are from "ghost guns"... none, it's a non-issue. Just like all attacks on “guns”. Guns may be a problem, but they’re absolutely not “the” problem. Gun violence, homelessness, the opioid crisis, rampant under employment, a failed healthcare system, mental health crisis, raising suicide rates, a 40% obesity rate, are all symptoms of the same problem. They are diseases of despair. Emile Durkehim studied this to answer the question what drives an individual or society to collectively self-destruct. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] When the bonds of society rupture, then supports systems crack or are dismantled, we see diseases of despair. We are in late stage capitalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

Re:who are the terrorists?

[Dynedain]

Gun violence, homelessness, the opioid crisis, rampant under employment, a failed healthcare system, mental health crisis, raising suicide rates, a 40% obesity rate, are all symptoms of the same problem.

Sure, but the party that consistently fights gun control is also the party that also consistently fights against any and all social safety net programs meant to address those other concerns and their underlying problems.

Re:

[Dynedain]

Part one: All police unions are required to self-insure so the citizens aren't on the hook for any lawsuits.

This is brilliant. It would disrupt the police unions and qualified immunity, making the unions care about how officers behave and not just automatically carte-blanche defending the "bad apples" every time. It also would be more in line with other licensed professions. Whether architects, doctors, or hair-care, most professions are not insured by the government.

However, most professionals are insured

Re:

[swillden]

Is it as much of a non-issue as electoral fraud?

Yes.

let's post 3D printed hydrogen bomb designs

[cjonslashdot]

Everyone should have their own hydrogen bomb. And their own centrifuge for separating uranium. I would never leave home without my personal hydrogen bomb - otherwise, if I meet someone I don't like, I cannot threaten to go nuclear. No more fighting for parking spaces - people always back down! (until they don't - LOL)

Chris Rock nailed it.

[Comboman]

Chris Rock got it right many years ago. Gun control is pointless, we should be controlling bullets. Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people. And you can't 3D print a bullet.

Chris Rock stand-up Bullet Control [youtube.com]

Re:

[Baron_Yam]

However, bullets are almost trivial to make in a workshop, whereas until the advent of 3D printing making anything more than a simple zip gun required skill and decent tools.

You can't stop people from making their own bullets, but until 3D printers and the Internet you could make it really difficult for them to make their own guns.

Trying to stop the plans from being available on the Internet is a joke, though. At best you can make possession or use of the plans an offense and use it as another charge after

Re:

[geekmux]

However, bullets are almost trivial to make in a workshop, whereas until the advent of 3D printing making anything more than a simple zip gun required skill and decent tools.

Either you're being purposely deceptive, or you're not aware of what it takes to make a bullet.

There is nothing trivial, about primers. Control the flow of a single key component, and you can control the manufacture of bullets.

Re:

[Baron_Yam]

Primers are not mechanically much more difficult than making a casing, and chemically not much more difficult than making your propellant.

If you're willing to have a high percentage of misfires, you can make primers out of easily sourced materials.

It's still something you can do in your home workshop if you're invested in getting it done. The technology is almost 200 years old, you don't need a modern machine shop.

Re:

[GWXerog]

The same community driving most of the work in 3D printed arms is also working on home manufacture of ammunition, making quick progress too. Most of the people working in that scene live in Europe where ammunition is already restricted, so they have an incentive

Re:

[zerosomething]

People have been making their own ammo for 100's of years. I can get all the tools I need to do it from Amazon right now. This isn't a problem that needs new tech, it's been solved.

Re:

[GWXerog]

Yes, in the United States, where gunpowder, black powder, primers, bullets, cases, and reloading equipment are not regulated. This is not the case in the rest of the world, and it wouldn't be the case if morons like the guy quoting Chris Rock had their way

Re:

[chill]

Chris Rock is a comedian. Here's another comedy take on it:
Guns don't kill people. Physics kills people! [tenor.com]

Home reloading and casting your own bullets is cheap and easy. Brass is plentiful, as is powder. Primers, however, frequently seem to be in short supply.

Re:

[boudie2]

There's always a catch. In this case making a primer. It's over 100 year old technology but try making one.

The adminstration was asleep.

[whoever57]

The Biden administration should have simply put the guns back on the list, then told the court that the question was moot.

The designs are ok,

[wakeboarder]

until the next court rules that they aren't. Seems like it's been going back and forth for a few years now.

Can't stop the signal

[schwit1]

States will now try to ban home built firearms. Good luck with that.

I wonder if 3D printer manufacturers will be mandated to include anti-counterfeiting features or code that adds a signature to firearms parts that identifies the printer.

Re:

[Random361]

States will now try to ban home built firearms. Good luck with that.

I wonder if 3D printer manufacturers will be mandated to include anti-counterfeiting features or code that adds a signature to firearms parts that identifies the printer.

Good luck when it;s a hobby made 3d printer or I just edit the firmware.

Re:

[XXongo]

It's working out so well for 'merka.

So, history shows that disarming entire nations, worked out so well?

Yes, it seems to have worked for England, Japan, Australia, Singapore and Germany, the countries with the strictest regulation of civilian weapons. England, for example, with very strict gun laws, has 1/5 the murder rate of the United States. Japan has 1/20th the murder rate.

Gun nuts think gun regulations lead to inevitable confiscation of guns, but every country that they say this happened in, the truth is the opposite.

Re:

[cayenne8]

England, for example, with very strict gun laws, has 1/5 the murder rate of the United States.

But their knife and acid assault numbers are through the roof.

Gun nuts think gun regulations lead to inevitable confiscation of guns,

Not so much regulations, but gun REGISTRATION inevitably leads to confiscation.

And right now, in the US we have PLENTY of laws and regulations covering firearms...if they would just enforce the ones on the books it would go a long way.

Right now, the things they are pushing are r

Re:

[ObliviousGnat]

Not so much regulations, but gun REGISTRATION inevitably leads to confiscation.

And right now, in the US we have PLENTY of laws and regulations covering firearms...if they would just enforce the ones on the books it would go a long way.

Those two sentences contradict each other. Either they enforce regulations such as gun confiscations, or they don't. So which is it?

Re:

[cayenne8]

Those two sentences contradict each other. Either they enforce regulations such as gun confiscations, or they don't. So which is it?

I dunno what you mean here.

We don't have any gun confiscation laws in the US...well, some of the Red Flag laws are dangerously close to that.

Most states do not have gun registration laws either, I've certainly never lived in a state that requires me to register or have a license for a firearm just to own one.

I was saying there are plenty of regulations out there in current

Made up facts [Re:Give everyone a gun already]

[XXongo]

England, for example, with very strict gun laws, has 1/5 the murder rate of the United States.

But their knife and acid assault numbers are through the roof.

That was the murder rate I quoted, not the "murder using guns" rate. Their gun restrictions means one fifth the number of people die by murder in the UK than in the U.S.-- counting knife murders,

Gun nuts think gun regulations lead to inevitable confiscation of guns,

Not so much regulations, but gun REGISTRATION inevitably leads to confiscation.

Yes, they say that, but this is just something that they made up. There is no evidence at all for this statement. This is a completely made-up fact.

Interestingly, back in the days of the original 13 colonies, when "well regulated militia" meant just that, registering guns was in fact one of the very few "regula

Re:Made up facts [Re:Give everyone a gun already]

[XXongo]

I've read the second amendment. Have you? Did you notice the words "well regulated"?

I agree that the second amendment says you can't take away peoples' guns. That seems clear.

Regulations, however: that seem pretty clearly allowed.

Re:

[jythie]

Huh.. so it is something that is done by both repressive regimes and peaceful 1st world democracies? It is almost like they are not related....

Re:

[fermion]

In fact in terms of firearm deaths it is white america. California has 7.2 deaths per 100,000 and Texas has 12.7. Both are minority white states. Colorado, on the other hand, has 14.2 firearm deaths per 100,00, with a 67% white population. Alaska and Wyoming with a white supermajority as well tops the list with over 20 firearm deaths per 100,000. But, to support your argument, Vermont where every terrorist literally has a gun the firearm death rate is only 9.3

Re:

[DaveV1.0]

Wonderful cherry-picking and lying with statistics. Per the FBI crime statistics, gun crimes and gun murders by black individuals is almost equal to that of those by white individuals while black people make up less than 15% of the population and white people make up about 75%. That alone proves you wrong.

By the way, did you know that gang members have started shooting each other in the ass to avoid attempted murder and murder charges? Look it up.

Re:

[fermion]

Vermont is a classic example of why only talking about murders is cherry picking. What most are concerned with a human lives lost, and creating policies where this is minimized. In Vermont the firearm mortality rate is over 9 people per hundred thousand, but the murder rate is very small. Why? Because most gun deaths are âaccidentalâ(TM). Cops have a great leeway in bring charges, for instance, a few years ago in my city a white boy chose to bring a gun to school, chose to load it, chose to point

Re:

[jythie]

And if you dig into those stats, they also find that gun related homicides by white people within the same economic bands is higher than black. So corrected for poverty levels the numbers show the exact opposite of your point.

Re:

[gmack]

No, those are just the ones that make the news. The reality is that states with smaller towns have overall higher murder rates.

Re:

[geekmux]

Mainly because they are not fit for purpose.

Then we should probably remove the internet, email, text messaging, and all those social media apps, from your phone.

After all, it's not fit for purpose.

Re:

[cayenne8]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

i.e. Because a well trained/orderly militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

Doesn't say "congress shall make no law" or "the executive shall make no order", but a blanket "the right ... shall not be infringed". Now the purview of the constitution is only regarding government power