Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

CA Senator Yee propses 3D printer regs, background checks and licensing

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:11 AM
link   
If you've paid even the slightest attention to the anti-liberty folks over the years Leland Yee's name will come as familiar.


Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) wants regulations that would possibly track the printers and who has access to them, though he’s not sure how he wants the legislation to work.


Borrowing a line from the neo-cons:


“Terrorists can make these guns and do some horrible things to an individual and then walk away scott-free, and that is something that is really dangerous,” said Yee.


Dont tell him about lathes, drill presses, and for heavens sake not milling machines!!!!

Yee proposes printer regs




posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:20 AM
link   
I would'n't complain;the idiots in ca voted him in.So tech they will get what they wanted.

Ca is a dump anymore so really who cares,



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by dellmonty
 


The brand of cancer that has killed CA is spreading out to MT, ID, NV, AZ, OR, WA.

Putting that kind of stupidity up on stage will hopefully deter or at least slow it's spread.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
I wouldn't trust any California Senator with an paintball gun, nor a pop gun. "Yeah, i'm putting in a new Bill, because I believe in my view and head, that a 'Pop Gun' looks a little to real, so yeah it makes sense." Really?, this is the kind of thinking your come across, when you actually sit and meet with these individuals.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Once they suss out how to print a 3D printer, thats it game over for manufacturing on this planet, time to do away with money I think.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   
how will they regulate people from 3d printers when they can Build them, just like they can build firearms, i build a combustable paintball gun and a potato gun when i was a teen, im sure I could build a cannon now if I wanted.

I am actually building a 3d printer now, it's just assembly, really not too hard if you know where things SHOULD go. The trickiest part is having the PC talk to the printer, and make sure your plastic filament doesn't get gummed up.

Go ahead, tell me I can't have something, I'll make it myself, douche.
edit on 11-5-2013 by Tranceopticalinclined because: Because I wanted to call our government representative a Douche one more time.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tranceopticalinclined

Go ahead, tell me I can't have something, I'll make it myself, douche.


And the boys in blue will raid your "weapons factory" and you'll be plastered all over the evening news as a lunatic living on the fringe of society out to hurt the children of local soccer moms and we'll have a thread here on ATS about the incident where a frighteningly high number of posters say "good, if he wasnt doing anything wrong why didnt he just register and get licensed?"

We're on the precipice of real craziness if the lunatics get control of the asylum here.

The same methods used to track child pornography will be used to track CAD files. The same no-knock assaults used to take down drug kingpins and murderers will be used against nerds trying to print out action figures.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Here we go someone makes a gun and the regulations start....

Thank you america because of your gun obession and your need to make weapons out of everything you are most likely going to get 3d printers banned round the world....



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
(heavy sigh) I was afraid of this..... Someone HAD to use the very promising new technology to construct the most controversial and objectionable item physically possible ...so now, we may see the birth of a real miracle in potential nipped in the bud. Oh.. I hope to God that having a new gun which is almost worthless outside of murder or assassination, was worth it.

It's as bad as the Manhattan Project building that nightmare ....not on the basis of "Should We" (to read the words and accounts of the scientists themselves) but strictly on the basis of 'can we'?


The thing is...The tech is hardly NEW anyway. These are machines I was looking at over 2 years ago when I had some inheritance to work with as an idea to take for a business of my own. At the time, home kits which required some knowledge of industrial process and computer programming (nothing too extreme) were running out at $1,500 to $3,000 or so.

It wasn't until some jackwagon made a fully functional, nearly undetectable GUN with it that lawmakers bothered to even take notice. :shk:

.......a device that would make spare parts from potential solid state electronic components to engine parts when materials caught up to applications ....may now be killed in it's tracks. Thanks. Thanks a lot. I'm a gun owner and a proud one too ...but this was stupid on steroids to have done.
edit on 11-5-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


We shouldnt be catering to idiots and lunatics.

It's a problem that laws are even proposed let alone passed on myths and nonsense like the Die Hard invention of a ceramic gun and the 80's magic teflon bullet and now it looks like 3d printers will get some attention from the hordes of sloped brow neanderthals.

We shouldnt have to live in a world where anyone with any sense needs to tread quietly for fear they might upset the in-patient population into hysterical hoots.

The more attention this brings to how absurd our system and our "law makers" are the better.

If it turns out that there is no escaping the madness of mass idiocy then at least we can stop pretending to play along with such a broken system and move forward toward independence.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
(heavy sigh) I was afraid of this..... Someone HAD to use the very promising new technology to construct the most controversial and objectionable item physically possible ...so now, we may see the birth of a real miracle in potential nipped in the bud. Oh.. I hope to God that having a new gun which is almost worthless outside of murder or assassination, was worth it.

It's as bad as the Manhattan Project building that nightmare ....not on the basis of "Should We" (to read the words and accounts of the scientists themselves) but strictly on the basis of 'can we'?


The thing is...The tech is hardly NEW anyway. These are machines I was looking at over 2 years ago when I had some inheritance to work with as an idea to take for a business of my own. At the time, home kits which required some knowledge of industrial process and computer programming (nothing too extreme) were running out at $1,500 to $3,000 or so.

It wasn't until some jackwagon made a fully functional, nearly undetectable GUN with it that lawmakers bothered to even take notice. :shk:

.......a device that would make spare parts from potential solid state electronic components to engine parts when materials caught up to applications ....may now be killed in it's tracks. Thanks. Thanks a lot. I'm a gun owner and a proud one too ...but this was stupid on steroids to have done.
edit on 11-5-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)


Well said!



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tuttle
Once they suss out how to print a 3D printer, thats it game over for manufacturing on this planet, time to do away with money I think.

Pretty much. It's only going to get even more advanced too. 'Molecule printers' aren't too far off. If this came to fruition it would basically mean that people could print anything and it would assemble the molecules right then and there. People could make food, tobacco, drugs (legal and illegal), clothing. Pretty much anything.

Pretty much every single person would be out of a job, but when you think about it, we wouldn't really need jobs if we could just produce everything for free.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

So, for the questionable benefit of taunting and outright provoking the very system we all agree defines the term 'overreaction' on it's best day, a whole line of technology development that is good for just about everything BUT this, should be risked? If the laws come down and the innovation of 3-D printers by the geeks and nerd brigades across the nation out of places like MIT and Cal-Tech are outright shut down because of it, then we'll see this all develop strictly along commercial and industrial lines. Probably how TPTB would most prefer it be anyway.

The concerns on the gun insanity for an application aren't "mythical" though. Hardly.


The Liberator pistol isn't all 3D printed ABS plastic, though. There are two bits of metal within the design: the first is a nail, which serves as the firing pin (producing a firing pin out of plastic is a difficult proposition). The second is a 6-ounce steel slug, used to ensure the weapon can be picked up by metal detectors as required by the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1998.
Source

Well, golly. So they deliberately added two features to make it detectable and follow the strict laws on the subject. Do you figure that will be adhered to by everyone following in the footsteps, now that it's proven to be possible? I kinda doubt it. Frangible Ammunition is already quite capable of being made from 100% undetectable material to form the bullet itself. It's what makes it valuable and frangible (VERY low penetration for use in 'shooting house' training environments and such) in the first place. ...in terms of firing pin? Nothing but personal choice requires that be metal..and federal law, of course.

It's already strictly against the whole spirit and letter of federal law to just make your own gun as it is. Even the mating of a 12 gauge shotgun to an AR-15 (as I learned from the ATF) technically makes a "new" gun and requires it's own licensing, lest one spend a couple years in prison to emphasize that fact.

So...the whole notion here is patently ridiculous, in my opinion. We risk everything on a priceless potential to throw a red flag to the bulls of the firearm debate...while outright breaking federal law by making it outside of licensing regulations in the first place. Nope.. Can't see to agree with it. Not on this one.
edit on 11-5-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


The fact there is a risk at all is what is ridiculous.

That risk should be wiped out. Not by forcing people to get in line but by shutting down the idiot mob rule machine that gives reactionary morons the power to make it a risk in the first place.

This is the same slave acceptance mentality that goes with "dont open carry cause you'll scare people into taking our rights" and "dont wear hot pants to the park because the homophobes will take our rights" and "dont take a white mans seat on the bus or they'll lock us all up."

Have we just accepted that the USA is not and never will be the land of the free? So we're totally cool with being a neo-fascist state then? Let's get on with licensing type-writers and computers because somebody might write something offensive or dangerous.
edit on 11-5-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

Okay, I think I see what you're saying...but I actually see the threat posed on this one. You probably know by my posting that I am a CCW carrier and regularly exercise my rights and ability specific to that permit. I must leave my firearm in the car when I enter certain places. I have no problem with that, because the screening at those locations insures no one ELSE is armed, either ...as a general rule, anyway. These include places like Courthouses and Government buildings.

Now, tell me, what happens when the first intelligent guy with a couple thousand dollars pulls a scene from 'In the line of fire', and makes himself his very own murder weapon to go settle a score in a domestic/family court case or even criminal case? It could be anyone from a true bad guy, looking to kill the mom or kid in a BAD family case to a victim's relative seeking a bit of personal justice in a murder case that doesn't go their way?

I'll save the guess work. If one of THESE are used ...now that the whole world knows it's not just theory, but actually CAN be done without blowing your own hand off.....they will radically and immediately change all security procedures overnight. They'll HAVE to...and I can't even say I could argue that with a straight face.

The ONLY technology I am aware of that would detect these, if you weren't kind enough to make special effort to comply with the 1998 act on undetectable firearms, is full body scanners. ("Naked Body Airport Scanners" as some have come to call them). See gunfire break out inside a secure perimeter because one of these was carried in and used to result in death though? We'll all see one in our local courthouse and more.


All...so someone could make a political point in the gun debate, as it's starting at this stage. Unforeseen consequences on this one are just asinine and don't justify the "gain" by any stretch, IMO.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


For your concern to have any bearing you would have to completely ignore the infinite other number of ways anyone could make an "undetectable" weapon.

A stone and a block of wood is enough to make a single shot firearm in nearly any caliber depending on how big a block of wood you want to carry. A pinewood derby car can be a functional .22 no problem.

Ignoring that reality to place this irrational fear solely onto the backs of 3d printers and the "Liberator" is ridiculous.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Why would you want to print a gun away? In usa you legaly buy much better ones.

Only use of these printable ones is to either stick to the world and show off like a ass or use it as a dispsible weapon for crime.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

Okay, I think I see what you're saying...but I actually see the threat posed on this one. You probably know by my posting that I am a CCW carrier and regularly exercise my rights and ability specific to that permit. I must leave my firearm in the car when I enter certain places. I have no problem with that, because the screening at those locations insures no one ELSE is armed, either ...as a general rule, anyway. These include places like Courthouses and Government buildings.

Now, tell me, what happens when the first intelligent guy with a couple thousand dollars pulls a scene from 'In the line of fire', and makes himself his very own murder weapon to go settle a score in a domestic/family court case or even criminal case? It could be anyone from a true bad guy, looking to kill the mom or kid in a BAD family case to a victim's relative seeking a bit of personal justice in a murder case that doesn't go their way?

I'll save the guess work. If one of THESE are used ...now that the whole world knows it's not just theory, but actually CAN be done without blowing your own hand off.....they will radically and immediately change all security procedures overnight. They'll HAVE to...and I can't even say I could argue that with a straight face.

The ONLY technology I am aware of that would detect these, if you weren't kind enough to make special effort to comply with the 1998 act on undetectable firearms, is full body scanners. ("Naked Body Airport Scanners" as some have come to call them). See gunfire break out inside a secure perimeter because one of these was carried in and used to result in death though? We'll all see one in our local courthouse and more.


All...so someone could make a political point in the gun debate, as it's starting at this stage. Unforeseen consequences on this one are just asinine and don't justify the "gain" by any stretch, IMO.


You Sir are correct.

I think this is about as wonderful an idea as having firearm dispensers around the city (like Candy bar dispensers)- This genie is out of the bottle, the plans are there and more plans will be coming (including full auto). 3D printing is getting better and cheaper and is going mainstream.

The 2nd amendment isnt "all or nothing"- if that is the case we already lost the battle since we do not have even close to equal arms as the Police/Military (and I am not even getting started on the tech)- This is ignorant and will inevitably result in more of our privacy rights being squashed.

I have said this in another thread- Anyone think about what "hackers" are going to do with this? Changing very slight angles and such on anything "3D" printed? This NOT noticeable to the naked eye but catastrophic when "firing a weapon you just printed"

I can keep MY firearms locked away and safe- But a 3D printer? And these fully plastic weapons will not show up in a metal detector (if I am correct) can be melted down to avoid ballistics test, etc...etc...
A nightmare- This has NOTHING to do with freedom any more than the fact you cannot walk in and buy a machine gun or SAW.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

Those infinite other ways aren't using a relatively new technology, still in it's infancy and still carrying near unlimited potential without the heavy hand of regulation to kill it. This invites that death by a thousand regs...where it doesn't have to be. This insures we lose it before it ever really begins to get rolling for how home users and inventors can adapt 3-D printing into wild new things and really cook on the diverse uses for it.

Imagine....you have a piece on your old model car break? They don't make it anymore? Well...3-D scan or assemble a scan from properly calibrated 2-D photographs of it (Already fairly established procedure to do) and feed the tech specs into your computer for your desktop fabricator to print. Wake up the next morning to have your replacement part...all set for what may have been hundreds of dollars, otherwise ...if possible to find at all?

It's not the "You could kill a thousand ways" argument that fits. Ceramic knives could also be used in that way ...it's the loss of potential to something still new enough to stop well short of reaching it.



posted on May, 11 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You accept that weapons can be made other ways yet still support playing coward with 3d printing.

Sounds like you're excusing lawmaker stupidity.

This is the problem. We shouldnt be excusing their crap. We certainly shouldnt be living afraid of what they might do if we scare them.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join