This case presents a complicated first amendment issue. It court’s can enjoin this publication, what else can they ban? Hate speech? Vicious literary criticism? Ugly theater reviews?
2
Anyone in the US who wants a real gun can get one anyways. At least with these toys, you have a fighting chance that the thing explodes in the criminal's hands, giving you a chance to escape. Perhaps we should allow ONLY plastic guns.
2
The plans for making "zip guns" have been readily available in print and subsequently the internet sine the 1930's largely due to the US Government disseminating them to partisans in occupied Axis countries. For less than $10 in parts at any hardware store a 12 gauge gun can be built of either metal or PVC with a threaded pipe, screw cap, nail, rubber band , ballpoint pen and a bit of epoxy. It has no serial number, if made of PVC is undetectable and is much more lethal than those being sought to be banned here. Of course demagogues cannot be bothered with facts, otherwise they would simply ask the question why would someone want to spend 3 times as much money to buy equipment to make a single shot plastic gun than it would cost to buy a stolen real gun on the street?
1
Talk about weaponizing the First Amendment. Not so fast...
1
I find it interesting that Trump had to get a 'read' from the NRA before responding with his 'take' on this issue.
4
Once again, the snake oil salesman avoids NRA opposition by appearing confused about gun rights
Cody feels an untraceable gun is what the bill of rights stands for? He must have learned to read and write the same way as the POTUS.
3
My question is: why do so many people want so many guns?
3
The only good outcome from this insanity would be the ability for an assassin to get close to the fool who supports putting weapons in everyones hands who buys(you profit first wins again) a 3D printer.I
I do not look forward to having to steal on a weapon as an essential requirement when getting dressed in the morning. Sensible gun laws were a part of disguising our country a hundred years ago. Not looking forward to a return to the Deadwood era and the anarchy of the Old West.
This is unquestionably the most important story in the news. It's consequences will be forever felt.
1
This certainly indicates how little the administration cares about law enforcement personnel. Their risk has gone up, since the plans already made it to the web while they dragged their feet.
It does certainly give more power to the Trump cult though. After seeing them in Tampa, they are clearly hoping for a new civil war.
It's not easy being a crypto-anarchist these days. Life is so full of paradoxes and ironies. For example, take Cody Wilson. Cody is working real hard to be an anarchist, but in order to protect his Second Amendment rights, he has to haul out his First Amendment rights to ward off the assaults of Government. Of course, Cody's Amendment rights are enshrined in one of the most anti-Anarchist documents ever produced - the Preamble must have gobsmacked Tim May. To top off the schizo-anarchist dilemmas Cody faces, he also has the problem of maintaining his crypto- creed. It's really hard to be crypto- when you have to spend all of your time broadcasting to anyone who will listen what your every move is. Hanging out at SXSW is not exactly a stealth move. The final indignity is having to rely on Capitalism to provide the actual money - and lots of it - to support his crypto-anarchism. Lawyers don't come cheaply, they don't take crypto-currency retainer fees, and they don't function in an anarchistic world. Crypto-anarchists could advance their causes if they formed a union and hired a smart Mad Ave firm to get their message out to the world.
Free speech is free speech. Abusing free speech by yelling FIRE in a theater where there is no fire is a violation multiple laws and can result in death. SCOTUS has already ruled the 1st Amendment does not allow abuse.
Printed instructions that create killing machines intended to kill or maim is an abuse of Free Speech and can be regulated or prohibited for the same reasons...and should be.
Case closed. The only question is will Congress, local authorities or the Courts wait for the killing to start before properly regulating/prohibiting the obvious for the public good.
Today's Congress will not, that's for sure. That leaves the Courts or the local authorities. Local authorities regulating internet speech issues???
Ha Ha Ha.
That leaves the Courts.
1
The issue here will be the constitutionality of the prior restraint. The precedent will be Progressive v. U.S. where the magazine sought to publish a story on the H Bomb.
The government learned of the impending story and obtained a prior restraint from a federal judge. After a hearing, JUdge Robert Warren made the temporary restraining order permanent.
The Progressive appealed. Partway through the appeal, the judge dissolved his restraining order. The reason -- details about the H Bomb had been published in several newspapers.
The judge explained that for prior restraints to be constitutional, they must pass a 3-part test:
1. Is there an immediate risk of irreparable harm . . .
2. Is the prior restraint narrowly tailored, that is does it only cover the harmful material and nothing more.
3. Would the prior restraint be effective.
Judge Warren said that because the details of the Progressive article were published, his prior restraint would not be effective and so he dissolved the restraint.
I understand that the plans, or at least some of them, were published. Cody Wilson said that he had posted some plans before the restraining order came out.
The only way the government could get an effective prior restraint would be if it showed that the plans were "incitement, and aiding and abetting illegal conduct."
That comes from U.S. v. Schiff where the government got a prior restraint against a publication that encouraged people not to pay federal income taxes.
1
If you'd bother to look, blueprints for AR15s, and every other gun, are out there on the InterWebs. Any good 3-D printer guy can write the code by just importing a blueprint into his CAD/CAM program. (I'm a technical guy and do CNC machining, I know these things. And I'm far from the only one, I'd say at least half of the machining guys I know are heavily into guns, none of this is particularly difficult). So all the brouhaha, is much ado about nothing.
Anyone with a milling machine or even a drill press can buy a fixture that will allow them to build an AR15, a copy of a Colt .45ACP, AK-47, anything really.
According to Wikipedia, approximately 100 million AK-47s and their variants have been produced. At the moment, anti gun people are demonizing the evil AR15. It isn't the gun, it's the crazy guy driving it that makes it dangerous. Is there a solution? No, I don't think so. Just look at the guys using rental vans and Home Depot trucks to pinball through crowds. Maybe if people start letting the authorities know that their brother or son, or daughter or wife is getting a bit Looney Tunes, but even then, if they haven't done anything yet, the authorities can't do a thing.
3
I understand the seriousness and concern with this issue... but is anyone else reading this article in absolute amazement that we're currently debating the 3-D printing of firearms? The fact that this kind of technology is even possible- I find it incredible. 20 years ago, I thought caller ID was impressive. Dang.
Any weapon is useless if it has no ammunition to fire. Plastic weapons may be undetectable, but their ammo is not. Without a round to fire out of the gun, it is nothing more than a plastic club.
2
Oh, dear, I am afraid I have to agree that the genie is out of the bottle, now. Prohibition did not stop the use and abuse of alcohol drugs and making plastic guns (all we need is more plastic in our oceans) and illegal is not going to stop their manufacture by enterprising crooks who will sell them at a huge profit to those wanting to escape metal detection.
Still I agree that we need to do all we can to prevent the manufacture of these guns, even if it means violating the First Amendment. At least we can prolong and thwart the inevitable for a while. While I love the First Amendment, I think it is also incumbent on the Government to protect public safety.
It will be interesting to see what sort of detectors you can walk through that can detect plastic as well as metal. Will they detect the plastic you are probably ingesting when ingesting fish?
We live in a brave new world. Politicians and judges should think carefully about this one, because no doubt, they will be the first to go as there is not much reason to use a plastic gun on the streets. They will be used by terrorists and political enemies only in places where one needs to go through a metal detector.
1
All done in the name of the First and Second Amendments. Now comes technology and innovation. While we speak of Rights, who is there to say, what is right and wrong? Is there anyone who can tell us between good technology and harmful technology?
The Parkland massacre and all other similar incidents in the past, are still fresh in our minds. Not much has happened to say, we now have better or improved Gun Controls in place.
Holding a degree in Library & Information Science, I am a huge proponent of First Amendment rights. Rarely, a case presents itself that leaves me twisting and turning, unsure about how to reconcile my beliefs. This is one of them. In fact, it might top the list.
Those blueprints for the plastic gun are already out on the internet and circulating thanks to thousands of third-party websites. That's not to mention the hundreds of readily-available blueprints and guides for DIY handguns, shotguns, automatic rifles, bullets, explosives, and gunpowder that have existed since before 3D printing was a thing.
Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.
1
Crikies, mate.....Undetectable guns!!! I hope not!!!!!!!!!
I'm a little surprised the article does not contain any reference to how law enforcement officials or police organizations feel about this. These guns will surely increase the danger to law enforcement people ten-fold.
5
We need to make movie documentaries showing what it's really like to be shot (not the cowboy and indian hollywood sanitized death). We need to show the reverberations of suffering, not just of the wounded but of the friends, family and communities of those touched by gun violence. We need to make people think long and hard about why they might want to own an object that with hardly a touch of it they can cause horrible, generational suffering.
2
JUDGE LASNIK Of the District Court in the State of Washington, is a hero, championing civil rights. Trump's announcement permitting the printing of 3D guns is an INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE. Thus, it is a form of speech that is NOT protected by the First Amendment. Further, Trump has a case pending in the court of Judge David Hale in the Western District of Kentucky, who ruled that Trump's encouraging supporters to attack protesters at political rallies is engaging in speech that is an incitement to violence, NOT protected by the First Amendment. That evidence should be presented to Lasnik in Seattle to resolve the First Amendment issues on August 10th. Trump is on a path toward daily announcements of new forms of terrorism including torture and increasing gun violence as official policy of the US. His actions appear to fit the definition of the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, making him vulnerable to impeachment and/or the invocation of the 26th Amendment due to being medically incapable of fulfilling the duties of his office as president.
9
JJ: "JUDGE LASNIK Of the District Court in the State of Washington, is a hero, championing civil rights."
Read the article again. Lasnik did not invoke "civil rights". Lasnik 'said the lawyers bringing the suit had established “a likelihood of irreparable harm” and of success on the merits.'
JJ: "Thus, it is a form of speech that is NOT protected by the First Amendment."
Again, you need to read the article. Lasnik said that 'there were “serious First Amendment issues” that would need to be worked out later in court, ...'
Note to Times editors: That should be "are", not "were". The literary present should be used in this context.
1
One again, thise who know so very little about firearms technology are the first to opine. Ask yourself this: How can a low-grade (i.e. printed..) gun stand up to 30,000 PSI chamber pressure ? For New Yorkers, cartridges being fired create tremendous pressure - that is how a projectile is pushed out. In the 1980’s we heard that the Glock Pistol was “ invisible” on X-Ray. Nothing could be further from the truth. In that case, the barrel, slide, springs, and magazine pieces were all steel.
Still, that did not stop heated debate by those who would seek to restrict the rights of others based on knowledge that they did not have.
We are consistently told those on the left are our intellectual betters. That said, why can’t you learn some basic technology?
3
"... up to 30,000 PSI chamber pressure ..."
Cite a reliable source for that number.
"We are consistently told those on the left are our intellectual betters."
Who "consistently told" us that?
What about our inalienable right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Guns, including downloadable plastic guns, cancel that right irrevocably. Eighty-five times every day.
7
It is my understanding that while "3 D Printer" handguns may not trigger metal detectors, at this point in time their ammunition will. It will be interesting to see if the promoters of this technology can develop bullets and shell casings that will also be invisible to scanners. I suspect that a "3D" bullet can be just as deadly as a lead or steel bullet given enough force. I dread having 10 -15 armed Trump/NRA supporters carrying 3D guns on every airline flight, but that appears to be where we are headed.
5
The 3d printing aspect is sensational, but there seems to be a large diy community who share information (and parts lists) on how to build / mod weapons using online hobby and industrial parts suppliers. Coupled with online machine shops.. What possibly could go wrong? (also, diy chemistry/genetic engineering is a thing )
As far as the online machine shops go, and I'm a machinist, I don't think most of them will do much gun manufacturing work with someone they don't know. I know I'm not willing to risk walking into some sting operation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for a little bit of money. There's plenty of work out there that I don't have to do anything illegal.
1
Imagine what this would do at the airports. With metal detectors being unreliable, every bag and person will have to be thoroughly searched. Expect to be required to arrive six hours before your flight.
4
This is not about Cody Wilson’s first amendment rights, not by a long shot. It’s all about making money. Wilson doesn’t seem to care or worry about the ramifications to people, National Security and country resulting from such a diabolical effort. So much killing in this country and all the country does is manufacture more guns….very sickening.
6
Amendments are not written in stone. That's why the Bill of Rights are called amendments.
This idea of using a 3D printer to produce a working AR-15 or any firearm is insanity. Buckle up our seat belts, it's going to be a bumpy ride down the rabbit hole.
5
Since 1968, in the USA, over 1 million people have died as a result of guns. To end the second world war, America used two nuclear weapons, and they killed about 1/4 million people.
Though I am vehemently against both the use of nuclear weapons and the use of guns because they are equally horrible, one definitely is worse than the other, and the numbers make it crystal clear.
2
"To end the second world war, America used two nuclear weapons, and they killed about 1/4 million people."
According to your comment, the only weapons used in WWII were "two nuclear weapons".
We are still living in the Wild Wild West, the rest of the world has moved on. Now we are going to arm teachers. When does this gun loving culture come to an end. Police shoot to kill, now the man on the street will shoot back. This cycle of violence has been sanctioned by the GOP, NRA.
People come to this country to escape violence from Central America now people have found the same violence here as they did back home. How sad that we live in fear for our lives because there is so much money in the NRA and the GOP love being backed by the NRA.
Why don't we have technology find a cure for cancer vs building guns. Our sense of priorities for life just isn't there
5
Next up printable nuclear devices.
2
Federal law passed in 1988, crafted with the NRA’s support, makes it unlawful to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive an undetectable firearm.
In 2013, Wilson posted the design of a gun he had created that was made of 3D printed components, a metal firing pin, and a metal plate to ensure compliance with the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988.
1
To a naive observer (like me), it would seem unlikely that a firearm consisting of plastic parts would be able to do anything with a bullet (metal?) shot using a chemical explosion that creates considerable pressure to push the bullet out of the barrel, other than destroy the gun. Has anybody actually demonstrated one of these plastic guns actually fire a bullet?
1
@d ascher They fire one bullet then they are done. This technology is mostly for making plastic receivers in states like CA where most guns are illegal to buy legal to make.
2
Marcus, you can buy pretty much any gun in CA that you can buy elsewhere in this country. There is a 10 day waiting period , and magazines are restricted to 10 rounds, but that's it .
Wonder how the gun industry/NRA really think about this dangerous innovation given it can cut in to their profit? Which is what their supposed protection of gun rights is really all about.
4
Meanwhile, in the 40th SD in Westchester/Putnam our local New York State Senator Terrence Murphy and Assembly Member Kevin Bryne want to repeal the safe act. Calls and letters to their offices to give a better explanation to their constituents or even hold a town hall style meeting to discuss this topic are ALL IGNORED. The Senator Senator says, "common sense" legislation but common sense would be to vote these two Trump supporting elected officials out of office.
5
As Pennsylvania's attorney general pointed out last night on the News Hour, one of the most disturbing parts of this is that Trump sought the counsel from the NRA rather than from those in law enforcement.
The line between Obama and Trump couldn't be clearer.
5
I don't understand the commotion-
Plastic handguns are only able to shoot 1 nail one time, but you'd need to be 5 feet from the target.
Plastic rifles cannot fire bullets because steel needs to be used to complete the gun, which cannot be added.
Everyone is getting worked up over this, and it is only ramping up sales of actual guns nationwide. That's the bigger issue.
1
Do YOU want to be at the other end of that 5 feet and take the risk? I certainly don't. NO, people are not getting upset over nothing. This is serious. One shot can KILL. And that shot is UNTRACEABLE.
Perhaps now we can enter a time when the government and the courts will legitimize the unintended consequences of new technologies. Marcel Proust is said to have observed that we cannot perform this week's play on last week's set. Enough with Originalism - times have changed.
1
More guns equal more tragedy - but let's not let tragedy interfere with profits.
10
@R. Anderson Which is why gun and violent crime has jumped by double digits the last two years in a row in London, the island nation that banned all handguns 20 years ago.
3
"I can't think of even one legitimate use for a plastic gun."
I can, a political coop.
Plastic guns should not be accorded in the second amendment right.
5
Folks, this is a hoax to rile up the anti-gun crowd. Workable guns require metallic parts that are beyond the capability of a 3D printer to replicate.
5
If you read the latest industry reports printable plastic guns made of sturdier plastics can fire real bullets.
6
You want to put the gun manufacturers out of business? An industry transition to home made guns would do that.
The day homemade plastic ghost guns ("downloadable guns") become real firearms in the hands of ignorant and insane Americans -- because they have a constitutional right to carry and shoot them, thanks to the First and Second Amendment guarantees -- is the day public safety will die in America, the once beautiful.
4
Well this certainly puts the NRA in a pickle. It won’t be long before gun manufacturers start whining to them and lobbying Congress about the competition from plastic gun makers, and then where will the NRA stand? Do they support just the metal gun manufacturers and then have to come up with an excuse as to why they don’t support plastic guns, twisting their logic into ever tighter pretzels? So many ways in which Republicans are eating their own in a feeding frenzy.
8
With the rampant stabbings in London, it makes it obvious that it's not the gun plans that need to be banned but the 3D printing itself.
With a 3D printer, one could turn out a infinite number of razor sharp knives from tiny pocket knives to swords all undetectable.
We must not allow such technology to be in the hands of the irresponsible general public.
Once we address this issue we should move on to other technologies that kill large numbers of people such as fire and private owned vehicles
5
There's a big difference between someone armed with a knife or armed with let's say a SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon - a military grade weapon, fires hundreds of rounds of 50 caliber bullets - there about 2 inches long and travel at about twice the speed of sound). So let me ask you: who would you rather face in the street? A person waving a knife or someone armed with a SAW? Still think there's no difference?
2
@Stephen Powers And how many times have SAWs been used on the streets and how many have they killed?
“The guns were “what the rest of us call freedom and innovation,” she said...”
Dana Loesch, NRA
Public production of unidentifiable, unregulated, and unregistered weapons? To what end and for what public purpose? Will traditional weapons manufacturers step in to oppose this on the basis of “quality control?”
This falls under the category of “have you ever thought of something to say and NOT said it?”
3
Can we have a National conversation about this first before everyone from children going to school tomorrow to people looking to knock off a liquor store have the capability to print up a gun in the privacy of their home?
5
@Mickey Well its already illegal for kids to possess a gun and also for anyone to knock off a liquor store so what different today from any day before?
2
@Marcus
Because this is a game changer, obviously.
How could any responsable person advocate the production of plastic guns which are clearly illegal? Another money-making scheme by a selfish person who has no concern for the risks to his fellow man. How low will the NRA stoop to cater to some unscrupulous members and a public only interested in their own pleasure no matter the risks involved. Law abiding NRA members should revolt! BTW, it's high time the president showed that he has a degree of compassion and that he has respect for the hundreds of past victims of gun violence by supporting the banning of plastic guns.
4
@barbara Well people are already making illegal weapons otherwise the UK wouldn't be seeing a uptick in gun violence two years in a row and none of these are pure plastic and the ones that are mostly plastic are single use and potentially dangerous.
2
Plastic guns in the hands of angry people is a disaster
4
Thank you Judge Lasnik for halting this unfolding tragedy.
Allowing 3-D printable guns is as insane as having Trump as our President. Law enforcement and security personnel are already overwhelmed by the proliferation of guns here in America - more than 260 millions guns. Now under the guise of yet another Amendment to our Constitution, the First Amendment, gun zealots are working hard to put more weapons on the streets.
And what makes the 3-D printable gun issue more insane is that the gun and parts are undetectable by most current building and event entrance security and these guns have no serial numbers. Basically anyone, good or bad, with a little money and know how could start producing weapons in their basement, garage or spare bedroom. Insanity!
And where is our Mad King Trump on this clear law and order issue? Cozying it up the the NRA. Insanity.
4
If Wilson succeeds in his attempt to post a 3D gun schematic, which would of course be available anywhere in the world, the first time one such gun was used to kill someone would make him an accomplice to murder or terrorism, yes?
So I assume that under the international agreements between the US and countries with a sane approach to gun control, he could be extradited to stand trial?
4
In Schenck v. United States (1919), the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the First Amendment, though it protects freedom of expression, does not protect dangerous speech.
“The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent” J. Holmes, Opinion of the Court.
By any measure, the publication of a lethal weapon, that can be produced at home that evades all known measures of security constitutes a “clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”
Case closed, right? Wrong, possibly. If conservative Justice Harbaugh is confirmed by the Republican Senate, it is likely - no probable - that the Supreme Court will, in a 5-4 vote, rewrite the law to satisfy the gun lobby and their monies interests.
We must prevent Harbaugh’s confirmation and vote to oust Republicans from the Senate.
2
Living in Europe, not having to do with any of these gun regulations just feels so liberated. Not having to think about guns in everyone’s pockets, in everyone’s home. Off course people have guns here but the dutch government actually recently lessened the allowed amount per citizen. It’s all about the intention.
The fact that the US government has always regulated guns, has made them way too accepted in everyone’s thought stream. Which is why citizens will always try to find ways to “defend” themselves. It has become too normal to think and talk about guns, even tho they are murdering objects in the purest sense.
I may only hope for the US gov to truly see what guns are, murdering objects. For self defense when can use our fists and whatnot. Except of course when the criminal has a gun. Well, how did he get it? Legal or illegal?
If he got it legally, then my feeling of safety as a citizen is completely gone.
Illegal gun trade will keep existing (just like all illegal things) but to me it’s about how the the Gov expresses the use of guns in general. The intention. The Gov has always made guns way too normal, and now they cannot remove them from general thoughts streams anymore.
2
This horse has left the barn and no doubt the plans are already available.
But while the guns can be made from plastic the bullets can't.
Time to restrict and heavily tax the sale of bullets. Without the bullets the gun is a useless toy.
And since possession of the plastic guns is already illegal make sure that anyone caught in possession of one, including I assume Cody Wilson should be put in jail.
Surely he would not publish the plans without first creating one and testing it.
4
The House is gone for August recess already? What are we paying these people to do? Real lives are at stake and they are on vacation?!
4
Where to begin. If you click on NYT best responses, all hysteria. Click on reader's picks, it's the end of humanity. This is old news. If you are old enough to remember, when "The Anarchist's Cookbook" came out, everyone lost their minds. People were going to be blowing up everything and creating chaos. The courts decided it was free speech. The book was not advocating that anyone kill anyone and as far as i know, there are no deaths associated to the book. There are more guns in the U.S. than there are people, but these "plastic" guns are going to create an uprising now? People that think there could ever be an all plastic gun know nothing about guns. Have they made plastic bullets yet? Can you set off a cartridge with a plastic hammer? Can a plastic barrel withstand the explosion of a discharge? No, to all. People also tried to say this about Glocks when they first came out with polymer components. You still need metal to make it work. Not traceable? What gun is? Most guns used in homicides are stolen. Why is a criminal going to spend over a thousand dollars to "print" an unreliable gun when he can get a "real steal" one for cheap on the streets? Stop with the histrionics. Any excuse to go after Trump.
4
No one needs 'an excuse' to go after Trump. He has earned our scorn through his own outrageous behavior. He's not the victim, he's the perpetrator. That said, even Trump says that he's not sure this plastic gun idea makes much 'sense.' He's talking to his buddies at the NRA, though, to see what he should do.
3
As much as there are many unresolved issues with weapons sales, the idea of blocking the release of 3D printing of any product is a violation of freedom of speech.
However the far greater issue is that the gun lobby constituents include current traditional manufacturers. For this group there is the potential for a significant loss of revenue. This then is in direct conflict with the basic principle of free enterprise where competition is key to advancing more efficient avenues to existing markets.
Policy makers will have to reconsider the value of the current system of gun sales vs the larger question of free enterprise. Of course there are many examples where Congress has legislated against new technologies in the past.
It is inevitable that 3D printing of weapons will come to pass. Like other new technologies such as the smartphone and the PC, the effect on the economy will be in the loss of many more jobs, in this case manufacturing jobs in the US.
Rather than stifle competition, it is time that Congress begins to seriously address the larger issue of legal weapon sales and proliferation in general.
Jobs lost in the firearms industry will be absorbed into the 3D printing industry, just as the people who manufactured has streetlights, or typewriters, moved on to other industries when those died.
Really? Large numbers of people will find value from untraceable and undetectable guns and adopt them at the the same level as they did PCs and mobile phones? That they will find them just as useful on a daily basis is worrying for a civil society.
The Wild West had nothing on this new age.
2
Regardless of what a person may be able to publish on the Internet, undetectable plastic guns have been illegal for 30 years. Federal law passed in 1988, crafted with the NRA’s support, makes it unlawful to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive an undetectable firearm.”
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20180731/nra-statement-on-3-d-printers-a...
9
As with many technological advances, the question is one not of law, but ethics: “Should we use them?” And not “Can we use them?” I am interested in the ethical argument for the publication of 3D gun printing plans where the purpose is not to entertain or inform the reader but to enable the making of these guns. Why should we encourage and support this?
3
@Gentlewomanfarmer:
We should not.
Period.
To do is to greatly accelerate the course we're already on to the demise of our species.
Sad.
Bigly sad.
2
Cool. I’m pretty sure downloading torrents of movies, TV shows and music is illegal too,
and that seems to be working out just as they’d hoped.
6
So what is all the fuss about with 3-D printed guns. Get a lathe and a milling machine and a block of steel and you have a gun that can be used more than once. China first used guns in the 12 century how can technology that is that old be controlled.
5
A gun with a plastic barrel would likely blow up with standard ammunition. It takes high quality steel to withstand the chamber pressure of a fired round. Such a gun would be a greater danger to the shooter than to say target.
This is a tempest in a teacup.
8
Right, because things don't change and improve.
1
@RM: if true, I say bring it on!!! Perhaps after a massive outbreak of personal injury and fatalities maybe -- just MAYBE the country will loose their infatuation with guns.
I seriously doubt it, but one can dream.
3
Given that it is legal (on speech grounds) to publish recipes/plans/code for drugs and crypto (a munition), I fail to see how gun plans can be banned.
5
That’s why there are lawyers and judges. Great they stopped the 3D idiocy. Thank god laymen don’t decide. IeWhen the decisions in the gay wedding cake issue was voted on in comprehensive legal opinion by the justices “the decision was made within a “narrow margin”. The vote was 2 dissenting and the rest allowing the dismissal in favor of the baker. But laymen reacted with “ what narrow margin? It’s not a sports score of the vote. Narrow margin is in the context of the ruling.That’s the unknowing about what the narrow margin was - the States actions and manner of efforts were their issue and the baker could still be sued again. That’s why readers are readers not lawyers. That’s the lesson for today. Any increase in guns is beyond stupid
Clearly, we’re dealing with a 1st Amendment issue here. Leave the poor man alone, and let him talk about plastic guns.
4
First amendment? 'Talking' about plastic guns? This isn't about talking, it's about making detailed instructions available to do something that is illegal and the furthermore would be bad for our society. Where are the adults in the room?
2
@M Wilson
I guess I was being too smarty-pants. I was merely pointing to the same absurdity that you correctly detail. It’s nuts that he and his supporters claim this all falls under the 1st Amendment’s protections. Talking about his (deadly, untraceable, handy-for-terrorists) toys is all that’s protected. Distributing them is not.
Maybe the airline industry will prevail in preventing this insanity.
4
Trump wants to make it easy for terrorists to pass through security chdck points. He is a danger to the entire planet.
14
“This is a huge free speech case,” said Mr. Blackman, who vowed to continue fighting the efforts to prevent Mr. Wilson from posting his documents online. - Yep, as big a free speech issue as used to prevent cities and towns from heavily taxing sugar-laden sodas. These evil people love to hide behind one Amendment or another. It's all part of Trump's plan to round up a well-armed militia he can call on to protect himself when the feds come to get him. His armed followers have been duped into thinking they are protecting the supreme protector of our democracy, while they are aligning with the supreme destroyer of our democracy while he gathers ultimate power to rule. But it's not too late to wake up to their mistake. What will be the catalyst for that? What/who will step forward.
6
Strange to find myself agreeing with the NRA. You can ban the guns themselves, but banning the plans is dumb and will be just as successful as banning music piracy.
The basic problem, which is that people can 3D print illegal or dangerous stuff, is not going away. It's just something society will need to get comfortable with.
10
@Updog Good point. After all, Americans have become comfortable with, for lack of a better word, with mass shootings.
1
@Updog
Just like the socjety needs to get comfortable with children being routinely killed in schools, correct?
1
Hold on a minute here... Isn't the NRA against gun control, as in anything that even closely resembles even the slightest infringement on management of gun ownership in our country?
How can the NRA be against 3-D printable guns? Such hypocrisy!
Throw out the NRA leadership and start with a fresh management team more in tune with our need to have reasonable restraints on guns, gun ownership and social safety - which might even choose to help protect Americans against all kinds of violence.
NRA: Use your resources to make our country safe... The "One Good Guy With A Gun" just isn't cutting it...
28
@Bob
3D printable ghost guns leave out the manufacturers...the very reason the NRA is for as many guns in ourlives as possible.
@Bob
My guess is that the NRA is against gun control but even more against people printing their own guns and leaving gun manufactures uninvolved. Gun manufacturers heavily sponsor and influence the NRA's agenda. It's not all about freedom and public safety.
I can't think of even one legitimate use for a plastic gun.
And legitimate uses do not include promoting anarchy and terrorism.
84
@CJ13 Its more for the poor people of The Peoples Republic of Kalifornia who are prohibited from buying many guns so a market for homemade receivers was born, which is the only part of a weapon that is considered a gun under federal law, for these disenfranchised citizens. If you want to blame someone blame CA politicians for creating a market which as an unintended consequence will aid the black market.
1
Thinking about the First Amendment and freedom of speech in general, one may not yell "fire" in a crowded theater. This effort to promote the manufacture of ghost guns seems to run afoul of such a common sense prohibition
69
'... one may not yell "fire" in a crowded theater.'
There is no "fire" and there is no "crowd".
Check your library for books on the "First Amendment" and on "freedom of speech".
4
The word “analogous” in the context of danger is a word that may not be understood by many. It is the concept of danger that counts. Like telling people how to pass TSA screens easily with dangerous weapons.
6
@Shoshana Halle Its been legal to make your own gun so long you able to buy and possess one since like 1776. Its irrelevant anyway as "ghost guns" have been around for year in CA which is why this technology was invented in the first place because of CA harsh gun laws. Stopping one man wont stop criminals just look at the recent Rancho Tehama Shooting in the gun control state of CA, it hasn't worked and never will allow the citizenry the right to self defense and crime will drop.
1
Perhaps things will begin to change when some gun nut sneaks his homemade 3D gun contraption past the metal detectors at RNC or NRA headquarters and administers some 2nd Amendment solutions to these callous, greedy fiends who profit off mayhem and death. (NOT advocating, just speculating.) Because Republicans never do anything until it happens to THEM; although that fatuous NRA stooge Scalese obviously learned nothing from his near death 2nd Amendmemt encounter. Americans should consider the political party that would allow any screwball with modest technical means the opportunity to make an undetectable gun and vote accordingly on November 6, 2018.
16
Perhaps it is time for the courts to determine whether enabling the private manufacture of untraceable and undetectable plastic guns through 3-D printers is an ultra-hazardous activity that should result in strict liability. Although the courts have rejected this argument with respect to regular guns, the effort by a self-described anarchist to flood our country with plastic, undetectable guns represents such a threat to our society and the right to life that it merits strict liability.
5
The point is that this technology makes it fairly easy for every bonehead with a high school degree to crank out an almost-undetectable two-shot firearm.
See also "Jurassic Park," in which Crichton--for all his frequent dimwittedness--pointed out that the prob is, such technologies award power with very little of the responsibility acquired through long training and work.
Like other such idiocies, this will come back to bite us. Fermi Paradoxes all around, I trust?
3
Trump ok’d the sale of these “ghost guns”. Let him be the first victim.
11
This is so far from a "well-regulated militia". See, 2nd Amendment folks, the word "regulate" is even in there.
12
All regulations, all government lawsuits in progress that could make the nation scream for mercy, should be considered upcoming attractions from the Trump administration. As Russian walls close in on the president of the United States expect him listening to aides tell him all about what scares the country most. What will distract. Whether it's a plastic gun nestled in the carry-on bag of your airline seatmate or something else, guaranteed Trump's aides will fail choosing a distract as horrific as an American president conspiring with Russia.
2
Maybe the best response is to make possession of such CAD files a felony, then have the Federal government put up websites with fake CAD files where the downloader can be identified though their ISP. When a downloader is identified in the US, they should then be visited by the local police.
4
Richard.....where do we start with that? Where does it end? Would it extend to any religions that we associate with terrorists? Child molesters? smuggler smugglers? How about those pesky opposition political parties? Do you see where I am going with this?
Well I don't want 3D printed plastic guns around and I do wish we had much stricter gun control laws, including universal background checks, gun registration, liability for misuse...
Yet I find the first amendment argument to be persuasive here. If it's legal to publish instructions for making meth and bombs (it is, isn't it?), shouldn't it be legal to publish plans for printing plastic gun parts?
3
"it is, isn't it?"
Why don't you test the hypothesis?
#GitmoTourist
2
The real challenge will be forcing Google and other search engines not giving search results for where to find the CAD files for this and other dangerous items (including explosives, chemical and bio weapons) that can be made with 3 D printers and other technologies. Then there is the matter of websites that have links to these files.
These CAD files or the equivalent will become available on the popular parts of the Internet on servers outside the US soon if they are not there already. Then there is the matter of this information being on the Dark Web.
The use of US courts is not as effective as we would like because US courts don't control what goes on Internet servers in the other 194 countries connected to the Internet.
1
NRA is hiding.
Trump says NRA says, Makes no sense.
Then NRA returns to hiding.
NRA has the intellect of a gun barrel.
Speak up kids. Where are your lawyers?
NRA is a chicken hawk.
What a joke.
6
Has this country finally lost its collective MIND? And this is a new low for the worst president in American history. And why isn't this the lead story on the front page of The Times?
As the rest of the world watches in disbelief, we have mass murders every few DAYS. And the NRA is more powerful now than it was 50 years ago, when King and Kennedy were gunned down just a few weeks apart.
And now, gun nuts can make their OWN guns that can't be traced with registration numbers or metal parts? Even if Republican NRA toadies were voted out of office, these do-it-yourself guns would STILL elude gun control.
God HELP the United States of America.
15
Oh boy, the fox is in charge of the hen house now.
4
The NRA--The National Russian Association--and the USA have gone absolutely and completely mad. I reckon no one from any other country will ever want to visit there.
6
@bcer NRA also means Never Reasonable Anytime!
4
The Anarchists Plastic Cookbook.
4
Here’s the standard: If we’re okay with these being carried in the White House and other federal buildings....have at it.
5
Gee, I hope that presidential assassins don't have access to trump's 3-D guns. That would be too much of an irony...
2
Why in the world would these online blueprints be allowed? And why would Dana Loesch of the NRA think this kind of thing is okay? She must be bought and sold by the Russian conspiracy campaign. Lordy, Lordy.
Thank you to the Washington State AG and the other states that signed onto his suit. Washington States’ AG has proven himself a true patriot in his continued challenges of this outlaw administration.
9
@Radha They have been online already for years especially on the dark web and no gun law has seemed to slow down criminals as of yet.
2
Proud my state took the lead in this. Sad that it will do absolutely no good. "How do you keep a wave upon the sand?"
5
Cody Wilson should have got a DARPA research project grant for battlefield replacement of combat weapons. We wouldn't even be having this pointless debate. 15 years later the technology would be commonplace... just like 30-06 deer rifles.
2
The judicial branch is the only functional branch of government.
3
Maybe they should send him schematics for 3D printable handcuffs.
9
please stop. as much as I despise Trump's administration and the damage he is doing to the rule of law and the environment Trump is not the bad guy in this story.
this is all playing into his narrative that he is being attacked.
vote on 11/6 let your voice be heard. that goes for all Trump supporters as well. we need to know how everyone feels.
2
In 1949, Supreme Court Justice R.H. Jackson wrote a dissent where he raised the possibility that too broad an interpretation of the Bill of Rights could turn it into a Constitutional suicide pact. We've already had a taste of this when Justice Scalia decided that the phrase "well-regulated militia" really meant "pretty much anybody". But now, when someone claims that their 1st Amendment rights includes the right to (effectively) home manufacture untraceable and undectable "ghost" guns and isn't immediately laughed out of court, I think it safe to say that Justice Jackson worst fears have become reality.
26
@curious Explain how it isn't. The First Amendment protects telling people how to do something illegal. It just prohibits encouraging them to do it.
1
Actually, the First does no such thing, and never has. See also, oh, publishing engineering diagrams for a polonium initiator or detailed instructions on shotgun DNA methods for genengineering an added protein sheath on a smallpox virus.
2
"In 1949, Supreme Court Justice R.H. Jackson wrote a dissent ..."
That's not an adequate legal citation. You need to give the name of the case too.
'... when Justice Scalia decided that the phrase "well-regulated militia" really meant "pretty much anybody".'
Again, you need to give the name of the case.
1
The plans were uploaded. As everyone knows, once it's been uploaded the net it's there for ever!!
2
Not much to see here. Another leftist judge making a ruling that will get overturned on appeal. The standard for a temporary restraining order requires that the plaintiff demonstrate a likelihood of succeeding on the merits. Anyone who knows anything about First Amendment jurisprudence (including the prior restraint doctrine) and basic principles of standing knows that there is virtually NO likelihood of succeeding on the merits.
3
@Jon W.
When the merit is public safety, along with existing laws specifically restricting undetectable firearms, no amount of legal maneuvering will let this go.
It ain't left or right. It heading off an unnecessary headache for law enforcement and the general public.
15
@Jon W.
On what circuit bench do you sit? Please cite credible sources that support your claim of "no likelihood."
"Anyone who knows anything" is not a source; it's smoke and mirrors.
2
@Jon W.
You are right, Jon, we on the left probably need to start reconsidering our support for gun control. We might need to become staunch proponents of the 2nd amendment, sadly.
2
Ah - you folks realize it was mentioned in previous comments on a USAT posting that the instructions for making this indicate the LIFE EXPECTANCE of the plastic gun is one shot. Eh? Big danger... Whooaaa.... Shaking....
4
@Bob
Up to nine shots. But even one shot can be fatal.
3
@Bob
Only one shot -- and for a domestic abuser with a restraining order that might be all they need.
3
@Bob
There were many cases throughout the years where a child would fire a gun and wound or kill their sibling, parent or a playmate. I doubt they kept shooting, so it seems to me that often one shot is all it takes.
Do you want to try it on yourself? "You can shoot me, but only once!"
Trump is using gun extremists and they are using him. May they both get their due someday.
8
Seems so insane for a country that has the highest murder and suicide rate by gun in the developed world. Seems like denial in the extreme.
How is this a "well regulated militia being necessary for a free state.."
Stupid grand experiment that will not end well. I guess we should all arm ourselves.
5
“As an industry, we certainly don’t advocate that hobbyists try to do this in their basement, any more than General Motors would encourage someone to go out and build a car at home,” he said.
I don't know where this guy has been. Some of us, quite a few of us, have been building cars at home for years and years with GM's approval. They sell us the parts. There is a big big difference between home made guns and home made cars.
7
There is. Cars kill more people.
3
Wars have killed more people than cars
Wow, only in America. I read about the politicians under NRA's thumb. Maybe free guns would weaken their control and then politicians will do their work with more common sense and moral and social responsibility.
5
Wonder how the rest of the worlds internet will respond to our 'free speech'?
4
@Jon W - How did they respond to the original Constitution?
3
Good. Some people are simply childish about refraining from doing things that can harm others. As soon as someone points out that they are putting themselves or others at risk they persist just to act defiantly. It’s some kind of emotional thing which is beyond their control. There may be ways to make these guns detectable so that they will not be used for crimes but for now they pose a clear and present danger.
4
@Casual Observer - Actually, you are quite wrong. Serial numbers only assist in tracking a weapon AFTER it's been used to kill you. Otherwise, they generally add value by dating production of a firearm.
3
Another consideration: There are plenty of countries where someone could host a website with those plans without fear of censure (if they don't already...).
So, unless it becomes illegal to download, possess, or distribute those plans (like child pornography), the current efforts to stop Wilson and like-minded others in the U.S. are likely to have limited impact -- especially if the technology continues to improve.
Attempting to legislate such prohibitions might seem appealing, but I suspect that the legal challenges would be hard to overcome. For one thing, child pornography involves the depiction of a crime. The capturing of an explicit image is, itself, an abuse of the child. Capturing/sharing a schematic/plan does not, on its own, harm anyone.
While the comparison to bomb schematics/recipes might be more appropriate, it would still be hard to prove "imminent" risk, given that a gun could be used for a variety of purposes (e.g., target practice, shooting competitions). Unlike the stockpiling of certain types of bombs/bomb-making materials, such uses don't necessarily involve imminent, or even likely, risk to persons.
3
"There are plenty of countries where someone could host a website with those plans without fear of censure (if they don't already...)."
What countries? Regardless, that is beside the point. Wilson is defending his freedom of speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment.
From the article:
'“This is a huge free speech case,” said [Wilson's lawyer,] Mr. Blackman, who vowed to continue fighting the efforts to prevent Mr. Wilson from posting his documents online.'
The Times should have been more specific: "... fighting the [US government's] efforts ..."
@GNH
Yes, Wilson is asserting that his rights under the First Amendment are being infringed upon.
My point is that the safety concerns that prompted the government's action are likely to remain, regardless of this case's outcome. The very same blueprints can be distributed online from sites where U.S. courts have no jurisdiction.
How is Cody Wilson any different from the Al Queda terrorists who posted the online article entitled "How to Make A Bomb in the Kitchen of your Mom"? Because the Second Amendment protects guns but not bombs?
He is aiding and abetting terrorism and ought to be treated accordingly.
43
You can find homemade bomb recipes in The Anarchist Cookbook. Copies are readily available online.
2
"How is Cody Wilson any different from the Al Queda terrorists ..."
For a start, Wilson files lawsuits against the US government ...
1
A smart way to circumvent for second amendment rights while including them in as first amendment rights.
Two entirely separate issues.
Does one have the legal right to publish blue prints for guns for the general public to obtain at will, without consideration of current federal state or local ordinances or laws that currently pertain to gun ownership, and do laws currently allow the publication as a free speech right, or do the courts currently limit certain items as free speech?
Should one say yes one can publish as a free speech and is a right, than could this also pertain to a person who publishes political secrets, be a free speech right also, where as current federal,state, and local ordinances are stating otherwise?
What is the precedent the court will decide on here.
This will be most interesting ruling.
Scalia's opinion was walking two sides of the fence, what will this court's opinion state.
And it is an opinion of an interpretation of laws.
2
@Kerm
You can already get blue prints/schematics of most fire arms. But to build them you would need a full shop and be a killed machinist. These prints include the BAR the 1919 the MG34 and ect. The only problem would be that it's a federal crime to build one
3
Standing on the field at a concert in Chicago, my eyes gazed up to all the buildings surrounding Wrigley and I thought, We are all sitting ducks.
5
I’m curious what this will mean for border controls in countries with a strong regime controlling the availability of semi-automatic and automatic weapons, like Australia.
I agree that if it’s possible to purchase a gun illegally, that will likely remain much cheaper and more reliable than trying to 3D print one at home (and if they are already willing to break the law then existing controls aren’t an obstacle). However in countries like Australia with strong natural and legal border controls that prevent a significant market in illegal automatic weapons, digital files and 3D filaments would easily pass the border controls.
I also agree that the cork is out of the bottle.
This is a much bigger issue for us, and even though we have no Second Amendment (no revolution was needed here to establish democracy) we would end up with criminals enjoying the same “freedoms” guaranteed all citizens of the US.
I fear that for these same reasons, ie that people here would have much more reason to invest in a printed weapon because they can’t just (illegally) buy one, we would become an attractive “development market” for those seeking to eventually monetise at-home gun production while they bring the costs down.
1
The risk this creates for society is huge and the typical methods we use to stop them just don't work since people like Cody Williams just circumvent the law.
What would work, in my view, is if people with strong knowledge 3D printing were to post a large number of almost identical documents that, when followed, would result in guns that didn't work. If these were posted and couldn't be distinguished from the real one the "bad guys" would just waste their money, get frustrated and hopefully give up.
Bruce
5
@Bruce
Best plan I've heard so far! I think this may already be a tool of law enforcement for bomb-making recipes.
I guess the NRA opposes it because it would dry up the source of a big chunk of their funding: GUN SALES. Free guns means who needs to pay for guns?
6
@James
“Free”? The printers and materials are not an impulse purchase.
1
You can avoid the free speech issue by legislating the illegality of possessing, distributing, manufacturing etc. "ghost guns," and same for guns without serial numbers. Similarly, can outlaw the purchase of ammunition for these guns, assuming they use different ammunition from the legal kill instruments er I mean guns
5
The sickness of the United States is on full display. My country, never fully satisfied until anyone or everyone has full access to weapons, trumps individual rights over collective rights. The community be damned. Is there a more primitive electorate in the developed world? What is wrong with the United States?
38
@Richard Steele
What is wrong with the United States?
REPUBLICANS.
20
In response to Richard Steele: Gutting public education, Fox News and other conservative propaganda media, and reality TV
6
It's difficult to stop someone with an intent to harm from harming people. Banning information about how to make a specialized tool to inflict harm isn't going to stop people with malicious intent.
3
@mannyv< it may not stop everyone, but it makes it allowable to try. I bet most Americans would like LEO to be able to legally try to stop people with malicious intent before they kill dozens of us.
4
If that was true then rates of homicide would be similar in other comparable first world nations such as Australia and United Kingdom. The reality is that if you arm a society with efficient killing tools (guns) then more people die by design or by accident.
8 of every 10 kids that are shot dead in the first world are American kids.
3
@mannyv
Actually it does stop people. There's a reason why very few people are killed by homemade bombs. Making weapons more difficult to manufacture at home or to purchase ready-made on impulse will not prevent all violence but it can stop a whole lot of it.
Its legal to build guns at home in most states. I dont see why it should be illegal to print them under current law in most states.
3
@Jacqueline I don't know "current law" in most states. Do you?
6
@Jacqueline
Did you read the article? All-plastic guns are illegal -- the kind that metal detectors can't see. They're illegal to manufacture, whether at home or in a factory. And plastic is exactly what 3D-printed guns are made from.
I would think that economics could help stop this Folly as well. People will be less likely to go to public places such as restaurants, theaters, concerts, airplanes etc., At least that is the direction I see myself going. It is not going to be good for business overall.
7
@Sabree Hamel Do you really think people in Arizona are afraid to go to the movies ?
2
Kenneth, They are in Colorado. Dark Knight Rising.
2
The only workable way to mitigate this problem involves two steps: 1) Criminal and financial penalties for building a working firearm without a federal manufacturing license or failing to register and serialize it must be made extremely severe; 2) Turning in anyone doing so, must be richly rewarded upon conviction.
15
This harkens back to a time five years ago when futurists and publicists predicted everyone would soon have a 3-D printer at home. Turns out they were as popular as Google glasses. People who commit crimes with guns tend to be poor people living in inner city desperation and occasionally people who are mentally ill or dealing drugs. People at the cutting edge of technology are unlikely gunslingers. This legal case reminds me of people who panic that a monument with the 10 commandments will cause unsuspecting people to convert from their religion. Fun arguments for a law professor before his students, but not related to the real world.
3
@Rick and therefore ?
If people will buy them people will make them.
3
@Rick
(1) The 1st Amendment forbids religious symbols on public land not because someone "might be converted" but so our government will not favor, nor appear to favor, any particular religion or its followers over everyone else.
(2) Please cite reliable sources for your claims about who commits gun violence. Many rural people also live in desperation and kill each other and themselves with guns.
1
The first amendment's famous limitation involves the imminent threat of death from misuse of free speech. Why would someone own or make such a gun except to evade detection? How is that fair or right when the intent is to try to get away with murder?
Can someone explain how this is fundamentally different from yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater?
22
@KHL For the same reason people have always made guns at home, because they want them. If you want to argue against this, argue against what has always been legal, to make guns at home with very basic machining equipment. If you don't understand that much about the law and the status quo, do some research before jumping into the conversation.
2
'Can someone explain how this is fundamentally different from yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater?'
There is no "fire" and there is no "crowd".
If you and the other commenters who tried that bogus argument want to discuss the First Amendment, you should learn something about it.
Check your library for books on the "First Amendment" and on "freedom of speech".
2
@sedanchair
so far, people have only been able to machine a gun at home that can be detected by metal detectors. This is about making guns at home that can be carried aboard planes and into theaters without metal detection.
Your position is irrelevant, and dangerous to all of us.
2
“As an industry, we certainly don’t advocate that hobbyists try to do this in their basement, any more than General Motors would encourage someone to go out and build a car at home,” he said.
Mr. Keane, surely you understand that even if GM encouraged people to build their own cars, we have regulations to protect the public from the consequences of that scenario. Our cars are inspected and registered and our drivers are licensed. The same obviously cannot be said about the gun industry. But the same SHOULD be said about the gun industry, especially when it comes to print-your-own weapons.
20
Great idea - let’s wait for the carnage of another 9/11
1
This horse has left the barn, despite what a US judge had ruled.
The issue may turn more on economics because the relevant printers are very expensive, well beyond what ordinary NRA members might be able to afford. Collectives of terrorists might be able to pay for the equipment, of course.
So the social issues before us are quite different from trying to ban “publication” of the blueprints/plans. Scary challenges indeed!!
3
Plans for 3D printed firearms have been available on the internet from multiple sources for years.
It's been illegal to generate an undetectable firearm for decades.
It's been illegal to give, sell, or barter an untraceable firearm for decades.
The NRA supports both of those restrictions.
This is a tempest in a teapot and yet another in the long list of reasons it's impossible to take Democrats seriously anymore
7
@I want another option
"it's impossible to take Democrats seriously anymore."
SO DON'T. THAT OUGHT TO MAKE FOR A HUGE CHANGE IN THE POLITICAL LANDSCAPE
1
NRA has succesfully posited the narrative: "guns = freedom."
2
Of course, the NRA is in favor of employing "freedom and innovation" to find new ways to kill and maim. As an added bonus, this new innovation will help terrorists evade detection (e.g., smuggling guns onto planes and into courtrooms). And it's just perfect for getting around our best forensic technology, too. No more wasting money on murder trials and imprisonments.
Dana Loesch and all the NRA brass should be proud that they're sticking it to the government and all the liberals. Again. Go, NRA!
4
Regarding judicially established rights and limits to free speech concerning public welfare, is facilitating the creation of a legally banned weapon equivalent to shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater?
3
Kind of funny in a sick way. The USA wasted trillions in a mindbogglingly misguided attempt to neutralize the terrorist threat thru military adventurism, yet its citizens want to aid would be terrorists either domestic or foreign by showing them how to make their own deadly weapons.
Really, when the nation has its own codified national suicide pact (2nd Amendment) and citizens can strut around either covertly or openly packing heat and a grudge, and cops are armed and those who hate or fear cops are armed, what’s a downloadable gun or two (or 1,000) into the mix? It’s really just like throwing a lighted match on a raging forest fire. So many American die at the hand of guns, what’s a few more? Life is cheap here. Very cheap indeed.
26
I fail to see how the publication of instructions to 3-D print a gun is a form of protected speech. It's more like yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater, i.e., a form of speech that is a threat to public safety. It's likewise not legal to distribute bomb-making instructions on the web.
9
"It's likewise not legal to distribute bomb-making instructions on the web."
There is a Wikipedia article on Molotov cocktails:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov_cocktail
2
@GNH
Dear Gun Rights Extremist,
A Molotov cocktail is not a true explosive device. Please familiarize yourself with the law: it is NOT legal to distribute bomb-making instructions on the web.
1
Parent: "Dear Gun Rights Extremist, ..."
Don't make assumptions about people you don't know.
Parent: "A Molotov cocktail is not a true explosive device."
You are equivocating. Google the "No True Scotsman Fallacy".
Parent: "Please familiarize yourself with the law: ..."
You have the burden of proof, so cite a reliable legal source, preferably the US Code.
1
Although print-at-home guns pose an obvious threat to our social order, the primary reason for this reversal is that this technology threatens to disrupt the gun industry’s market.
6
"... this technology threatens to disrupt the gun industry’s market."
That's ridiculous. Anyone can make forks with a 3D printer too. Is the fork "market" going to be "disrupted"?
Google "3D print fork" for instructions.
1
With due respect to those who fail to understand the limitations of 3D printing....you can't make a working gun for $150, despite what the AG of PA says. Functional 3D printers which can lay down metal layers for laser scintillation hardening cost several tens of thousands of dollars. Plastic guns won't work. It's physics
This entire discussion is nothing but ignorance, piled on ignorance, with a significant overlay of emotion.
Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
7
@jljarvis Classic plastic FDM 3d printers can actually make quite strong structures when done correctly, that can shoot repeatedly. Espescially combined with post-processes like meta inserts or soaking in epoxy.
4
@Alex uh huh. I've spent north of $10k on 3D printers in the last 6 months. What they can't do, and materials science won't support, exceeds the popular fiction. And yes, there are limited work-arounds for plastic which may work for a time. But there is more fiction here than fact. Reality ain't cheap.
The argument has more emotional smoke than real fire.
1
@jljarvis
Please cite some proof for your claim that they don't work.
These aren't heirloom Winchesters, but it appears that you can spend a few hundred dollars to make a flimsy but usable plastic gun that will evade metal detectors at airports, schools and courthouses. You don't have to own a printer -- there are printers available for public use on a fee basis.
It is too little too late. Cody Wilson said that he has already released the blueprints. I think it was CBS that said about 2,500 people have already downloaded it. I watched a couple of interviews with him today . Wilson acts like a sociopath. Complete arrogance and self-interest in his fantasy of "providing information." No regard whatsoever for public safety and being a direct contributor to violence, murder, chaos. He was asked directly if he felt any responsibility for ghost guns falling into the hands of children, felons, mentally ill people - he could care less. Trump could care less too. Congress probably won't care enough to do anything either. What a total nightmare.
30
@NYReader The fact that people are stupid, or that information can be abused for criminal ends does not abrogate the right of persons to discuss, and/or otherwise disseminate information. There are already laws about children and guns, etc - none of this has anything to do with bypassing any existing laws.
Trump, Republicans and the NRA are a disgrace to this country, pushing a pro-gun ideology at any cost to American people, regardless of mass shootings in K-12 schools, colleges, workplaces, concerts, malls. They care nothing for common sense gun control that would help curb this terrible, very real threat.
15
Mr. Wilson needs to creatively bring the "free exercise of religion" edict, also under the First Amendment, somehow into his legal defense of these homemade, lethal plastic weapons. Perhaps he needs to establish the Church of the Righteous Spewing Fire, or something similar, to establish his bona fides. Once his case eventually gets to the Supreme Court, he'll have a winner for sure!
6
My niece and I were talking the other day...she is 11-years old and lives in Australia. She said she and her mom were discussing going overseas....here first such trip.
Her one input to the conversation was...'Just not America. I saw what happened to the Parkland kids and I don't want to anywhere there are so many guns'.
THIS is the legacy the worlds children are growing up with around American culture. Congratulations to the NRA for ruining the image of America in the world for generations...and just when China and India are on the rise. The decline of America truly is in full swing.
36
"Congratulations to the NRA for ruining the image of America in the world for generations..."
So that would be why so many thousands of people are trying to enter the US illegally every day, and why they pay others so much money to get them in, and why they risk their lives to do so, and why they try again and again if they are caught.
Got it. Thanks.
3
As a Bay Area liberal (or ex-liberal), 3D printed guns were the single issue that most woke me up and I have become much more conservative sympathetic, and a classic libertarian since studying it.
If you think stopping Cody Wilson from distributing his art (yes this is best understood as an art project) ends this problem, think again. I own a 3D printer I bought online for about $400 and even though my only firearm experience comes from Boy Scout camp, I could tonight design my own gun with free tools from Google and some research on Wikipedia. I don't need to download his design, or any illegitimate sources.
For 200 years the value created by the industrial revolution has been in the hands of a select powerful few in New York and DC, who were happy to let the government protect them in trade for control. Hence controlling gun manufacturers and marijuana farmers was possible.
But this is by no means a natural state of society. The true natural state is far closer to libertarianism than central control, just look at history or any non-industrialized nation. As such, modern liberals and progressing technology will stay opposed for many years to come, until liberals learn to release the safety of tyranny, and enter the dangerous real world like everybody else.
5
@Alex Blaming everything on some phantom cartoon idea of "liberals" is childish, self-serving and just wrong. You idea of pure freedom is a freedom "from" and you need a scapegoat to have that "from". Wyatt Earp was no liberal. Having a government is just citizens of the proverbial "wild west" banding together and saying "enough with your childish uncivilized manner" writ large.
10
@Alex
There is NO nation that successfully operates on a libertarian basis. We can choose nature -- where life is "nasty, brutish, and short" as Hobbes said -- or we can choose civilization. There are a lot of options between oligarchy and anarchy.
1
Heaven forbid we have a gun manufactured in the US that the NRA doesn’t get a payoff on.
Individual gun owners making their own weapons without a donation to the NRA could undermine their whole system of funding.
Gun manufacturers contribute $40 million a year to NRA coffers and enable them to buy politicians.
4
This reminds me of one of my all-time favorite cartoons from the New Yorker --
https://www.allposters.com/-sp/O-K-folks-let-s-break-it-up-New-Yorker-Ca...
3
Amazing and not thought possible, the 1st amendment literally weaponized through the 2nd amendment. Some 3D printers use non-metal materials that can stand up to the forces of a cartridge explosion and a bullet pushed out of a barrel.
6
"Some 3D printers use non-metal materials that can stand up to the forces of a cartridge explosion and a bullet pushed out of a barrel."
Cite a reliable source. And how is the ammunition made?
1
It has always been a mystery to me how some people can believe the only "freedom" enshrined in the Constitution that should function without any limitation, of any kind, is the "freedom" to own and operate a machine whose sole purpose is to kill. Every other "right" must have its "reasonable" limits - except the "right" to kill. Though I love it dearly, ours is a very sick nation.
277
I TOTALLY AGEE WITH YOU! what is happening in this country?
5
'... some people can believe the only "freedom" enshrined in the Constitution that should function without any limitation, of any kind, ...'
You didn't identify anyone with that belief. Further, firearms are indeed regulated in the US, so you are creating a straw man. Google "federal firearms regulations".
'Every other "right" must have its "reasonable" limits - except the "right" to kill.'
That's another straw man. There is no such "right". Murder is a crime. Self-defense, hunting, and target shooting are legal.
3
@Not Amused Nonsense. Conservatives are not saying what you're saying they are saying.
The first right enumerated in the Constitution is the right to life (then liberty and the pursuit of happiness), and there is no right to kill anywhere.
Maybe try taking your "killer" rhetoric to pro-choice advocates who also try to balance individual rights with the supreme right to life!
1
What was he thinking? It is our second amendment right to have guns that defeat all security, in airport, in the courtroom and in schools. Where's the Russian-backed NRA when you need them?
13
Thing 1 - You cannot legally manufacture a firearm (that includes putting together unapproved combinations of previously manufactured firearms) unless you have a Class 7 FFL to manufacture.
So... anyone who actually DID make a plastic gun would be in violation of a Federal law. And we all know that gun laws advocated by liberals prevent bad guys from doing illegal things, RIGHT???? I mean... if the LeftyLeft is worried about plastic guns being made, they're pretty much ADMITTING that gun regs are worthless.
You really CAN'T have it both ways.
3
Being dead is not a partisan issue, criminals don't ask and don't care one fig about that.
1
@Joey
Well, Joey, do you feel happy to have scored a point and downed another LeftyLeft type? Do you feel safe and secure at the thought of totally unregulated gun production and ownership? You are right, though, you can't have it both ways - so, why not, let's opt for more guns and many more unnecessary deaths as a result of guns in a country where most of us are already looking over the shoulder for the next wing nut with a weapon. Is there any shred of common sense left in this country?
6
@Joey, I'm trying to relate your post to reality.....
2
Can I make a bulletproof vest with a printer?
34
@Anthony Forget the vest, I want an Iron Man suit.
2
@Patrick
You can't have one, I watched the film, your government reclassified the suit as a weapon, and demanded/seized the right to control it.
3-D printing technology has enabled suitably equipped individuals to "print" plastic guns for a long time. Plans for the guns - files containing programs to run the printer - have been available publicly to anyone interested for at least five years. This simply is not news.
During that time, I do not recall seeing a single report of a plastic gun being used in a crime or any other circumstance.
During that time, however, metal firearms have been used many thousands of times, both legally and not. During that time, and for many decades earlier, a competent machinist, with appropriate equipment within financial reach of individuals, could manufacture real guns, more reliable, accurate, and reusable than the plastic product from a 3-D printer.
The fears of those in a panic over this "shocking" "news" are almost entirely misplaced. Those who want guns for illegal use or who are in prohibited status generally can obtain real guns illegally; they have little need to print one. Even the bogeyman of undetectability probably is not a serious problem in airports where scanning equipment is current, and there is little question that detection technology will be improved going forward.
In short, people should get a grip and concentrate their worry on issues likely to be significant problems.
7
"Even the bogeyman of undetectability probably is not a serious problem in airports where scanning equipment is current ..."
Certainly not a problem at all, because ammunition is made with *metal*.
3
@Thomas D. Dial And, at the same time, i very often violate seatbelt laws and yet I've never been killed in an auto accident. Why aren't you also fighting for my freedom from being fined for not wearing seat belt?
Who at the Times thought the most representative image to pair with this article would be a picture of Trump? We are already force-fed Trump as a president, even though he doesn't represent the electorate; must his image be paired with stories that relate only tangentially to him?
I fear that this phenomenon is the same one that led the national media to give Trump an estimated billion dollars in free publicity during the 2016 election. We are not baby birds waiting with our beaks open for every available tidbit about Trump. When it's a Trump story, fine, use his picture. When Trump is not the main protagonist, don't. A picture of Judge Lasnik or Cody Wilson would have been the obvious pick.
12
@Steve
Excuse me the NRA is telling Trump what to do on a daily basis . I think the picture of this very disturbed person should be with the article. Remember when he pretended to care about the families who had lost loved ones to shootings at the White House and then gave a sickening speech to the NRA within two weeks. His picture should be always posted with the NRA. he cares for no one but himself.
I agree with you and I am sick to death of listening to his hate/nonsense but he is a poster boy for the NRA.
Register to vote and lets get rid of the swamp administration.
4
@Steve Three cheers for your clearly-said comment! Force-fed is a perfect description. Clearly, even according to the excellent NYT, most news, most events, now pass through the Trump alembic.
He does not represent the majority; there are other voices--most of whom do not build their rhetoric on networks of lies and most of whom can speak in complete sentences using polysyllabic vocabulary.
2
This block should be permanent and in perpetuity.
It is madness to provide such technology to the public with its great potential for incredible danger and mayhem.
100
@N. Eichler shall we also burn the gunsmithing books that have design patterns and techniques?
6
@mm357
gunsmithing is a learned difficult craft. you need only BUY a printer..
@marie bernadette I have dabbled in gunsmithing and have done quite a bit of digital manufacturing, so I suspect I am more educated on this subject than you are. Even the best commercial 3d printers require skill to setup, calibrate, operate, and maintain to be able to create objects of any complexity. If you can sufficiently operate a 3d printer to produce a firearm, you have been able for decades to do the same with a CNC mill and produce a much better firearm in plastic or metal.
1
Perhaps the next generation of printers can make hand grenades.
Enough to lob at the GOP and say Wake Up!
The vast majority of Americans don’t want this. Does the GOP listen? No they don’t.
23
Aside from the fact that templates for various 3D-printed pistol designs are already circulating online, and have been for a number of years, any kind of legislation which seeks to legalize the distribution of CAD templates for firearms is one which pretty transparently demonstrates more of a concern for the gun lobby (and an armed civil uprising?) than human life.
The argument will probably be raised at some point that, because one cannot print a firing pin, it doesn’t really matter if an otherwise functional gun can bypass a metal detector. What won’t be mentioned is how little this would actually change any part of why this is concerning.
Invocations of First Amendment protection should similarly be seen as the nonsense that they are. The rationale which would support the sharing of this kind of information as protected speech would also cover the same type of explosives which have become such familiar elements of domestic terrorism.
1
Aside from geodesic toilet paper holders and digital sundials, I thought 3D printers were relatively benign. College students would obviously compete for unique bong designs but no one is really getting hurt.
Wilson however seems bent on weaponizing the harmless. Just imagine a world where 3D printers are strictly regulated instead of gun designs. Does anyone feel like we've made the most valuable trade off?
I have to say: People like Wilson give anarchists a bad name. He seems to relish in all the destructive aspects of personal liberty without acknowledging any of the peaceful ones. I'd describe him as a misanthrope. That's my most polite assessment.
8
Printing 3-D guns is not a matter of First amendment rights , and has nothing to do with free speech . Comparing this to the printing of the Pentagon papers is obscene and twisted , but that seems to be the path that has become popular with those on the right.
8
Parties in federal court are required to file disclosures regarding the true parties at interest. I hope that the judge will require the organizations advocating for the release of these blueprints to disclose their source of funding and members. Given the recent revelations regarding Russian money and the NRA, this would not be unwarranted. I sure hope the press is all over this.
4
The US has more guns in the hands of its citizens than it has citizens. Now, however, guns that can defy metal detectors and, broken into components, x-ray scanners will defeat security measures. Also, cheap 3D-printed guns will be readily available in countries with strict bans on handgun possession. Not for the first time, we are becoming victims of our technology.
1
It looks like the gun manufacturers have finally shot themselves in the foot. For decades they have cultivated a vast sea of 2A passion to shut down any law with the slightest taint of "infringement" . Now a technology comes along that could take away a chunk of their business and the faithful will defend it with the same zeal.
By the way, I don't think we will need to worry about these weapons being carried on to airplanes. The TSA now uses terahertz scanners that can detect something as flimsy as a boarding pass (I found out the hard way) . Maybe it's time to unload the Remington and Sig Sauer stock and buy shares in the companies that make the scanners.
1
Let's do away with the Secret Service and find out how much Trump really supports the 2nd Amendment.
Either way, it'd be a win-win situation.
11
Big proponent of guns but I think printable weapons cross the line. They hardly serve the purposes of recreation or self-defense in any reasonably foreseeable way.
If the NRA plays its cards correctly, it could sacrifice printable guns on the altar of traditional weapons and stave off any regulation attempts for a long time to come, I feel.
1
3D printing of guns is the very definition of social self destruction and crowd based insanity.
You can't make this stuff up - a sci-fi novel about this would be seen as crazy fantasy...something we can imagine but would never let happen.
Perhaps we should provide nuclear weapons to children and just get it over with.
Just because we can do something doesn't mean we have to do it.
7
Pandora's box is open. Plastic gun plans are currently available on pirate sites and numerous other places around the world.
Now we wait for the first murders by plastic gun.
1
ISIS and others such, including wanna-be and aspiring terrorists, eagerly await . . .
1
In other words he is waiting for the NRA money to roll in.
1
Why doesnt Mr. Wilson use his brain to develop other technology 3-D products instead of guns? Isnt there anything else he could produce? What a waste of brains!
1
I saw this movie. "In the Line of Fire", where John Malkovich was able to sneak in a plastic gun in an attempt to kill the president at a fundraiser.
Not being a gun nut, I thought the idea was somewhat silly.
Guess I was wrong.
Seems to me, though, that serving a a goat roast with moonshine and chitlins to his guests would be safer for a terrorist, rather than having a plastic gun blow up in his face.
"I saw this movie."
Why read a newspaper when you can learn everything you need to know from movies?
'"In the Line of Fire", ...'
The gun used some *metal* parts and *metal* ammunition. (per Wikipedia article on the movie)
3
Trump wants guns that defeat the white house security?
This country is insane. It might as well just give away guns as raffle prizes or bingo prizes. Oh wait, it ALREADY DOES.
11
If these go online expect to see several articles on people blowing their handd off; plastic makes a terrible firearm.
2
How about an Abram's tank?
1
@GaviotaGuy
I want one! where?
A gun without ammo is just a doorstop. Can bullets be printed? Why not regulate, track, or just tax the bejeezus out of ammunition?
4
@Richard Strimbeck
Careful we'll be printing& designing them too!
Dana Loesch says the Neconservative Russian Auxiliary is fine with 3D printable guns. Do Smith and Wesson know about this?
2
Both Cody Wilson and Donald Trump have something in common. Both were named Wired Magazine’s THE MOST DANGEROUS PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET for 2017.
4
Thoughts and prayers coming from the White House.
7
The only reason the NRA and gun makers would oppose this is because they can't directly profit from it.
Putin, however, loves it.
26
You would think that the President would sit down with law enforcement. What is the NRA going to do about it? " I'll look into it", God help us.
9
Ugh, guys (editors): the caption on that photo, "President Trump has been a staunch supporter of gun rights."
THIS ISN'T GUN RIGHTS. This is a mass delusion that our country has been in the grip of for decades. Not centuries, but decades, since we ceded our definition of the 2nd amendment to the wing nuts who took over the NRAs leadership in the '70s. When it became an extremist, rightwing organization instead of something more similar to 4H.
Trump isn't supporting gun rights, he's supporting insanity. He's supporting death. He's supporting gun manufacturers' profits over children, doublespeak over plain English:
Guns don't make us safer.
If they did, the U.S. would be the safest country in the world instead of the deadliest outside of war zones.
This. Must. Stop.
77
He'd better stop this. He should never forget that he, too, could become the target of some deranged extremist with an untraceable weapon. There could be another Lee Harvey Oswald out there now. The Secret Service I hope can talk some sense into him here. None of us, not even at the top, are safe if people can print guns at home.
3
"... an untraceable weapon. There could be another Lee Harvey Oswald out there now."
Oswald was caught because he shot a policeman, not because his rifle was "traced". Further, there were photographs of Oswald with the rifle, and his palmprint was on it.
See the Warren Commission Report.
Anyway, a serial number is useless if the gun is stolen.
4
So we have a Clinton appointed Left Wing Judge in Seattle who is ok with subverting the First Amendment?
Sad day in this nation when a Federal Judge puts his personal politics ahead of upholding the right of Free Speech
4
@Java Junkie, free speech has limits. The right to impart information has to be fettered by the risk of harm to others. If the risk of harm is real and here I think it is, an untraceable and difficult to detect weapon in the hands of anyone with a 3D printer, then I think most people would have no difficulty limiting the ability to communicate that information. The communities right to live in safety free from fear of gun violence is an important right that should not be diminished by an absolutist assertion of the individual’s rights to free speech in this context.
4
No one's putting personal politics above anything here -- this was about *saving lives*!
This is maybe the most terrifying thing that could happen in this country right now with all the mass shootings we already cant control...! This judge just saved lives. Undeniably, absolutely *saved* *lives*.
2
@Java Junkie making a gun is a free speech right? Even a plastic gun, that's going to blow up in your hand? Supposing that to be true, it has zero to do with the second amendment, and state's rights to have a 'well formed militia' to protect them against force by the united states.
1
We can't even get registration and universal background checks for legitimate gun ownership. Supposedly the guy (a self proclaimed anarchist) won a legal case on first amendment free speech. Egad! If you aren't afraid yet, maybe you should be!
128
President Trump is a "staunch supporter" of anything that kicks back money and anything that incites conflict. Please do not dignify his preferences as containing any real thought or any real concern about the United States. Print your own guns and let your kids shoot each other. He could care less. If the NRA says it's okay, so will the Donald.
Michael Gross
Woodland Hills CA
8189991144
15
What's with the death wish Trump and his overlords are foisting on the rest of us? Printable guns, rolled back pollution emissions standards, ethnic and racial hatred? Oh wait. Evangelicals. Armageddon, the Rapture etc. That must be it.
41
@Deborah
I agree with you about the death wish of the Evangelicals. I have heard several of them say so, in their own words. But why would wealthy amoral hypocrites like Mitch McConnell & Trump harbor a death wish? They don't. On the contrary. They believe they can survive any apocalypse their corrupt & self-serving policies bring about. They are convinced that their wealth will shield them, that their money can buy them freedom from consequences. They also intend to profit mightily from whatever chaos & devastation they cause.
Yeah, DJT will definitely look into it after his next round of golf.
10
Cody Wilson is providing material support for terrorism. He ought to be prosecuted. And those in the State Department who gave him the green light should be fired. Or, if Secretary Pompeo was involved, impeached.
35
@JJM You really think a serious "terrorist" is going to trouble herself to go get a plastic one-shot-wonder that is going to self destruct when she could just get a reliable old gun from your local classified ads? Get a clue.
4
@Joey except that the plans intended to be offered include fully functional assault weapons.
Oh, and I was making a point about attitudes toward deadly weapons, and one about the way that this maladministration treats the law.
Waiting for Trump to ever do something to control guns is like "waiting for Godot." At least the justice system is working. Let's see if Trump and/or the N.R.A. say anything.
8
Allowing plastic guns will prove we have completely off the deep end by opening a Pandora's box in the world.
110
Identical to what the US did by dropping nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You cannot put the genii back in the bottle.
What are we becoming?
8
It will be interesting to hear the position of the NRA when their dear profits are threatened.
5
@pork chops
actually the gun manufactures shouldn't care as they still will make and sell ( without permits, online) the "uppers". the plastic copy is the lower part .. trigger and magazine.
ey, the NRA loves to say how guns save lives, with more and more out there, maybe no one will ever die, because of all the lives "saved". They never answered my email asking how many lives the Parkland FL shooter saved, I wonder why?
6
Boy....it just never ends. But I would posit that the kibosh will be put on this. And it will not be for any moral or ethical reasons or for the our safety and security. Rather I would wager that the NRA will put on its cowboy hat, place its gun in its holster, and gallop with the speed of lightning right up to the steps of the White House. And Mr. Trump will bow before its wishes, as will his Congress. Let's not fool ourselves...the NRA's power and greed is at risk with 3D guns. Their goal is total control basically over this entire nation, and to date they are doing quite a good job of it. Meanwhile, moms and dads, keep an eye on what's spewing from your printers. For that matter, moms and dads who are gun-right advocates, try to restrain yourselves and your fellow Second Amendment extremists..if you can.
7
What's the big deal for this NRA funded Republican administration and plastic guns ? After all " Guns don't kill people, people kill people" has been their mantra for years. Now that the gun manufacturers might be side stepped there seems to be concern. Don't those "stand your ground" Floridians deserve the freedom to make their own guns ? What is this a police state ?
6
Personally I’m waiting for the plans to be released for whittling one out of a bar of Ivory soap. The big double bar, if they still make them.
3
@John Doe
text me.. i have the plans. my gramps invented "first" one...
The NRA's notion that a criminal, or any person for that matter, would not spend tens of thousands of dollars on a 3-D printer and materials is just ignorant. Anyone can rent a 3-D printer for less than $200 dollars a week. Cody Wilson and his supporters also seem to know what the NRA doesn't: 3-D printed guns can function, and they will. This is just the beginning. If I were a big name gun manufacturer, I'd be scared to death right now...
9
A champion of anarchists? While that's a good fit for modern, incompetent, anti-government Republicans, the rest of us, including old-fashioned law-n-order Republicans, consider anarchists to be a threat to civil society. Why would any police support this?
10
So you criminalize asylum seekers and enable the distributors of lethal weapons that can be used for acts of terrorism. That is terrifying. That is bad policy. That is craziness.
22
I was upset when Lasnik temporarily blocked the Seattle law allowing ride-hailing companies (such as Uber and Lyft) drivers to unionize over pay and working conditions.
However, I am pleased that he granted the temporary nationwide injunction blocking Cody Wilson from distributing blueprints for 3-D printed “ghost guns” online even though the Trump administration decided last month to allow posting of instructions for making the untraceable, plastic firearms.
The NRA must be stopped! They will not relent until we are all living as if we are in "Little Murders."
3
Almost no matter how the 3-D gun issue plays out, it will rightly be judged as a insane policy of a sick nation led by a sociopath. But, who is to say existing policies bear any semblance to rationality with mass murder, suicide and random death due to firearms just part of daily life in the Republicans' and NRA's America. Hard to believe the outrage over this one will tip us back toward rationality any more than the death of innocent students, concert goers, etc., etc., etc.
19
@backfull
What's really mind boggling, is the fact that the republican party claims to be pro-life. Yet, in Iowa, there's been a rise in drug addicted parents, bringing a drug addicted children into the world, then starving them to death, or strangling the child to death, basically bringing an innocent victim into the world with all the physical, and brain damage done while in utero . Yet, you don't see the republican party writing laws that would demand that a pregnant woman if she's arrested for drug use, she's held in jail until the child is born then the child is taken away, NEVER to be returned.
The republican's would wet themselves if they actually acted to protect the innocent babies that they claim to be so pro-life about, or does pro-life only protect babies from abortion. it's beyond hypocritical.
So I expect these far right wing nuts to try and say that 3D printed guns are protected by the second amendment. Which, it isn't. This is a smart move by a judge that sees no value in people being able to print their own guns, where does it end, and I own guns. But I believe in states rights, and those states have the right to regulate who gets guns, and how they get them, I believe in background checks as well. As a gun owner, and a combat veteran, some weapons do not belong in the public's hands.
Who did Trump call?
Not his own expert administration members.
The NRA.
That says it all.
9
To clarify a bit:
People can make their own guns, whether via kit or from raw materials. But this requires skill and equipment.
A 3 D printer with the quality to do this would likely cost up to several thousand dollars. But once the printer is available, the actual printing (if you have the necessary computer files) is very easy. Likewise, the assembly should be simple. Considering the value of an untraceable gun that could get through metal detectors and also be easily destroyed, a few criminals would make the investment and the rest would be history. Similar to counterfeiting, except the actual equipment and production would be completely legal- only the actual gun is illegal (Even that could be easily circumvented by including an easily removable piece of scanner visible material.)
9
Actually, people can make their own flintlock muskets. If they know how to smelt the ore for barrel stock, and can run a circa 1780 lathe to do the rifling.
It is nonsense to keep pretending that Amurrican kin turn out their own defenders of the Second Amendment.
3
@Alan D
Well the gun would have to have some metal components, I personally would never fire a gun, made out of plastic. I've seen guns blow up from over pressure, people don't realize the immense pressures being developed in milliseconds, in a very confined area.
I would hope that people that try and make guns using a 3D printer, deserve getting their hand blown off.
@Alan D
Cartels have plenty of money. And has anyone seen Breaking Bad? Organized crime can pay for lots of fancy equipment.
As a matter of policy, I can't imagine that individuals' printing 3-D guns would benefit places like the U.S., Canada, or Brazil.
On the other hand, in despotisms in which the government preys on hapless, unarmed individuals, or in countries in which men prey on unarmed women with impunity, these guns might lead to a lot more freedom and human flourishing. Would-be rapists might have reason to be afraid for the first time ever.
Or perhaps even in lawless or predatory places 3-D guns will only make things worse.
I think we'll find out either way. Aside from policy, does anyone think this genie can be kept in the bottle? I don't. Someone in Moldova, the Maldives, or Turkmenistan is probably working on the same software and won't be stopped by U.S. law.
2
@Cyclist
You think those in despotic countries can afford such printers? Probably not.
@PJR — Good question. Presumably they'd be shared printers that are rented by the hour. But perhaps the authorities would ban any 3-D printing.
"... in despotisms ... these guns might lead to a lot more freedom and human flourishing."
I can't tell if you are attempting to be ironic or not.
Assuming not, you don't know much about totalitarian states. The government would control access to 3D printers and to the plastic needed to make things.
I guess what we will hear now will be 'a good guy with a 3D printer beats a bad guy with a 3D printer.' The US is now exporting its tremendous issues with gun control and violence to the entire world. The internet knows no borders. It is not appreciated. This is not free speech, this is public safety...who in their right mind would think distributing weapons, or the ability to manufacture them would constitute a constitutional freedom of expressing yourself and stating an opinion.
26
What most of the general public fails to understand is there are much easier means to achieve the ends of an untraceable and function firearm - specifically AR-15s. An AR-15 is highly modularized and the only piece - again the only piece - that is controlled by the ATF (with a background check) is the lower receiver.
One can easily today buy what is known as an “80% lower” that the ATF does not consider yet to be a firearm component and is sold unserialized. It is then quite easy to machine out the necessary cavities in the metal with a router and a drill press. I takes between 30 and 60 minutes per lower receiver if one has simple shop equipment. The rest of the components necessary can be purchased online without any restrictions.
The law allows for citizens to do this for private use only, and selling or gifting a completed 80% lower would violate federal statute. This is the path of least resistance, not 3d printing a firearm. By the way a “plastic” firearm would unlikely work with the chamber pressures involved in firing a bullet of any consequence and would probably blow up the person shooting instead of actually firing. This injunction appears to be toothless.
7
In which again we see that the Gun Nut Brigade retreats into irrelevant technicalities much as the lordly average squid retreats into a cloud of ink.
See also the endless, mindless phony debate over magazines vs. clips, semi-auto vs. full auto, and so endlessly, stupidly on.
6
@Ed
It amy seem like its toothless, but the technology isn't far behind to come up with a hard plastic that could take the pressures you're talking about. I've built guns, modified the Chinese version of the AK-47 from semi auto to full auto, I never did it for anyone I did it as a demonstration on how easy it was.
My point being, in theory, you could 3D print all the components except for the barrel and the magazine. It then becomes a pressure issue. I would never print a firearm then hold it in my hand and shoot it. I'e seen guns explode from over pressure, and it's amazing how one grain of smokeless gunpowder, in a confined area can blow off fingers, take out eyes, blow off your whole hand for that matter. And I've built rounds for the .454 Casull which produces pressures of around 60,000psi.
Freedom of speech is not absolute in the United States. One cannot yell of a false fire in a movie theater without facing penalty. The publishing of a plan for an untraceable weapon should be considered similarly inasmuch as the weapon could not be discovered in an x-ray as paer of boarding an airplane. The weapon is a clear and present danger.
6
@my2sons Freedom of speech is absolute, the movie theater is privately owned, hence the exception
In which again we see that today's summer soldiers know as little about the Constitution as they know about the Gadsden Flag and the proper display of Old Glory.
1
@Rob - You have no idea what you are talking about. The 2 things you said here are false not to mention asinine. Feedom of speech is NOT absolute and the fact of ownership of a theater has not one thing whatever to do with why yelling fire in a crowded space, theater or not is illegal. This was decided in a supreme court ruling in 1919 (Schenck vs US) that ruled First Ammendment can be restricted if words spoken (or printed) represent a "clear and present danger" to society. You must be a Trump supporter.
1
And who owns the Gun manufacturers?
In the case of Remington, up til the latest bankruptcy, it's the private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management. Franklin Templeton and JPMorgan Asset Management will switch from Bond Holders to Equity Owners per reporting on Feb 12, 2018 by Reuters.
6
I love the reaction from the guy at the National Shooting Sports Foundation. His only concern is that a printed gun won't work - for the would-be mass shooter, presumably.
Can we just get to the version of America from The Purge and be done with it?
4
@Phillip I am sure that he is well aware that these guns DO work. There are lots of videos to prove it. And yes, they fire very real, lethal ammunition such as .380 or .357 .
1
So we all learn that it isn't protected speech to yell "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater, endangering a few dozen people, but it is somehow protected speech to in effect yell "Ready, aim, fire" on the internet, endangering thousands?
This 1st amendment stuff is really complicated!!!
2
This is deadly serious. Clearly, members of the current adminstration and Republicans in general never saw Clint Eastwood's "In The Line of Fire."
2
This is insanity and should not be allowed. This is about nothing but circumventing what little law there is to control the possession of guns. This does not bode well for a civilized society.
6
It is hard to imagine anyone who travels by airplane and goes through TSA security would not be aghast at the prospect of the proliferation of homemade, unregulated, plastic and likely undetectable guns (There already exists ammo without metal cases or metal bullets.). Plastic guns getting into the hands of would-be murderers is just a matter of time but slowing down this insane process sure helps.
8
@Emergence
The bottoms of shell casings that are largely plastic are metal.
1
Just another reason to enforce my good decision to move away from the US and to a country that took action and enforced gun laws when it became a problem.
When is the US going to hit rock bottom to finally make a change? What will it take? I fear the day that some event is horrific enough for people to wake up and make an actual change. How many people have to die?!
38
@NW2
What will it take? Tens of thousands all at once, unless it's white conservative people being killed by black people. Then it will only take thousands.
Let me start out by saying that I own guns, and have a conceal carry permit. I believe in a responsible, sane second amendment, strong background checks, and no assault rifles. If you want an M-4, join the military, but don't bring it to hunt Bambi.
Let me also add that I am a volunteer Police Officer in Northern Arizona. I believe that 3-D printed guns are a terrible idea. Some people say, hey it's only one shot. Tell that to President Lincoln.
This is so wrong, that it's almost impossible to know where to begin.
A last point. If the NRA loves this, then you know in your heart it's wrong.
54
@Sua Sponte
As a sensible gun owner, maybe you can influence gun owners who support the NRA's insanity to stop funding the organization. It is supposedly a non-profit, I understand...
1
If you own guns you are part of the problem. Guns kill. They kill their owners or immediate family six times the rate they kill strangers or intruders. Most guns used in crimes are stolen from those who legally own. Most guns that kill tragically and accidentally are legally owned. The toxic and deadly gun culture that is responsible for high ownership rates linked to high homicide and suicide rates is fueled by gun owners. The high price paid by non owners in arming cops and ubiquitous security in the public domain and schools and govt buildings is necessitated by the dangers posed by a gun culture.
Join those who pledged to be part of the solution after Parkland and surrender your gun. You will make your life safer, and the lives of those around you. No other first world nation has, or wants, a 2nd Amendment. They look to this country and see vindication.
No doubt that the Trump Organization owns the patents on the design of all these DIY firearms.
Sad state of affairs.
1
Judge Lasnik, thank you. In a country where murdered children go practically unnoticed, your decision is a hopeful sign. Although no one should kid themselves into thinking the coast-to-coast bloodshed will ever end. This is America. This is America as defined by the NRA and a gutless congress. And it's no surprise that the man leading this latest act of madness, Mr. Wilson, is described by The Times as `a champion of gun-rights and anarchism.' Did you get that? Anarchism. It's sickening.
11
The Republicans in the Senate just blocked a bill today by the Senate Democrats to ban this 3D printing. Please get to the polls and vote the GOP out. They do not care about the state of our air, water, land or our lives in general.
13
Hysteria, many years ago there was a book written called "The Anarchist's Cookbook", a how to on many nasty things.
Still available on Amazon.
2
Perhaps this headline should be reviewed? Most guns are 3D; this ruling seems to be specific to 3D printed guns.
3
I guess I'll have to go back and look at the constitution AGAIN!! In all the times I have looked, I still can't find the word "guns" anywhere! But EVERY time I look I always find the phrase "well regulated".
35
@Scott S.
Not only does it say well regulated, but it also uses the word militia in the very same sentence. In fact,
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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.
The well armed militia, is the crux of the argument regarding the second amendment. I believe that the framers, couldn't have known what the consequences of those words would bring. Nor do I believe that they meant that the population be armed once a standing army was developed. If they could come back to the 21st century, I think they would be appalled at the senseless killing of our kids, and people in bars, theaters, concerts etc.
2
An untraceable, single shot gun that can avoid metal detectors, but is unreliable and might blow up in your hand. This a terrible self defense weapon. It would be awful against a corrupt team of armed federal agents (if you're the kind of person who thinks that might be an issue). It would be extremely useful for assassinating someone in a secure building. I really don't see any other good use for such a weapon. Correct me if I've missed a less dastardly application, but this seems pretty obvious.
1
@Angry Who said that they are unreliable? Check the internet, firing videos go back for years and plastics and 3 D printing have only gotten better. We all have a problem....
3
How about held to a pilot's head, or the night shift supervisor at a nuclear reactor?
3
This will go to the current Supreme Court! And guess what?!
4
Guns are not the problem. Printers are the problem.
19
It's a great day! We can shut down the TSA because their x ray machines and metal detectors are worthless against this kind of weaponry.
17
@gnowell
Are you aware of how an x-ray machine works, you can see a plastic whatever in luggage that's going through an x-ray machine. A plastic gun isn't invisible to x-rays. You're a good example why banning this is a good idea.
2
@gnowell No, they'll probably just have us all strip naked instead of just walking through the scanners.
But, seriously, when I was in India back in 2005, there were separate men & women's security lines. I went into a curtained off area where I was patted down all over by a female security agent before getting onto the plane. Do we want that here? We think it takes long now?
Maybe someone should explain to trump (in 20 words or less, since that is the limit of his attention span) that a radical socialist could print a gun, sneak it undecided into one of his rallies, and take him out.
14
This is being presented by the right as a free speech issue.
You can't violate laws in the name of free speech. What a ridiculous argument.
9
Let The Charlatan fight for this. Let him show his deeply-ingrained allegiance to the NRA and it's Russian money. Reasonable people understand that the concept of "You can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded theatre" applies well-beyond said theatre.
Let sanity prevail. Please.
10
Why can’t people get this straight:
When you fire a gun you set off a small bomb and the explosion hurls a piece of shrapnel, called a bullet, down a grooved barrel on its way to rip and tear flesh.
There are laws, aren’t there, against setting off bombs.
A physician MD
28
@srwdm
I think people should have to go to an ER and witness the carnage of a bullet fired from an AR-15 or any other weapon. It would shock people. As a combat veteran, I've witnessed first hand the power of an AR-15 in the hands of a trained shooter. In the hands of an untrained shooter, well the consequences are far worse, since the killing is indiscriminate.
In California (I believe) people that get a DWI, have to visit the morgue and view bodies of people that have been killed by a drunk driver, there is no way out of it, and there is no shortage of people killed by drunk drivers it happens every day. That same law should apply to people that get guns illegally, or have misused their firearm. They should have to look at a person that's been shot in the head, or children. I've seen it, it's not pretty, and it leaves a mark on your conscience.
I own guns, but I'm not rabid about it, this country needs to address it. The NRA used to be a group that advocated gun safety, gun laws, etc. Now they pay congress to enact laws that benefit them, while asserting that the democrats will take their guns, betting on the fact the Trump supporters are rabid about their guns, and no so smart when it comes to civics and how difficult it would be for one party in congress to repeal the second amendment.
3
I have mixed feelings here. Maybe the first use of these guns would be political assassination? Followed by the plan's distributor? Perfect irony.
I'm inclined to think that libertarians ought to get to live on the receiving end of their beliefs, not be exempt from their consequences as they are now
4
How are you suppose to detect a plastic gun if half of what you use is made up of some type of polymer, it’s just nos justifiable to accept this type of technology, it makes me sick how people find ways to make technology that for the most part does good and yet they find a way to make it a horrible thing for humankind.
1
Do I want someone bringing a gun onto an airplane I'm on because it can slip through the metal detector?
Guess.
7
Our country has officially lost its mind.
44
Good to see there is some kind of innovative thinking coming out of Texas, for a change. Unfortunately, though, it’s from a guy who advocates anarchy. Maybe Trump should make him his next Chief of Staff? He would fit right in.
6
When print technology gets to the point that you can print an exact copy of any gun ever made, the NRA will buy the votes to make it illegal.
3
Why on just put out some plans for 3-D printed bullets. Mixing gun powder & Lazers would creat quite the Bang!
Guns don't kill people, the bullets do.
"... plans for 3-D printed bullets."
You understand that guns need ammo, so you are ahead of the Times and 99% of its readers.
"Mixing gun powder & Lazers would creat quite the Bang!"
I'm not sure what you have in mind, but some gun hobbyists reload their own ammunition. Indeed, there are web pages explaining how to do it. Google "reload ammunition".
1
@Geekonabike
I'm not sure how much you know about guns, but if a 3D printer can print a lead bullet, gun powder, and a primer, well that's one heck of a printer. You can't print a bullet.
2
Whew, looks like we dodged another bullet that time. We don't need more guns and anarchy.
5
Did nobody see the film, In the Line of Fire? A plastic uatracable gun is a heart of the plot! Except today Clint Eastwood is too old to foil the plan!
4
@Saskatoonberry: it's not a new idea, but 25 years ago (the film is from 1992 I think), you had to make molds and cast resin and then file it down -- a long complex project. I believe in the film that the villain (John Malkovich) HIRED an expert in model-making to create the plastic resin gun and then killed the guy WITH that gun.
The advantage of modern 3-D printing is that you'd bypass that and would not need any expertise in model making.
Why is the NRA supportive of this sort of technology? How would they be making any money if gun-owners switched over to plastic?
12
@stu freeman
Exactly my thoughts. I think 3D gun printing will force gun manufacturers to endorse stricter gun control in order to keep 3D printed guns from eating into their profit.
It seems Trump had the need to consult the NRA after his own State Department okayed this insane release of plans to print guns. Perhaps he should consult his boss, Vladimir Putin, next. Heaven forbid he should consult law enforcement whose lives are imperiled by this insanity. The Republican Congress can be counted on to do its usual job when it comes to standing up to the gun lobby. NOTHING.
60
The proliferation of untraceable guns will require TSA agents search every bag and pocket of every airline passenger.
I welcome that.
Political support to shut down 3D printing of guns will build quickly.
8
The Courts have no business interfering with the publishing of information. Mr. Wilson should just release all of his plans and blueprints into the wild, and let the internet do his publishing for him.
2
@Spook Perhaps you're comfy with plastic guns in everyone's hands from kids to adults because it's your idea of freedom of expression but I'm not. And perhaps you'e comfy with somone yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater when there is none but it's your idea of freedom of speech, but I'm not.
1
These so called "ghost guns" are real guns that kill, and to allow anyone to be able to manufacture one without a licence or in total secret is a great danger to National Security.
What about enemies of America around the world
who can manufacture these ghost guns that can be
taken in silence and invisible to any detection system
and onto God only knows where, where they will harm innocent women and children.
God bless the Judge who knows the dangers of such
weapons of death.
12
Part of the problem here though is that the blueprints in question just got a significant amount of hype. If one random gun dude somewhere designed this gun, another can and will, and will post them directly online. In other words, the genie is out of the bottle on this one, I'm afraid.
10
Doesn't mean it has to be made legal.
2
They don't have to pay thousands or even hundreds of dollars to buy the 3-D printer. Our local public library has a 3-D printer for public use in the basement. I doubt if they have the staff to watch what people are printing. A lot of communities have 3-D printers in public "maker spaces."
8
@Sue: yes and no -- the library keeps track of who uses the 3-D printer (even if they do not watch what you make) and you "rent it out" on your library card, and also you must buy your own plastic material for the machine to create with.
My concern is 3-D printed guns made and in the hands of students-because easy access to a 3D printer is becoming more and more common at home and at school for academic reasons. I strongly recommend security cameras on home 3-D printers and school printers too, to slow down gun printing access by young people.
The silver lining in this dangerous thundercloud - and I'm not minimizing the dangers of homemade guns that can't be stopped by metal detectors - could be disenfranchising the NRA, and reducing its powerhold on Republicans. But since they are relatively silent on the issue, I'd bet that the NRA and gun manufacturers look at printable guns as their next revenue opportunity: they will push gun buyers and potential gun buyers to buy their far more sophisticated weapons that fire more rapidly to combat plastic guns that can get through metal detectors.
So no silver lining - just more and more tragic deaths enabled by complicit Republican politicians.
16
I'll be surprised if the NRA won't do something to prevent this. True, they want as many guns on the street as humanly possible, but they want to profit from those sales. Unless they have invested heavily in the manufacture of all these 3D printers.
31
@A. Xak - I would not be surprised. There is still lots of buying potential of these guns from any source including from the likes of S&W, Colt and Ruger. They are new, different and likely exciting to gun enthusiasts. If Trump has approved 3-D guns, so has the N.R.A.
1
So if Cody Wilson is permitted to post instructions and blueprints for manufacturing firearms under the First Amendment, what is to stop someone else from publishing instructions and blueprints for manufacturing pipe bombs, pressure cooker bombs, hand grenades, etc. under the same First Amendment?
There are reasonable limits to First AND Second Amendment rights.
I'm sure the thousands/millions of gun owners do NOT belong to any "well regulated militia" as stated in the Constitution.
38
@Steve this information already exists and has existed at least since the 1980’s when I saw it in a kid’s room in college. It’s called The Anarchist’s Cookbook.
4
@Steve Absolutely nothing. I can find instructions on how to do any of these things in my local library or online.
Prior restraint is, has been, and hopefully always will be illegal and the methodology of tyrants.
4
@Steve, perhaps of interest, the federal government attempted to restrain the Progressive magazine from publishing materials on the making of a hydrogen bomb in the late 1970s. Through related events and mishaps the plans got published anyway (by another publication) while the government had a restraining order in place against the Progressive pending review by the Supreme Court of this "prior restraint" of the claimed free speech. The government then dropped the case as moot because the genie was out of the bottle when the other publication occurred. The H bomb plans are still out there, the government deciding the genie could not be re-corked.
1
Praise be; common sense - again from a judge.
I don't know where we'd be right now without these stalwarts.
There's no way to detect a plastic gun! How on earth would we ensure the safety of our airliners, our courthouses?
Thank you Your Honor.
29
@Sophia Guns should NOT be banned in courthouses. Guns are a constitutional right and that's the FIRST place they should be allowed.
@Charlie surely you jest!
1
I wonder if bernie, sarandon and their followers saw this one coming in their relentless attacks on Clinton during the primaries or their bernie or bust decision. Maybe bernie can start making sense and forget his wishes if running which only weakens the democratic party.
2
@Frank López, I am sure you are making some point but it's completely unclear.
3
Everyone screams about their rights, real or imagined.
Aren't the Republicans always yelling about responsibilities as part of those rights?
I thought so.
11
The NRA won't like this because it deprives their major supporters, gun manufacturers, of an income stream.
Law enforcement won't like this because it means that any wacko and his brother might have an undetectable, and untraceable, firearm.
Most sane people agree with law enforcement on this.
But, unfortunately, once something gets posted on-line, it really can't be taken back. There's nothing to prevent such plans being posted on a web site overseas. I don't see how this genie can be put back in the bottle.
This is similar to the government trying to outlaw abortion in the face of technology that makes it as easy as taking a pill. Governments are simply losing their ability to regulate behavior. There are both good and bad implications.
11
@Justin That would (or SHOULD) be where the Constitution's commitment to the "general welfare" kicks in--our dedication to national wellbeing, principled liberty, and neighborly support should guide us to regulate our own behavior, for the common good. It seems to work in a number of European nations... If only we hadn't spent the last few decades listening to the GOP promote the ideal of the self-centered, self-serving rich guy, the cult of "I've got mine, the hell with you." If only we were a nation of people who actually did care about one another. During natural crises like floods, fires, and massacres, we draw together and show what's best in the people who share this nation; but the daily cult of greed and bigotry and fear of the "other" (rooted not only in the marketplace but also in a shockingly large number of churches, and escalated and exasperated via "social" media) leaves us defenseless against technological and financial work-arounds, as you astutely note.
Considering that gun manufacturers won’t make any profit from this kind of guns, it seems obvious that the NRA will advocate for a ban.
And then they will use this move as an illustration of how responsible they are...
3
@Guillaume
They'll have to endorse stricter gun control laws for ALL guns, This development will force their hand. I think teh end result will be the breakdown of the NRA.
@Guillaume Good point. I had not thought about the economic impact on people employed in that industry. Not that I love that industry and want it to thrive. But Trump is supposed to be all about the jobs. Plastic homemade guns sound like a big job-killer to me.
In a just world, posting blueprints for a dangerous weapon online would be a act punishable by life sentence. In Trump era, it's a "cause celebre".
3
Fortunately, 3D printing is still prohibitively expensive for most people so plans/templates or not, most people would not be able to afford a firearm produced this way. Even so, organizations that might desire limited use, difficult to detect guns probably could. Think organized crime, big gangs, terrorists. For these reasons, this information should be illegal.
1
@arusso Our public library has a 3D printer.
1
@arusso Prohibitively expensive? I bought mine for about $250 and maybe another $70 for the plastic.
5
@arusso 3-D printers now start at under $200, considerably less than almost all commercially made firearms.
3
I guess the president's campaign rhetoric about "the carnage in America" isn't effective with this issue but he certainly will be contributing to it, and sure won't be able to blame Obama for it either! And thanks for checking with the NRA first.
6
I think a realistic understanding of the situation requires knowing this problem cannot be easily regulated by courts, if at all.
2
The ACLU, various advocacy groups and the courts have consistently been the adults from day 1 of the Trump administration.
We need a full resistance movement to stop these crazies at every turn.
We are living in very toxic times. This particular toxic event is a by-product of the work of the NRA over decades.
---
www.rimaregas.com
111
@Rima Regas ACLU would likely support this man's right to distribute his blueprints.
1
@GR
From the article: "Homemade firearms are not illegal, but all-plastic versions are. The Undetectable Firearms Act prohibits owning a gun that can pass through a metal detector unnoticed. Firearms commerce is more regulated. Dealers must be licensed and customers must pass a federal background check, although private sellers are sometimes able to bypass the requirement."
The federal judges appointed by earlier administrations are the only thing keeping this country from descending into complete dystopia.
219
If we agree that Free Speech is protected by the constitution (yes??).... Is a description of Hardware free speech? I asked that question 17 years ago in an ACM magazine (Computer Graphics, Publc Policy Column), now i think we need to ask the question again, is a description of hardware, which in the end is in letters and numbers (or can be) communicatable? Is it protected by the constitution? Maybe you can make it illegal to use something like this, but to make it illegal to print something like this you'd have to try to be very clear in your description of what can and cannot be printed, to the point where on future 3d commercial printers it would block the printing of such.
4
@Rob W Indeed. This reminds me of an issue from the turn of the century when people were arguing if code was free speech specifically in the context of defeating copy protection mechanisms in DVDs.
https://www.wired.com/2000/08/court-to-address-decss-t-shirt/
I believe the refrain at the time was: "If You Can Put It On A T-Shirt, It's Speech"
2
Of course this calls for a well overdue discussion of reasonable people to take place which means no legislative action will take place due to typical NRA rhetoric and the lemmings in Congress who are paying down their campaign debt. It will be only after the lives of friends and family members of influential people have been taken with a 3D printed weapon that some action will be taken.
Of course 3D guns cut into the profits of the manufacturers of guns so perhaps action will come sooner than expected.
1
We are a nation of laws, not feelings. How is this legally different than buying a very expensive milling machine and making the parts from metal?
Seems to me the left will not be able to resist the chance to throw aside the rule of law to enact two of their most desired ends: controlling access to firearms (allegedly good) and controlling what can be posted on the internet under the guise of “safety” concerns.
Cue the “think of the children” arguments. I welcome them.
8
@CS Yes, we are a nation of laws, despite the continual disrespect for law and law enforcement shown by our current president.
I'll be interested to learn what legal arguments were made to put the availability of plastic guns on hold, and which ones succeeded and which did not.
One legal difference between plastic guns and guns made from metal using a milling machine is the detectability of the guns. Existing laws assume guns can be detected at airports and other secure facilities with metal detectors etc. Technology now undercuts that assumption, so we should review the law and see whether changes should be made.
Another legal difference is the reliability of plastic vs. metal guns. There may be a greater risk of a plastic gun shattering, or being inaccurate. Both of those pose a greater risk to bystanders. Again, the assumptions underlying current law have changed, so it seems reasonable to me to put plastic gun availability on hold while the law is reviewed.
I'm not sure what you mean by "think of the children" arguments.
3
@CS They are made of plastic, therefore they will be able to be smuggled onto planes and in schools, etc. I would imagine plastic guns would be useless to a well regulated militia. But, I am guessing a sociopath bent on destruction would find it useful.
4
All politics aside do you REALLY think this is a good idea?
7
Next from Trump will be coming measures to provide free ammunition to poor and low-income gun owners in the interest of making schools safer and improving the economy.
6
The short term danger from these things seems very small. The effort and cost required to make one of these seems a lot higher the the effort to buy a "real" gun. And a real gun won't shatter in your hand unlike many of these weapons.
The long run is a different matter. 3D printers that can work with stronger materials (or better materials for current 3D printers) will eventually be available to consumers, and they might make far more durable gun parts. In the long run, however, it is also almost impossible to keep electronic files from circulating. Hoping to regulate designs for objects that have been in the public domain for years does not seem realistic.
What might be realistic is shifting regulation to ammunition and some of its ingredients. Limiting ammunition purchases, requiring a background check and proof that the purchaser legally owns a gun for which the ammunition is suitable would probably do a lot more to prevent violence in the long term than trying to corral CAD files set loose on the internet.
16
When Trump said "he is looking into it,"he meant to say that he would like to brand the item, Trump's Plastic Fantastic Guns.
8
In other words, let me check to see how much the companies involved with 3D printers contributed to my and other GOP members' campaigns.
14
The latest technological disaster waiting for Trump (aka his friends at the N.R.A.) to "look into." Whether or not it's possible to keep this genie in the bottle may be difficult in any case (as noted). Of course, Mr. Second Amendment will have a hard time defending doing so even if the gun manufacturers who run the N.R.A. are against it, as seems likely. That, of course, would then open the door to gun regulation. Perhaps the only way to control such weapons will be to control the ammunition, and that may end up be a very good way to control those and all other weapons of mass destruction.
2
I hope that Mr. Trump realizes that such printed plastic guns are especially dangerous because they are not readily detectable by x-ray or magnetic fields such as used at security checks, and defeating those is really the only reason to make and have one (they are lousy weapons otherwise and can literally blow up in one's hands). However, this stealth characteristic also means that Mr. Trump's safety may be as much at risk from these devices as ours. If common sense isn't enough, maybe his drive for self-preservation will make him see the light and stop this madness.
42
A plastic gun in unlikely to function with a cartridge (bullet) of any size or consequence-it will simply blow up when the firing pin hits the primer.
18
@Ed And said explosion will propel lead pellet down the barrel at what velocity? Will that be enough for fatal results? One shot = one victim?
@Ed
I think you need to take a class in modern engineering. A plastic AK-47 is likely outside the realm of possibility. However, a plastic version of the Welrod seems perfectly achievable even among amateurs. Think about it. You could technically make an "undetectable" pipe pistol without a 3D printer. It's commonly called a potato gun. Do you honestly think sophisticated blue prints for plastic guns are unworkable for private citizens? Cooking meth is probably more dangerous.
Just because many people will burn themselves making their own roman candle doesn't mean someone won't. I'll point you in the direction of the Oklahoma City Bombing for historical context. Please don't act naive.
Now, what is the position of the NRA on this issue? They have been noticeably quiet, indeed absent, here. Wouldn't more guns in the hands of the populace be a good thing from their point of view? Or would the ability to manufacture one's own weapon and bypass the gun makers, who are the NRA's chief source of income, be considered a threat to their patron's profitability?
Wouldn't making my own gun be an exercise of my Second Amendment right? Or is that exercise only valid when buying one from the munitions industry?
And, not to change the subject, what was the NRA doing hanging out with a Russian spy? Haven't heard a peep about that, either
14
This guy is simply exacerbating a problem he believes he's trying to solve. That's Conservative America for you.
48
Let me see if I got this straight. We have this thing called the First Amendment. It's all about freedom of speech. In fact there are a lot of distasteful and dangerous ideas bandied about and they are all protected by the First Amendment. Newspapers, why this very one included (if you can still call the Times a newspaper) use it to protect themselves when they print distasteful or offensive things. So why now liberals are we whining? Is it about guns or is it just because most of you have TDS?
3
Relatively easy access to an untraceable firearm that doesn't set off metal detector. Why would you make one if you didn't want to get somewhere protected by security with a need to only fire one bullet. Potential malfunctions aside, this is only practical for assassinations. Does that no give you any pause?
2
@Rob The right to free speech does not extend to the right to cry "fire" in a crowded theater.
2
@Rob Let me help you over your logical hurdle, Rob.
Free speech is not unlimited. Well established by the courts. Think child pornography. Think shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Probably even you have heard of that limitation.
2
If, by chance, we later learn Cody Wilson is affiliated or is partial to white nationalist or supremacists, it would not shock me. They want to start a civil war (they call it "race war" but it will degenerate into civil war) and this is one way to prep the arena.
Time to move out of this crazy place.
75
@Lmca
move where?
Times quoting lawsuit: "3-D printed guns ... are often unrecognizable by standard metal detectors because they are made out of materials other than metal (e.g., plastic) ..."
The Times should explain why the word "often" is in that sentence.
And the Times should say something about *ammunition*.
3
Does ammo really have to be metal? There are probably plastics that can stand the stress of firing and fly straight.
I remember reading about Cody Wilson and his 3D printed guns 3 or 4 years ago. And the president is only "looking into" the issue now? So has Fox and Friends, that leading Executive Branch policymaking body, not yet come up with a position?
8
The ability to possess a gun implies a de facto right to commit murder.
That's what makes us Americans who we are: Murder, Inc.
30
@Jay David Okay, so people with muscles (or kitchen knives) are the next to go in terrms of rights?
1
@Jay David No, actually it does not. Murder is illegal everywhere.
1
Congress should get started creating a DMV-like agency for gun ownership.
- You have to be licensed to own a gun. You have to pass tests to get licensed.
- You must have liability insurance for any loss of life or property damage attributed to your gun.
Congress needs to act on this while we're between mass shootings, before we're back to thoughts and prayers.
10
It is sad testament to Trump's lack of morals and intelligence that he actually needs to think this one through. This is yet one more instance of Trump being in way over his head. He will now call his hotline to the NRA leaders (yes, probably the same ones who are linked to the Kremlin) and ask them what he should do. In the end, he will no nothing, and as a result we will all be less safe. The only way to stop this insanity is to vote in November and to ban the bullets.
32
If you can manufacture a gun, how long before a teen gets shot by a police officer, who, in the dark, has a split second to decide if his or her life is in danger ? The blood will be 100% on Trump's hands.
3
@Tim Home-made guns have been around a long time. Funny that you are just noticing them.
But prices will come down on the printers just like the PC so that almost anyone can afford one.
3-D printed bullets have also been accomplished. We live in interesting, scratch that, we live in demented times. I wish the 'freedom' and 'rights' people were as vehement in supporting the rights of children in school, club goers, concert attendees, church gatherings, etc., to attend to their business of living without fear of a mass shooting. But no. Guns are the new religion and the NRA is their church.
24
if the design were being posted by someone with a "Muslim sounding name" would don the con & his gunners be cheering him on?
not likely.
but don the con cares only about himself and hearing the cheers of brownsirts at rallies
27
Great, let’s:
- Make it impossible to regulate firearms
- Remove any and all barriers to dangerous and unstable people acquiring guns
- Render existing security measures obsolete
- Make it impossible to attend a concert, sporting event, courtroom, or travel without in-depth screenings and personal searches of people and baggage
We already have a gun violence epidemic in this country. We already have an epidemic of police preemptively shooting people because they’re worried they *might* have a gun. We can expect all of these problems to go through the roof when anyone can print a gun in their garage or buy inexpensive/untraceable printed guns online. The idea that more guns make us safer is the most asinine, backwards logic on the planet. More guns = more likelihood of guns being used = more gun deaths. It’s a fear-based fantasy that’s been fueled and legislated by an amoral and profit-driven lobby. If the justification is that citizens need to arm themselves in case they need to rise up against a tyrannical government, we’d better lift regulations on submarines, aircraft carriers, attack drones, fighter jets, and nuclear weapons. Because your printed gun isn’t doing anything to tip that balance. The only purpose it serves is to ensure that Americans live in constant fear that the person next to them might be carrying something whose sole purpose and reason for being is to kill them.
18
“If they want a firearm, they should go to a local, licensed retailer and buy a product made by a reputable manufacturer.”
Should read;
“If they want a firearm, they should give us their money.”
8
Do you think 3D printers are free?
Is this not a Homeland Security issue? Don't pretend that this is just going to be an individual with an expensive 3D printer making one or two guns here and there across the country. This provides mass production and distribution to those who can't otherwise get a gun or who want an untraceable weapon. People have been calling their legislators about this and commenting on the State Dept. webpage. The hypocrisy of legislators who are so concerned and sympathetic about violence but who support NRA initiatives is disgusting. I am tired of getting letters from Republican representatives about their efforts for safe schools but not once mentioning gun control. Now this. The insanity of the Trump administration's policies continues.
34
Forget this childish nonsense. When will we get the downloadable specifications to build chemical and nuclear weapons? After all, it is a first amendment right to post such, isn't it?
24
@Bruce Have you bothered to look before commenting? That stuff has been available for a long time...
@Bruce These exist. Plenty of scientific lit on making drugs and chem weapons is 1st Amemdment protected.
Wow lets just help the terrorists out with these new plastic toys. Wonder how soon a plastic 3-D pistol is involved in a shooting somewhere, where we have to go thru metal detectors like stadiums or airports. I do realize technology is a good thing most of time, but really we are going to allow this to happen. Why bother we metal detectors at schools, as we should know that these kids today are very computer smart, and yes if this is allowed to happen, there will be lives lost. This is as dumb as allowing the manufacture of assault style weapons. Why do we keep wanting to make it easy for crazy/mental people to get weapons?
85
@Ricky I can only hope that some on the GOP side of Congress will realize that the metal detectors there also won't pick these up. Since all they care about is themselves, maybe that will help them get some common sense.
5
@Ricky Well it kinda has happened all ready in CA with the Rancho Tehama Shooting.
What on earth possesses people to do such things? Whoever is doing this is like some kamikaze fly hellbent on hitting the ointment just to be a pest. And some judge let’s them get away with it? They’re even worse possessed by something else.
11
@John Doe To quote Alfred (Bruce Wayne's butler): "Some people just like to see the world burn."
In Microsoft Corporation v. AT&T Corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court said in 2007: “A blueprint may contain precise instructions for the construction and combination of the components of a patented device, but it is not itself a combinable component.” (127 S.Ct. 1746, 1748)
4
I give up. Cervantes said something to the effect that firearms placed the common knave on the same level as a knight, but without the gallantry, allegiance, intelligence, or expertise of a knight. Cervantes published Don Quixote in 1615.
I'll be out tilting at windmills. You guys with guns know where to find me.
(Nice pic of DJT. Wonder what's on his playlist? My guess - State of My Head, Shinedown. Or maybe Beck. You're probably right - Guns N' Roses...Used to Love Her.)
4
We'll see, we'll see.
(leadership)
7
“I am looking into pretending to care about it while also being careful not to lose a single NRA dollar or vote.”
33
I'm waiting for a revision of the Bible that establishes God made Adam with a gun in his hand.
62
Next on Cody Wilson's agenda: 3D printing a girlfriend.
168
@stan continople
That's nothing new - may I remind you of Pygmalion. From antiquity onward, men have tried to fashion for themselves gorgeous women based on their own fantasies - and none of these women could talk back, naturally (or if they could, they would be suitably submissive - I think the Japanese are developing female robots with talking ability to that effect...).
1
3D girlfriends at least wouldn’t present a “clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”
Trump carries water for the NRA and the NRA is about selling guns, not people getting them for free. so ixnay on 3D.
17
This is an international disgrace, a blot upon humanity. How in God’s name are we allowing people to create weapons of war in their own homes. We will all need bullet-proof vests and masks to leave our homes in a few years. The Trump administration and Congress should be ashamed of themselves, instead they hold out their palms and ask for more money from the NRA. We need to vote these creeps out of office. Boy, am I angry. I have had it with these people, this tops them all - make your own machine gun in your office and arm your children too, no licenses or money needed. The USA as we knew it is done for if they don’t stop this.
35
If we can’t stop nuclear proliferation, what gives us any hope that we can stop plastic guns?
5
If Trump has any doubts about 3-D printed guns, he should watch the 1993 film “In the Line of Fire” where an assassin (John Malkovich) uses a plastic composite gun to attempt the assassination of a president.
7
Trump looking into printed guns? Maybe he doesn't trust his own Secret Service.
3
Of course Trumpy is. It'll put a massive dent into the gun business profits and of the NRA. You betcha!
1
Trump suddenly had that oh-no moment. And the NRA was there to enlighten his thinking. They'd all probably loose alot money when people made their own.
4
We have not had enough robberies, highjackings, or murders to satisfy our national bloodlust. Funny how we are the only country that takes so much amusement from so much slaughter. .
4
Thank goodness the only body/group powerful enough in America to stop this - the NRA - will be against it.
7
The gun manufacturers are probably against this since they won't make money off sales of firearms. Therefore their lobbying group, the NRA, is also against it.
2
When you pair an incredibly stupid idea, downloaded guns?!, with an incompetent administration led by a con man, you get disaster
9
This is something that everyone (gun advocates included) should be against. This is simply a way for people who should never be in possession of a gun to get one. Yet, I'll bet most gun advocates love this. In my dealings with gun advocates, I've found that almost all of them are bitter about the fact that they've had to make major compromises to gun regulation advocates-things like filling out some paperwork to buy a gun, or not being able to obtain a machine gun-yet gun advocates have made none at all. But, they are wrong about that: we make the greatest possible sacrifices for them. For example, I'll bet none of the people killed at Sandy Hook were gun owners. But gun advocates will never acknowledge that sacrifice...and they will applaud gun printing technology.
136
This seems like a silly distraction from more pressing sensible firearms laws.
There are much easier ways for people who should not have a gun to get one than to buy a 3D printer of sufficient quality and print a gun out. Even if one did that, they'd create a really low quality firearm that would be as likely to kill them as someone else.
Remember when 3D printers were being hyped in the media a few years back until people realized they weren't actually that useful?
I almost wonder if this is a ruse by the NRA to get pro-regulation folks to waste time and money on a non-issue. As the article points out, there have long been other ways to make DIY firearms.
All of these DIY firearms need real bullets. Why not focus on regulation that if you can't legally buy a firearm, you can't buy bullets. That's the case some places, buy not others. Why not put our resources towards that rather than waisting them on a first amendment case?
1
@Leo
People, including nefarious ne'er do wells and the criminally insane have always been able to make a gun more deadly than a plastic printed single shot gun. If you are so alarmed you should really panic now because it's centuries too late.
1
@Pete
Limiting access to bullets as a means of controlling guns, a constitutional right, has already been tested. It failed because ammo is part and parcel of a citizen's right to bear arms.
The solution is what it has always been, training and education of one's responsibility when owning a gun. The liberals hatefully destroyed, or tried to destroy, that when they demonized the NRA who still teaches gun safety and responsibility. Those other gungrabber organizations who put the word "safety" in their title don't teach safety at all.
Too late there are already all kinds of ways to make unregistered homemade guns- you can cast AR 15 receivers in plastic and epoxy, buy 80% complete but technically “non gun” receivers that can be finished with a drill press or CNC machine or you can buy sheet metal flats and a jig g to bend pre cut “non gun” Ak 47 or various HK sheet metal submachine gun receiver “ flats”into real durable guns ( much improved in comparison to 3D printed recievers). It’s been this way for awhile and anyone who wants to can possess unregistered homemade guns, many using used machine gun parts from various ex com block countries to complete the weapons- all untraceable and do not require the buyer to even be an adult. Cats been out of the bag for some time and despite the right wing hate for the BATFE, that federal regulatory arm now appears to be facilitating this sort of thing.
17
@Mad Town Patriotic, It looks to me that the BATF is even more afraid of the gun monster Congress created than the Congress is.
1
Understanding your insightful comment requires basic gun knowledge. An issue with many readers of the NYT I’m afraid.
2
@Mad Town Patriotic
Thank you for posting instructions on how to make an AK47, a weapon most vets do not believe should be in civilian hands. No doubt homeowners would be happy to spray the inside of their rooms with this military combat style weapon to deter an intruder. Phones don't work? If phone lines are cut, there are no rooms with door locks in which to hide while the intruders commit their crime? It makes no sense to confront possibly armed criminals in order to save a computer or large screen TV. If you have a computer and are computer literate, you also have a back up, a small USB device. Banking on-line can be protected; big banks have firewalls. Change your PW at the bank, not on line. Don't shop on line; avoid Amazon shopping; buy books at a book store. Maybe support your local businesses on Main St.
Is there no end to the nightmarish ideas that this dude comes up with every day?
73
@Martha Goff What did this "dude" come up with Martha? It wasn't his idea to publish the plans and he didn't write the plans and frankly (sorry for the run on sentence but I figure anyone who calls the President "dude" really wont care about grammar) there is something called the First Amendment which kind of protects this sort of thing.
1
"... the nightmarish ideas that this dude comes up with every day?"
What "dude" are you talking about? Trump?
"Looking into" guns is not a wise thing to do...
92
@cyclist Ha! Didn't slow him down with the eclipse. Not gonna slow him down now.
5
NRA was the first consult by Trump. That's all we need to know. This will be a "new" national emergency. First we had weaponized water (liquids) underwear, cellphones. Until there is a killing,robbery or hijacking using the "new" weapons the NRA/Trump will be silent. Wayne Lapierre will try to bring the 3D weapons under The 2nd Amendment as the right to bear plastic arms.
56
@Sam Pringle It depends. Is the NRA more owned by the gun manufacturers or by Russian dark money at this point? The Russians would love to sow the US with plastic guns. The gun makers, not so much.
1
He is awaiting his orders from the NRA.
310
@steve
Actually NRA as intermediary for Putin, don't you think?
2
trump's "i'll look into it" is code for not doing anything and hoping the matter gets buried beneath the daily noise he creates.
129
So, ultimately, what could save the day is IRS stepping in and protecting the interests of its biggest and most powerful constituent -- the gun manufacturing industry. Hard to imagine these guys being too happy about people bypassing the mainstream supply chain and cutting into their profits. Oh, the irony!
41
@Kilgore Trout -- Oh my, I certainly meant NRA stepping in to defend the interests of the gun industry, not IRS! Must have been the shock from reading this article that scrambled up my mind...
Speaking of NRA, it may not be just the interests of the US gun industry they could step in to defend, but also Russia's.
Double the irony!
5
Cody Wilson claims he has a right to publish the 3D printer blueprints on the grounds that doing so represents free speech.
I think it was Justice Brandeis who wrote that the right to free speech does not entitle anyone to yell "fire!" in a crowded movie theater. Publishing these plans in my mind is tantamount to setting our country on societal fire, which could cause tde deaths of thousands of innocent Americans, in front of the altar of the second Amendment.
Wilson must be stopped!
199
@Nelson Schmitz, CNC programs speak to computers, not people. Under the rationale offered by this anarchist, computer viruses are constitutionally-protected free speech.
3
@Nelson Schmitz-- Wilson must be stopped. He needs to be arrested and charged with treason. He needs to be executed as what he plans to offer makes him public enemy number one. Enough of this. We need to protect ourselves and put our country back on the path of lawfulness!
1
@Nelson Schmitz I'm very glad you aren't in charge of determining what our rights are. That said, as a judge, you'd at least have a modicum of legal education - something clearly absent from your comment.
I am a bit bewildered nobody else has commented on this article yet. After seeing the NY Times Electoral Map of the election of 2016, I know why when I'm on vacation I don't jump into my car, I hop on an airplane. People from red country simply believe in a different world than those from the blue. Cody Wilson is one odd bird, in my opinion. What could possibly be the benefit to making a very dangerous weapon yourself, when guns are already readily available for purchase, manufactured by people who know how to make a gun very well. The First Amendment claim seems hard to defend as well, because the Supreme Court has clearly said that dangerous speech is not protected by the First Amendment, and I can think of nothing more dangerous than a situation where unregulated, untraceable AR-15's are made available to anyone with access to the internet and enough cash to buy a 3-D printing machine and the necessary plastic materials can create an extremely lethal weapon for themselves or to freely sell and distribute to others.
54
@karisimo0, plastic guns are single-use throwaways
1
Not for nothing, but there sure is a lot of red on those maps in NY and NJ. Just as there is blue in places like Texas. How many terms did Chris Christie serve?
1
Untraceable AR15s are available RIGHT NOW, in the form of 80% completed receivers, it's not a gun until it's finished. You could buy 1000 of them right NOW, finish machine them , but the parts to complete them, and you would have 1000 guns with no numbers on them. Not plastic, shoot once and throw them away, but guns thar will shoot tens of thousands of times each
Just so you know...
When trump says he is "looking into" something, it means he hasn't a clue what he's talking about and has zero intention of doing anything about it, even if he did.
214
@David
I don't know. I remember when there was a solar eclipse, and he was looking into the Sun. I think he knows a lot about the Sun. I've never looked into the Sun. No-one I know has ever looked into the Sun. I think we should be praising him for looking into things no-one else looks into.
Trump, says he's already speaking to NRA; the NRA says it doesn’t seem to make much sense.
Translation: it doesn't make much sense to allow private citizens to earn gun profits because the NRA and gun manufacturers are solely entitled to the lion's share of gun profits. They've no intention of allowing their entitled billions to flow to private citizens making guns. They've had a corner on the senseless murder market for years and they're darned if they'll allow anyone to take it away from them.
272
@Sara G. You're right. And the other concern politicians have is that plastic guns cannot be detected, so can easily be brought into the halls of congress and the white house itself. When the politicians themselves are at risk of being shot, they'll do something about it.
Mr. Trumps next book called "Profiles in Courage...How I stood up to the NRA" (leaving out the part about consulting with them first).
I don't see how 3-D printed guns can benefit the NRA, and they are dangerous to the shooter - the two things the NRA cares about more than the general public's safety.
They should be banned.
14
The sooner America grows up and delinks an outdated mode of freedom to gun ownership, the better Americans and the world will be.
It is pure insanity to allow anyone, of any background and age, access to these weapons.
Finally, those of us which view true freedom and living in a society where we will not be shot and killed must never, ever give up. Ban all guns now!
102
@Mark L
We don't need to ban single shot pistols, or target practice guns, legal at practice ranges. AK47's are not commonly allowed on ranges due to a lack of any kind of skill necessary to spray a target and surrounding area. My cousin, a Marine vet, gave up his guns, keeps none in his home. He went to a bow and arrow to hunt deer; finally stopped hunting deer. His sons do not own any weapons. Farmers use shotguns to kill "varmints"; they don't use shotguns to murder their neighbors.
1
And remember "Ghost guns made of plastic, so they can't be detected by metal detectors, now being made available via distribution of blueprints for 3-D printers don't kill people, But, chances are, anyone who would needs one of these weapons, is looking to kill someone". To long for a bumper sticker?
50
Is it just me, or is the United States a country in freefall under the Trump maladministration and complicit GOP Congress?
3D printed guns. Seriously? Is there any place for common sense anymore?
439
@Andrew, you are so right.
Aside from the downside probabilities ahead for domestic violence victims, such publication means the Secret Service would be severely compromised in its ability to protect the president. And the magnetometers in Congress and the courts would not detect these weapons. And that is just the federal government.
Hasn't any of these people seen In the Line of Duty with Clint Eastwood and John Malkovich?
@Andrew
Apparently not.
1
@Andrew
The people watching this most nervously are the Chinese. Stability and control what the Chinese Communist Party is all about, and the potential for mayhem -- anti-government and otherwise -- from 3D printed guns is limitless.
2
An incredibly steep and slippery slope! If our elected leaders allow printed plastic guns I see nothing but trouble coming from it. Widespread distribution of plans to print these weapons is as much protected by the First Amendment as is shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. It isn't and for good reason. A fundamental purpose of government is to protect the public interest. Anarchists should immigrate to Anarchia - I hear its wild there.
37
@catalina
Somalia is another place where guns are everywhere; random murders are common. Nigeria might also be an alternate choice. No doubt the U.S. Republic would benefit from adopting loose gun regs from violent third world countries. Although not as much as the gun manufacturers who fund the NRA will benefit from more guns in the hands of unlicensed, untrained and untested civilians.
The downloadable gun is just the beginning of a new technology in gun making. It is like open sourced software that will shared and improved from a global base of users. The real threat here is not the plastic gun, but the plastic based gun.
What is going to happen is that the plastic gun will be modified with steel to make it much more reliable and dependable. All that has to be done is to use steel inserts where the gun is subjected to the blast from the detonated cartridge. The plastic is then used as a superstructure that holds the steel parts in precise alignment. These inserts would be essentially precision steel tubes. There are many ways to attach these into a plastic superstructure in a permanent fashion with mechanical means and adhesives.
I envision a future where underground gunsmiths make these things and sell them to criminals and others who want them. There are small metal working lathes that are very inexpensive which can be used to machine these tubes and inserts.
New and better designs will be developed. This first model is very crude. Really smart makers will vastly improve it. It will become the new nerd hobby for nerds with bad intentions. Underground makers will pop up financed by criminals and quite possibly terrorist networks.
This is very serious and dangerous. Low cost, disposable weapons are almost here. They only have to work for a little while, then pitch it and get another one.
247
@Bruce Rozenblit Tossed like a burner phone.
1
@Bruce Rozenblit, the only good reason to make guns of plastic is to get them past metal detectors. Otherwise, guns made of metal are vastly superior.
1
@Bruce Rozenblit
So the U.S. remains the most dangerous Western democracy. A title no one should aspire to.