http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=DconsfGsXyA&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DDconsfGsXyA

I am fully in favor of this. People need a means to defend themselves. The more the U.S. government tries to infringe on 2nd amendment rights, the stronger people are going to resist.

>>2 I'm guessing you live in America? In Australia we don't have the right to carry arms but we live in a peaceful society. Something that holds the power to take another human life so easily and without effort will amplify the effects of greed and raise crime rates if it becomes readily available through the internet.
The point I'm making is that there are other ways to defend your property, your family and even your own life without guns. Supposing your attacker has a gun that they printed you'd have one too but that means that someone will die or be shot either way. If neither has a gun generally you don't need to use lethal force to protect yourself and everybody lives.
Don't try to give me junk about your constitution and using lethal force to protect your property when one of the commandments from the "god" in which America trusts is "thou shalt not commit murder"

In the us we need guns because we got crazy drug and corrupt countries to the south and the people who really want a weapon want it's not that hard because there are lots of arms dealers here to

I'm not saying there isn't crime in Australia. There is. We just have different ways of dealing with it and honestly it works better than pre-meditated murder.

Removing guns doesn't reduce crime rates.Humans were born to adapt.If you look in certain European countries, you'll see that there's still a lot of murders with melee weapons or poisoning.Nations with high gun ownership can have low murder rates while nations with low gun ownership can have high murder rates.Very few murders actually involve guns and stabbing with knives is far more common.Beatings can be just as common.I'm gonna stop this from becoming another one of those Murica hate threads.

Here's the whole article on this if you don't want my layman version : http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/

Here's an informative video on the subject of gun control: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xC03hmS1Brk

>>6 I also live in Australia and agree with F, we are perfectly able to handle crime without civillians in possession of guns. However! America is a different situation. Because it has always been so lax with gun laws the country has been flooded with dangerous arms. It would be like moving your house to the bottom of the sea then attempting to keep all the water out. Gun laws do need to be tightened, slowly however as not to disturb the already fragile balance in America. The fact that America has had more civillian mass shootings in the past ten years than all the other first world countries combined proves my point more than any speech could.

For the record to fully produce a gun, or print it, you need to buy out the patents. If one doesn't get permission to do so then if they create a gun based off of another they are infringing upon copyrights.

Also I think Canada doesn't have nearly as many restrictions on guns, and more people own them. In a documentary called, "Bowling for Columbine," I think, he went to Canada and everyone he talked to owned multiple guns. Not just pistols, but high powered rifles. Despite all of the guns the most recent crime involving a shooting was a guy escaping to Canada from the US. Also no one locks their doors in Canada either.

People will use anything to kill another, like in prison they kill with paper arrows. You can make explosives with a gas container and a fuse quite easily. Should we start banning gas since it can, and has been, used to make a bomb?

I personally don't think it is the guns but society and people in America have become a lot more messed up. I don't really know the reason behind it, but in "Bowling for Columbine" a major difference in America compared to others is the news. The news broadcasts violence and fear, with rarely any positive stories in America making a bunch of people live in paranoia

>>8 I never watch the news, but if you watched the video the guy who is making the guns is giving away the CAD files for free. Copyright doesn't matter at that point if hes just giving it away.

>>8 Next time you use bullets to fuel a car and gas to rob a passerby give me a call.

>>10 I'll work on that right away.

>>9 He isn't infringing upon the copyrights, since he isn't creating a whole gun. He had an earlier video that I can't find which he said that. I don't really get why making a gun piece by piece isn't going against any copyrights, but if you make the whole thing it is.

>>10 many people have used bombs to rob people. Also did you know many bombs were intended to kill more than a gun. Columbine had bombs in the cafeteria that failed to work properly, but if they did hundreds would be dead. Also for the Aurora movie theater shooting he wired his apartment to blow the whole city block and his shooting was suppose to be a distraction for the explosion. All he forgot was batteries for the timer.

Just food for thought why is it more people tend to do suicide bombings in the middle east rather than shooting up a place? Probably becuase it kills more people and sends more of a message than just shooting up a place. If they spent more time on the explosives hundreds to thousands of people might have died instead.

>>10 Also if you modify a car engine I bet you could make it run off of gun powder, since all you need is an explosion to raise the pistons.

Personally I think it would be more traumatic if someone used gas to rob somebody. Think about it you soak someone in gasoline and have a lighter or match ready to burn them to death. I am pretty sure they would do almost anything to not be and the smell would increase the fear of it as well. What you don't see is how simple it is to do, since all you need is to pour gas on someone and have a lighter ready. It's just as easy as having a gun ready

This is great, I will support the 3D printing, it'll make so much chaos in the wrong hands, but protection in the right hands, AWESOME!!!!!

my school has a 3d printer in my technology 2 class. the models are made out of strings of fast hardening glue. imagine makeing something out of spaggetti and letting it harden. the peices are not sturdy enaugh for gun parts, you can break them by steping on them, not to mention that the peices would never fit together. the printer is NOT that accurate.

>>15 It really depends on the printer grade and plastics you're using. Speaking about accuracy, that also depends on the quality of the file you're printing, similar to low and high resolution prints. If you were using an industrial grade printer, however, there really shouldn't be any issues. Aside from the plastic components melting when firing full-auto, due to the heat. The rifle should be fine if you're firing in short bursts.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this.
Commercial 3D printers sell for around $10k++. And so do the good resin powders that are needed to print anything. And, well, probably maintenance costs as well. You're probably better off buying a normal gun/ rifle, in my opinion. Seems like people who have too much time and cash making their own replacement parts to me.

I'll agree with >>6 that weapons don't mean reducing crimes, though they do make crimes....easier, from my point of view. Very rarely do you see a person try to rob a bank bare-handed.

If you're talking about defending yourself, warning signs, metal grills, car batteries and a little imagination with some technical skills should do the trick. Personally, I'm terrified of guns. If only all the guns were replaced with tasers. Sigh.
>>9 not infringing on copyrights because it's someone else giving things that don't belong to them away for free you say? You should hear yourself. Music artists are crying everywhere.

>>13 It's technically infringing on the original patents though, if you ask me. Gun powder in engines..? I'm pretty sure it's combustion, not explosions, that run an engine. You've got yourself a car bomb now, though.

I think >>10 is a bit unfair of a statement (besides going off topic), as I do agree partway with >>8, after all, the title does say "What are your thoughts". Humans are fragile. We die easily.

This is starting to turn into an open discussion around the topic? I'm /saging as I don't see how this is news. Probably belongs in tech since it has 3D printing components and stuff? But that's probably just me. Wiki Weapons has been around for quite awhile now. The thing with legality and all about this is, there's no real issue with printing gun components, the main issue is the AR's receiver that requires a license before it can be used.

bump

>>15 They can also print in metal apparently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zApmGFDA6ow

Also, >>16 the cost might block bank robbers, but serial killers and gunmen, which seem to be more common lately, usually get killed, so they probably wouldn't care about the cost.