- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Wikiweapons and Printing 3D Guns. It's Just a Stalking Horse for What's to Come
|
|
Comments (33)
13 earlier comments in the full thread.
:-))
I like herring. Matjes herring is in a red sauce so I guess it's red herring. That means I like red herrings. I'm allergic to horses. For me the red herring wins.
> ...so much irrational fear, which drives people to carry weapons...
You know, my entire family tree has had multiple loaded guns in our homes going back at least six generations. You'd think so much irrationality would have been detected sometime during that period. Of course, those guns also put food on the table for most of us, so maybe it's not as irrational as some think.
You know, my entire family tree has had multiple loaded guns in our homes going back at least six generations. You'd think so much irrationality would have been detected sometime during that period. Of course, those guns also put food on the table for most of us, so maybe it's not as irrational as some think.
Gun control is, in North America, a highly politicized, emotionally-freighted, hot-button issue characterized by an amazing amount of knee-jerk irrationality on both sides.
As I am a citizen of two other countries with quite different gun-control regimes than the United States. think I can describe the situation from two different perspectives, that might throw some additional light on the matter.
As a Canadian, I am accustomed to -- and have [strike]no[/strike] little problem with -- the gun-control regime in effect here. There are some issues, and it's an occasionally contentious issue, but it mostly works. Most people can own a gun, but there are definite restrictions on who can own a firearm, and on what kind of weapon, and there is far less gun-ownership in Canada than in the US.
(And I suspect the NRA would launch an armed rebellion before accepting anything remotely like this in the USA.)
I am also Swiss. In Switzerland the government actually supplies every military-service aged male (therefore members of the national militia) a military firearm, and requires that weapon to be kept in well-maintained working condition. The government also supplies ammunition for practice at any local firing range. There are extensive and strictly enforced laws governing the safe storage and transport of these weapons, with strong penalties for non-compliance.
(And I suspect the NRA would launch an armed rebellion before accepting anything remotely like that in the USA, too.)
Both Canada and Switzerland have far lower rates of gun-related violence than the USA -- and very few would argue that either country is "less free" than the USA.
Now -- getting back the the topic at hand -- how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the legal regime around firearm use and ownership in any of these countries? And how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the realities of gun violence in any of these countries?
As I am a citizen of two other countries with quite different gun-control regimes than the United States. think I can describe the situation from two different perspectives, that might throw some additional light on the matter.
As a Canadian, I am accustomed to -- and have [strike]no[/strike] little problem with -- the gun-control regime in effect here. There are some issues, and it's an occasionally contentious issue, but it mostly works. Most people can own a gun, but there are definite restrictions on who can own a firearm, and on what kind of weapon, and there is far less gun-ownership in Canada than in the US.
(And I suspect the NRA would launch an armed rebellion before accepting anything remotely like this in the USA.)
I am also Swiss. In Switzerland the government actually supplies every military-service aged male (therefore members of the national militia) a military firearm, and requires that weapon to be kept in well-maintained working condition. The government also supplies ammunition for practice at any local firing range. There are extensive and strictly enforced laws governing the safe storage and transport of these weapons, with strong penalties for non-compliance.
(And I suspect the NRA would launch an armed rebellion before accepting anything remotely like that in the USA, too.)
Both Canada and Switzerland have far lower rates of gun-related violence than the USA -- and very few would argue that either country is "less free" than the USA.
Now -- getting back the the topic at hand -- how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the legal regime around firearm use and ownership in any of these countries? And how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the realities of gun violence in any of these countries?
> Both Canada and Switzerland have far lower rates of gun-related violence than the USA
The US as a whole, yes. If you eliminate a handful of urban population centers from the statistics, the rest of the US is comparable or lower. The statistics on same are readily available for those who wish to search.
> how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the legal regime around firearm use and ownership in any of these countries?
At the moment, not at all. The gun is not particularly useful as a weapon. Assuming it could be made into one with future advancements: It has no effect on the Swiss model; but barring the banning of 3D printing to the public, it absolutely destroys the government's ability to enforce the Canadian one.
> And how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the realities of gun violence in any of these countries?
Not at all.
The US as a whole, yes. If you eliminate a handful of urban population centers from the statistics, the rest of the US is comparable or lower. The statistics on same are readily available for those who wish to search.
> how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the legal regime around firearm use and ownership in any of these countries?
At the moment, not at all. The gun is not particularly useful as a weapon. Assuming it could be made into one with future advancements: It has no effect on the Swiss model; but barring the banning of 3D printing to the public, it absolutely destroys the government's ability to enforce the Canadian one.
> And how does 3-D printing of firearms actually effect the realities of gun violence in any of these countries?
Not at all.
@jdixson,
You missed mentioning what effect it has on the legal regime in the US?
I would say it will be banned just because the NRA lobby wouldn't want.
You missed mentioning what effect it has on the legal regime in the US?
I would say it will be banned just because the NRA lobby wouldn't want.
> You missed mentioning what effect it has on the legal regime in the US?
The legal regime in the US is in such a state of flux that it's impossible to say. Which is sort of the point of the release of the design.
The legal regime in the US is in such a state of flux that it's impossible to say. Which is sort of the point of the release of the design.
Fettoosh,
I think you are functioning under a misconception. The NRA is a gun _control_ organization. Nowhere in their efforts will you find anything about actually repealing any regulation or restriction, unless it involves greater _licensing_ of individuals.
If restrictions and regulations were repealed, the NRA would lose all that wonderful money, all that power and influence, and return to being nothing more than a shooting club. They do not want that.
Seriously.
As to the effects of this printing, none at all. There would be greater effect by banning hardware stores, since it's cheaper and easier to make a single-shot pistol out of pipe fittings and rubber bands than by spending thousands of dollars just to shape plastic.
To the point I made above, this was a demonstration to make people think, not any kind of revolution. And, as usual, Leviathan has over-reacted.
I think you are functioning under a misconception. The NRA is a gun _control_ organization. Nowhere in their efforts will you find anything about actually repealing any regulation or restriction, unless it involves greater _licensing_ of individuals.
If restrictions and regulations were repealed, the NRA would lose all that wonderful money, all that power and influence, and return to being nothing more than a shooting club. They do not want that.
Seriously.
As to the effects of this printing, none at all. There would be greater effect by banning hardware stores, since it's cheaper and easier to make a single-shot pistol out of pipe fittings and rubber bands than by spending thousands of dollars just to shape plastic.
To the point I made above, this was a demonstration to make people think, not any kind of revolution. And, as usual, Leviathan has over-reacted.
Quoting:I think you are functioning under a misconception. ...
I don't believe so @Bob_R.
My point was, if there was no restriction on 3D gun printing, then people will make their own and there won't be much need for gun manufacturers, hence NRA would lose its main sources of income and consequently would lobby very hard to ban it. I consider 3D printing a personal liberty and freedom, but, as you know, Not all regulations have to make sense.
And I leave that alone. ;)
> ...there won't be much need for gun manufacturers, hence NRA would lose its main sources of income ...
I'm pretty sure gun manufacturers aren't the main source of income for the NRA. The Wikipedia article on the NRA may prove useful for those who think they are.
I'm pretty sure gun manufacturers aren't the main source of income for the NRA. The Wikipedia article on the NRA may prove useful for those who think they are.
Yeah.. I don't think talking about guns is a good thing on LXer ladies and gents. We gotta change the conversation or I will be forced to close the thread I am sorry to say.
Scott, you might wish to be more careful about the articles you link to in that case. The article in question was specifically about guns and 3D printers. :)
It's rather hard to discuss an article without discussing its central subject. Most of us understand the risks, and I think you can see that we've done our best to keep the discussion out of the directly political. Please take that into account in your decision.
It's rather hard to discuss an article without discussing its central subject. Most of us understand the risks, and I think you can see that we've done our best to keep the discussion out of the directly political. Please take that into account in your decision.
If I may, it looks like the discussion has pretty much run its course, closing it now would be.... anti-climactic.
You are right jdixon and I am responsible for that. I just did not think the conversation would go in the direction it has. I do apologize.
This why forums and forum TOS'es are unworkable. You think M$ standards aren't political? That adoption of systemd and LSB is not political? Get real. That's why usenet is still viable. One can rant till one is blue and if the masses don't care, they jes walk away. No right. No wrong. No fault or dismissals. Simply, play or walk away.
NO NO NO NO NO!!!!11one
Wait, could you repeat the question?
Wait, could you repeat the question?
> I do apologize.
Not necessary Scott. It's a best a minor problem. And I'd always rather have you err on the side of carrying articles than not.
And as already noted, the discussion has pretty much run it's course. I think a word to the wise is probably sufficient in this case.
However, I'm at a loss on how to handle such such potentially explosive topics myself. You don't want to not carry them, but the resulting conversations can get, hmm, "entertaining".
Maybe there's a way to link to an article but block discussion on it? That seems draconian, but it may be the best alternative for subjects which are obvious political landmines.
Not necessary Scott. It's a best a minor problem. And I'd always rather have you err on the side of carrying articles than not.
And as already noted, the discussion has pretty much run it's course. I think a word to the wise is probably sufficient in this case.
However, I'm at a loss on how to handle such such potentially explosive topics myself. You don't want to not carry them, but the resulting conversations can get, hmm, "entertaining".
Maybe there's a way to link to an article but block discussion on it? That seems draconian, but it may be the best alternative for subjects which are obvious political landmines.
It is a sad fact that so much of life has been usurped by the "political" class that it is practically impossible to discuss anything without its effect.
Which distribution, which desktop, which browser, emacs or vi, these remain in the purely voluntary realm, and as such while the discussions may range into the vehement, but no one is compelled thereby. They are not "political".
Sadly, no matter how much we all may wish live that way, the political will not leave F/OSS alone.
Which distribution, which desktop, which browser, emacs or vi, these remain in the purely voluntary realm, and as such while the discussions may range into the vehement, but no one is compelled thereby. They are not "political".
Sadly, no matter how much we all may wish live that way, the political will not leave F/OSS alone.
Quoting:Sadly, no matter how much we all may wish live that way, the political will not leave F/OSS alone.
I agree bob, it is something that I have been thinking about for a while and want to address at some point. It is the wording and intent that I feel has to be correct before starting what I believe will be and encompassing long term discourse.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
I agree, let's move on.