It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Liberator" gun made with 3D printer fires first successful shot

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Awesome. A printed gun. If SHTF, you can just print one out do whenever you need. Perfect for survival.

But of course, if someone shoots a person with a printed gun, you can bet not only will printed guns be banned, but the actual printers themselves, for our safety you know.


A Texas man has become the first person to successfully fire a real bullet from a gun that was created on a home 3D printer. Sounds crazy? In fact, the blueprint for the pistol is available for free online for anyone to access. And it's legal.

University of Texas law student Cody Wilson, 25, released a video of a 3D-printed gun named the "Liberator" taking test shots over the weekend. The gun is mostly made of plastic, with the exception of two metal pieces: a metal firing pin and a six ounce piece of steel that is required by law under the Undetectable Firearms Act. Of course, the piece of steel that makes the weapon visible to metal detectors, and legal, can certainly be omitted by future hobbyists.
www.cbsnews.com...




posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by extraterrestrialentity
 


This application has just as much potential for harm as it does for good. Printing artillery at home? Does it get more "terrorist" than that?
edit on 6-5-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
If the blueprints are already out there, then it's probably already too late to ban anything. They will have about as much success as they had with music piracy.

Also this quote bothered me -




"Guns are made out of plastic, so they would not be detectable by a metal detector at any airport or sporting event," Schumer said.


Won't the bullets still be made of metal?



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by cleverhans
 


Bullets don't have to be made of metal to do damage. But that's just the tip of the whole "plastic guns" issue.
edit on 6-5-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I'm sure there will be a call to put gun dispensers in schools, right by the pop machines lol
That will make things safer!




posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:47 PM
link   
There's already a thread on this farce.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by extraterrestrialentity
 


This application has just as much potential for harm as it does for good. Printing artillery at home? Does it get more "terrorist" than that?
edit on 6-5-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


I would print one just to shoot the damn thing at a target in my backyard, does it get more 'terrorist' than that? It then would collect dust, or come out when someone else wants to check it out.

Also, some people actually take life seriously enough to not use the word 'terrorist' loosely. That's just some people I guess.

classic.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by cleverhans
 




If the blueprints are already out there, then it's probably already too late to ban anything.


At the time I watched our afternoon news, they said the site already had 800,000 downloads for the blueprints.
Also, that the 3D printer only costs approx $800.

They also reminded Canadians that in Canada, it's illegal for citizens to manufacture guns.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by retirednature
 



I would print one just to shoot the damn thing at a target in my backyard, does it get more 'terrorist' than that? It then would collect dust, or come out when someone else wants to check it out.

Also, some people actually take life seriously enough to not use the word 'terrorist' loosely. That's just some people I guess.


I'm sensing a touch of contempt behind that post. In case it wasn't obvious from the quotation marks, the word "terrorist" was used in the sense that the government keeps applying it. And yes, they do tend to swing it around in a rather broad circle. Don't blame me for it, I'm just taking my cue from previous examples. Like Tupac's godmother.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by snowspirit
 


The $800 printers cannot print one of these guns. The printer that this company used was a $34,900.00 printer that prints using high strength ABS plastic. So, not to worry there aren't going to be a bunch of tech kiddies printing up guns.


For the record it is legal in the US to manufacture a firearm for personal use, so there would be no laws broken even if people did print them in the US. As it stands right now for the people crying that terrorists could use this, that statement holds no water because a terrorist could use anything illegally, and obtain anything illegally, so why not throw a fit about everything being potentially used by terrorists?



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowspirit
reply to post by cleverhans
 




If the blueprints are already out there, then it's probably already too late to ban anything.


At the time I watched our afternoon news, they said the site already had 800,000 downloads for the blueprints.
Also, that the 3D printer only costs approx $800.

They also reminded Canadians that in Canada, it's illegal for citizens to manufacture guns.

Hi SS
good point
LOL
bet you a beer that some slicky bicky lady lawyer gets them on "printing" isn't "man ufacturing"

say, you getting of this august weather up your way this week?

edit on 6-5-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Wrong thread.
edit on 6-5-2013 by extraterrestrialentity because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   
If TSHTF and you're sitting in your mansion with your 3D printer pondering what sort of toy you want to print out..

then TShas NOT HTF.

lol

Also, umm yeah, I'll say it again. I can make 'things' in my bathtub. I can buy them from a drug store too. One is legal, one is not. I rekon this will become like that. You get caught with the schematics and the materials, and you're done for intent to manufacture, supply or sell.

It's a great sign isn't it. Every day we have people being shot on purpose or by accident and now you can print one out if you're rich enough, and bypass all that silly stuff like training and understanding.

Imma print out me a rocket ship and go to the moon.



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


I wonder if it's ok to print a long gun? They don't need to be registered, therefore, would they need a serial number?
That probably part of the issue with hand guns....

Weather. Wow. Hot today. 30 Celsius, 25 yesterday, and I still have patches of snow

Good thing my house is on a high spot...



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by snowspirit
 


Why? Gunsmithing is a respectable skill.
Gunsmithing for resale I could see a problem but as a hobby? Meh - Why not?



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   
I believe they actually have printed AR 15 lower recievers(the serial numbered part) all else is over the counter legal(upper reciever etc.....)to anyone......
The first one was good for six rounds before failure....the next one was better plastic.....
They print hi cap mags as well......



posted on May, 6 2013 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by retirednature
 



I would print one just to shoot the damn thing at a target in my backyard, does it get more 'terrorist' than that? It then would collect dust, or come out when someone else wants to check it out.

Also, some people actually take life seriously enough to not use the word 'terrorist' loosely. That's just some people I guess.


I'm sensing a touch of contempt behind that post. In case it wasn't obvious from the quotation marks, the word "terrorist" was used in the sense that the government keeps applying it. And yes, they do tend to swing it around in a rather broad circle. Don't blame me for it, I'm just taking my cue from previous examples. Like Tupac's godmother.


Contempt as in anger? Umm... no, I called it a 'damn thing' because that's about all it boils down to. It's a device, something to which we are all equal in acquiring. If someone wants a gun, they will get a gun. I'm neither disgusted by your position or claims, for they are just that. I'm not saying that a ban on these types of things are completely out of the question, but to attribute 'terrorist' to this... I think is a stretch. You might as well call the guy creating and promoting these things a terrorist.

I don't think that the government uses the word 'terrorist' loosely at all. Would you maybe provide examples? I've always found that most references to terrorism coming from our government, to be fairly direct. I also don't pay much attention to what they say anyways, so I'm probably wrong.

Taking your 'cue from previous examples', just great lol. Continue to perpetuate nonsense, perfect.

"He started it"

Tupac's godmother? What?



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join