Pentagon scrubs 3D gun plans from Internet, says designer

Good. That's just what the world does not need- more weapons of death in the hands of the Neanderthal populace. Even if they can only fire a few shots before breaking...

reply to post by g146541

I have to admit that I thought blacksmith is a synonym for gunsmith or a variation of it so I got it wrong myself in translation. So my statement that you should know that as a blacksmith was based on the thought blacksmith equals gunsmith. I´m sorry for that mistake and the hard take on you.

I didn´t saw that documentation as I live in Germany but learned about this decades ago when I started going into guns. I would not testify that it does not change integrity cause I saw the result of such "modifications", cracked slide on a 6mm "baby" Browning, although I don´t know if it has been kept cool during grinding. Anyways, for protocol and TOS, it´s not a good idea nor legal, but criminals won´t care either.

Have a nice day/night.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Star for the correction. To add what you left out, there are ways to obscure those imprints with a slightly smaller projectile (of course it depends on type, hollow points are untraceable as far as I know) and a paper or plastic coating that will disintegrate when leaving the barrel/on flight path. I saw a documentation some time ago, I hope I don´t mix things up here, they used an outer shell or coating on the projectile that allowed obscuring without destroying the riflings with the first shots but still allowing the projectile to remain spin given by those. Don´t know about accuracy though but if I remember right it was a precision rifle where they showed this.

reply to post by adjensen


How stupid and pointless. As if people won't be taking up making plastic gun blueprints for 3D printers as a hobby.

Regardless gun regulation as such has gone too far, it would be more effective for the government to regulate munitions than guns.

It's almost as if the regulatory system was designed with flaws purposefully

This really pisses me off to no end. The Constitution explicitly lays out not what the government CAN'T do, but rather what it is allowed to do. The Federal government has no legal right to control firearms, and that is the bottom line. I can live with the government outlawing automatic weapons, and some types of very powerful weapons, but as far as semi-automatic weapons are concerned, I do not think they should touch them at all. And like I said, they have ZERO Constitutional right to do so.

The government, like the police force, wants the people to forget who actually has the rights in this country. The rights of the people do not exist to protect the government, but the people. The 2nd amendment was envisioned to offer the people a way to oppose tyranny. And think about it, if the government fails to listen to the cries of the people, and fails to obey the rule of law, what else can be done besides violent insurrection? It is either that, or accept the alternative, which is tyranny. This is why the founders of this country explicitly stated that under no circumstances should the people allow the government to fiddle with their right to bear arms. That is what is occurring, and people do not realize just how bad this is for our country, and for the continuation of democracy.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
under no circumstances should the people allow the government to fiddle with their right to bear arms. That is what is occurring

The files were removed because they breach EXPORT arms controls.

As it says quite clearly says in the news article.

reply to post by adjensen


The plans are still available on the interwebz, specifically at various torrent sites.

What's hilarious is that more copies of the plans will be downloaded because of the US gubmint's trying to put a clamp on them.

However, it was the State Department, not the Pentagon, that put the kabosh on the designer's download site.

Someone needs to come up with a good 3D-printable anti-drone design next.

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
And like I said, they have ZERO Constitutional right to do so.

Actually, the Federal Government has the constitutional right to remove almost all guns from the population.

It's right there in the opening paragraph...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

You see those little bits about "domestic tranquility" and "general welfare" ?

Well guns kill people, that reduces tranquility and welfare of the people. So, if these weapons can be shown to actually be at risk of being used to affect that "domestic tranquility" and reducing the "welfare" of the public, then the constitution says the government must act to protect these two things, and hence remove the guns from the population. They have no choice.

Every public official "swears an oath" to protect the constitution, and thus to fulfill it's goals and objectives.

Now, there is an exception, in an amendment...Article II

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Unfortunately, when the constitution was written, back in the 1789, thereabouts, the "arms" referred to at that time were "muskets".

That means, that the "exception" for arms in the constitution, refers to a particular kind of gun, common to the times. And so you are allowed to have "muskets" in your home, to defend yourself. The AK-47 is not a musket. Bears no resemblance to the arms of the day when the constitution was written. So, the modern weapons, although they might carry the name "gun" and "arms", are not the "gun" and "arms" to which the constitution actually refers.

You have a constitutional right to have a musket. This is a gun that fires one shot. Then takes a few minutes to reload. That is what the constitution protects.

That is the exception granted by the Article II amendment, to the otherwise general rule that the Federal Government has the right and obligation to control all weaponry that might adversely affect the "tranquility" and "welfare" of the public.

I'm amazed at how many Consitutional lawyers there are on the Internet.
Seriously why do we even need a Supreme Court when people from all over the world can figure out what was meant by a bunch of the best educated minds, at the time, were trying to do over two hundred years ago.
I'm also amazed at the level of technological ignorance people have.
A gun is not a magic device. They have been made for hundreds of years. Early guns were actully considered as functional works of art by some. They didn't have 3d printers, or even cad/cnc milling machines.
You can print out a resonable stabbing knife with a 3d printer but no one seems to be upset about that.
Has anyone thought that maybe the plans were banned becuse it would make a really nice terrorist weapon to take onto an airplane? When disassembled could you tell the parts were from a gun or a camera kit?
The bullets would be a bit harder but not impossible.
Maybe for once someone was thinking ahead.
Any one that would bother printing out a 3D gun is someone that proably can't even spell 3D.

reply to post by rickymouse


once again ricky... you are WRONG.... as usual...

it is perfectly legal in all 50 states to manufacture a firearm for personal use and not register it in any way nor does it have to have a serial number!

Now the second you sell or transfer that weapon it absolutely needs to be serialized and the first transaction must go through a licensed ffl to make it a legit transfer!

Some provisos apply to this such as section 922r and you must also comply with existing NFA regulations.... aka no SBR;s, AOW;s or machine guns without going through the requisite legal processes.

oh and btw... if you knew much of ANYTHING about guns you'd know that the ATF is the final authority on all federal gun laws not the US justice department! And ATF.gov has a nice little FAQ that quite nicely spells out everything I've just said btw.

As far as your background check... blah blah concealed carry blah blah... people have the right not to be scared by open carry blah blah....

All I can say is you sure have a hell of a different understanding of the english language than I do... shall not be infringed was pretty clear to me.

And on the open carry note.... seriously? Only regressive anal compulsive control freak neurotics are afraid of inanimate objects strapped to another person's hip! And no they don't actually have a RIGHT not to be afraid! There is no constitutional clause whatsoever that nullifies or abridges other amendments if they "make people uncomfortable"

As far as you being a gun owner.... just because you own guns does not mean you know jack about them... and further it really has no bearing on your knowledge of gun law... which is subpar to say the least.

Also just fyi... I clearly stated in my original post that in FREE states you don't have to register pistols or long guns... if you happen to live in a state where you do and you haven't filed a supreme court motion yet you are just one more crapass excuse for a gun owner and are part of the problem!

Oh and one more thing genius.... the liberator pistol is completely illegal to make as it is currently designed anyway unless you fill out an ATF form 4 and get your tax stamp first or are a licensed gun dealer... But you would have no idea why that is would you?

I'll give you a hint... even with the 6 ounce block of metal inserted to make it meet the requirements for not violating the undetectable firearm act it is still illegal without a valid tax stamp do you know why?

Nope didn't think so!

Ok so it's still illegal because it does not have a rifled barrel and therefore is considered by the ATF to be in the Any Other Weapon category... yes that is right zip guns are technically NFA firearms that you can do the same amount of prison time for as having an unregistered machine gun!

oh and on the note of overall practicality the entire liberator pistol brouhaha is a total tempest in a teapot... you will not see a storm of kids killing kids with 3d printed zip guns or any of the other Doomtard BS certain parties are saying this will bring about! This is why your totally indefensible and shockingly horrific assertion that information like this should be banned is so ironic and deliciously STUPID!

For the price of a 3d printer and the materials needed to crank out a liberator you can get an entire arsenal of hot pocket pistols from nearly any seedy neighborhood street corner dealer! You know pocket pistols with real metal barrels that will fire more than 5 shots before becoming dangerous to the user!

The reality is there are vested interests in power that are going to use the knee jerk emotional reaction of SUCKERS like YOU to limit people's access to information and desktop manufacturing equipment! And you know what?

It has Not A SINGLE THING TO DO WITH PUBLIC SAFETY and EVERYTHING To do with using useful idiot low information voters to secure legislation that is protectionist towards big centrallized conglomerates by introducing even MORE barriers to entry into the business world!

The reality is the mega corporate uber centralization societal model worked during the industrial revolution because equipment was expensive and RARE. As of now this same model is actually choking the LIFE out of 1st world nations, and if we do not embrace decentralization and democratization of everything from power generation to consumer goods manufacturing our society will grind to a halt under the weight of an ever less desirable societal model that is only being clung to because decentralization will result in the dissolution of large corporate and bureaucratic empires that have allowed a relative few to control almost Every corner of the globe.

But you go on thinking you're fighting the good fight I'm sure your overlords will lay you off last when they send your department to china!

reply to post by SQUEALER


Actually no squealer that was not the intent of the founding fathers and you damn well know it!

this is spelled out EXPLICITLY in their supplemental writings such as the federalist papers etc...

Beyond that if you actually knew any history you'd understand why that argument holds NO water whatsoever!

It is a commonly known fact that used to be taught in most junior high US history text books that a large part of the Colonial's victory over the British army was due to their SUPERIOR firearms technology!

Yes you heard that right! Not only did the colonials have weapons equivalent to the British Army, but in fact their standard shoulder arms were orders of magnitude BETTER!

At the time of the revolutionary war the British Army used what is commonly referred to as the brown bess musket

Brown Bess Musket

The brown bess was a smooth bore .75 caliber flint lock musket. It had no sights although you could take rudimentary aim off of the bayonet... because of fouling british soldiers typically used .69 caliber musket balls greatly reducing the accuracy of these weapons. This is the Real reason you see old wood block prints of european army's lining up to face each other and blazing away at close range! With a .69 caliber ball you were LUCKY to hit a man sized target at much past 75 yards! (and I'm being very generous giving it 75 yards!) Essentially they used what is known as volley fire substituting VOLUME of fire for accuracy.... (paging Nancy Pelosi oh gawd ban the brown bess! it's the original assault rifle only good for indiscriminate spray and pray ROFL!)


Now let's contrast this with the preferred long arm of the minute men

Kentucky long rifle

Commonly referred to as the pennsylvania or Kentucky long rifle, these weapons used a rifled barrel and tighter fitting musket balls. This gave the minute men an UNPRECEDENTED advantage over the brown bess carrying british army! Where British troops were limited to kneeling in line abreast formation and firing volleys to a cadence and being LUCKY to hit a man sized target at 75 yards.... the minute men were using a rifle that could RELIABLY hit a man sized target at a hundred yards in the hands of a relatively inexperienced user and could make shots of 200 yards or a little more in the hands of a seasoned shooter (which most of the minute men were btw) The only "disadvantage" these weapons had over the brown bess was in sustained rate of fire. Due to the nature of black powder and their tighter fitting musket balls kentucky rifles could not fire as many shots between bore cleanings as a brown bess. However in practice this was not very much of a problem since veteran colonial marksmen could hit a lone british troop they were aiming at from 4 TIMES the distance a british formation could reliably hit a GROUP FORMATION of colonials! This is why the most rousing successes of the colonial forces were in running gun battles where they did not allow themselves to get tied up in set piece scenarios where sustained rate of fire at close range could chew them up!

So do you mean to tell me that our founding fathers, who were very smart men by the way, were willing to write the law with an intent to force the people of the nation they founded to give up their ONE advantage of superior arms technology to the march of progress?

Further do you really mean to tell me that the founding fathers did not know eventually repeating firearms would be affordable enough for every man to own? If so again you do not know your history... because there were repeating arms even in those days and our founding fathers were nothing if not forward thinking!

So again... please if you are going to attempt to justify stealing the second amendment from the american people at least either be downright blatant about it and say you think it was a bad idea to start with or come up with a historical justification that actually holds some water... (which you can't do btw... this is why anti gunners attempt the 2nd amendment only applies to national guard or smoothbore muskets argument... both of which are patently false and historically completely unjustifiable!)

Originally posted by roguetechie
The reality is there are vested interests in power that are going to use the knee jerk emotional reaction of SUCKERS like YOU to limit people's access to information and desktop manufacturing equipment! And you know what?

Nice post roguetechie.

I think other people should really think about what you mean by the statement above. Bold is my doing. The only people who fear this kind of thinking are those who stand to lose a lot of Money/Control/Power when this kind of technology really gets going.

"THEY" don't give a crap about your damn safety and y'all know it!!! and when "THEY" say stuff like

"It's best for our National Interest and must be "covered by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations"

that means

"It's best for our Globalist Business Interests and must be controlled by our B.S. regulatory puppet institution so that only THEY can get rich and powerful selling arms."

Just think about the next gen. of machines that can print/model/produce anything anyone has the blueprints to create. Add to it the advancement of "Inks" which can be used as the material and so forth...Use your imagination and foresight....Get's interesting in many ways!!!

reply to post by roguetechie



Actually, you touched on a topic in your post that had brought up a concerning thought to me. I have not read the whole thread, as the arguing by uneducated people is a total turnoff, so I will ask my question in hopes of finding an answer.

I do believe that people can rent time on 3D printers, though I could be wrong, but I expect that to become more common in years to come, as opposed to people owning their own. I also imagine that along with rentable printers, you will also have a list of available plans fo choose from, compatible with said printer. I would also imagine firearms, if this catches on in popularity, will be one of the more common available plans. If not, bring your own may well work.

Now, to touch on my question/point you brought out. Rifling. Right now, rifling is like a fingerprint, individual and traceable to an exact firearm, and very rarely are matches in rifling I.D. a problem.

With the printable firearms, though, I can foresee this being a problem. Serial numbers etc. are for tracing for more reasons than just snooping governments, but for crimesolving.

I have zero problem, if I own a firearm, knowing where it came from, and having a serial number. I don't have to register my gun unless I wish to conceal carry, but this brings me to the rifling. My serial number and the rifling in my gun barrel can either convict me OR free me of an accusation in a crime, depending on the circumstances.

Without a serial number, obtaining a printed gun from someone else would be a huge risk, not knowing where it had been. However, the barrel, being made on a machine, along with how many others? Will have similar to exact rifling in the barrel, will it not?

So, if the printer has crafted say, 4000 guns before the parts wore out and had to be replaced, I would imagine any number of guns would be identical, or near identical, to any number printed both before -numerically - and after.

So say I buy gun #40. Guns 35-45 would likely be forensically identical in rifling, enough so, that those rounds fired would be indestinguishable from one gun to the next. Potentially, the range could be smaller, but what if it is more? What if 1-200.are too close to distinguish identity forensically?

Of course, this would likely also depend on how many rounds had been fired through each gun, as well, would it not? So, as the rifling breaks down and detoriorates from use, even a shot fired for for forensic use could potentially not be a match.

In other words, what was once a sound forensic science used to both incriminate or eliminate suspects, would likely be lost.

I can see this being potentially good for a criminal, but not great if someone is wrongly accused, or even worse, in the instance someone wants to frame someone else.

I am totally against censorship the likes of this, and all for 2nd Ammendment rights, but in thinking on this, the rifling issue, it did raise some questions. It matters a lot, especially if it's your family member that gets murdered, and a vital piece of evudence to the conviction would be the "smoking gun", the bullet, and the rifling, especially being the key evidence to convict or free the perp.

Just bouncing this off of you for an opinion.

reply to post by Libertygal


Liberty i typed out a long post explaining the how's and why's of why this is not an issue, but my computer ate it ARGH....

Suffice it to say that this will not be an issue with 3d printers for the same reason it's not an issue with the techniques for manufacturing currently in use! Ballistics depends on such small variances to generate a match that you'd literally have to isolate your machine gyroscopically in a vacuum from even the smallest disturbances and you STILL would have identifiable differences that ballistics experts could use to differentiate one weapon from another!

3d printing will not change this! and further as of right now there are quite a few technologies in use for firearms manufacture that actually give a higher amount of precision than the great majority of 3d printers available to mere mortals.

The reality as I said in other posts is that this entire incident has nothing to do with public safety or ITAR regulations and EVERYTHING to do with protectionism for the current paradigm and power base! People need to do their due diligence and see this for themselves though... I just hope they do it before our useful idiot congress rubber stamps through a set of laws that will disarm the threat to established power structures that desktop manufacturing poses!

Why are there others out there that are not restricted?

Link

Link here is a whole website...


AR-15 lowers, magazines. What makes this one, honestly, so special. The Boston Bombers downloaded their plans evidently so why are those sites not shut down or scrubbed.

reply to post by esdad71


Because being consistent take too much effort, time, money and is realistically not possible.

So government just makes half-assed attempts and flounders about only when something is "hip" or "popular" enough that their pointless efforts will be seen by idiots who look to government to save them from what they dont understand.

Originally posted by esdad71
Why are there others out there that are not restricted?

Link

Link here is a whole website...

You apparently missed this at the top of the page:

AR-15 lowers, magazines. What makes this one, honestly, so special. The Boston Bombers downloaded their plans evidently so why are those sites not shut down or scrubbed.

The obvious answer is that they were hosted on servers not in the United States -- DoD has no jurisdiction over non-American hosted sites.

reply to post by adjensen


I downloaded everything they had a coupe of weeks ago.
The genie is out of the bottle, they can't put it back in.

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by adjensen

 

I downloaded everything they had a coupe of weeks ago.
The genie is out of the bottle, they can't put it back in.

Hope you were smart enough to be using a VPN or Seedbox.

You are correct, the genie is out and there is no putting it back in- But the genie is also being heavily tracked and monitored.

Originally posted by DarKPenguiN

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by adjensen

 

I downloaded everything they had a coupe of weeks ago.
The genie is out of the bottle, they can't put it back in.

Hope you were smart enough to be using a VPN or Seedbox.

You are correct, the genie is out and there is no putting it back in- But the genie is also being heavily tracked and monitored.

Actually, I don't think that one need worry -- if they're out of the United States, the DoD has no jurisdiction, and if they're inside the United States, it isn't illegal to have these plans (at least not at this point,) it is illegal to export them, which is what the take down order was in regards to.

There's no law against making your own firearms, so long as you make them for personal use, not as a business, and so long as the weapon doesn't violate existing laws (not fully automatic, can be detected with a metal detector, etc.) you shouldn't have a problem.