Sunday, February 24, 2013 9:10:41 PM
If may become an issue when we figure out to make more durable materials to print with. So far I think it's all plastic, when we get to ceramic and metals, it`ll be scarier.
Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:35:16 AM
The point is that all the parts to most popular semi-auto guns are easy to get through mail order and you don't need to show any ID to get them.
The receiver is the main part of the gun and that is what the government wants regulated, because it has the main serial number.
Now they want to regulate ammo clips as well.
Both parts can be made with 3D printers thus circumventing any regulation they may try to pass.
Before these 3D printers you would have to have a shop full of machine tools and a lot of machinist experience to make those parts. There is no law saying that you can`t create your own gun, for your own personal use. So these machines change the whole debate, because they are so simple anyone can use them.
Sunday, February 24, 2013 11:11:43 AM
@MacGuffin: A valid point, but that's only because M-16s are so fussy! There`s other machineguns that are far more reliable. Assuming one could (eventually!) make a strong enough chamber & barrel, one could also "print" the shells too. Just need to fill them with powder & primer and you`re good to go! (Well, not quite THAT easy, but close enough!)
Why stop at printing an AR-15? Why not an MG-42 from WW2? Rugged! Reliable! Deadly.