I understand the intent, but feel that there are so many other loopholes that put much worse weapons on the street than a printer. Besides, my prints can barely sustain normal use, much less a bullet being fired from them. I would think that this is more of a risk to the person holding the gun than who it’s pointing at.

  • Wogi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s a community that builds 3d printed guns, and those don’t last very long either. They’re not printing barrels, they’re just printing the trigger housing and grip. They go out and buy the dangerous bits.

    This is all a bit pointless.

    Even more pointless when you consider that once you have a 3d printer, you can make a lot of the components for a second 3d printer, and go out and buy the other parts, without ever buying a 3d printer. Now you have two ghost gun machines!! Oh the horror.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The reprap movement was exactly that. A self replicating rapid prototyper. While it never reached true replication, it got close enough to cause an explosive growth of the community. That, in turn led to the huge number of low cost suppliers and designs we have now.

  • Gigan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is this a real problem? How many crimes are being committed with 3D printed guns?

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a rounding error… basically just politicians virtue signalling that they’re doing something.

      • MajesticSloth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m reminded of Leland Yee. California politician who was in favor of gun control all while doing gun running stuff himself. Guess he felt gun control was good for business.

    • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, but often gun control is an “if it stops even one” type of thing. Most of it is predicated on mass shootings which are .001% of gun violence in an attempt to ban the gun that kills <500 out of 60,000 people a year.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anything to regulate and restrict the people/end users but not address any real problems in society.

    Go after the gun companies, gun lobbies, NRA? No, never. Address housing, income, and educational inequality? That sounds complicated, tough, and expensive.

    This has similar vibes to shaming/regulating people for using too much water in their showers and for washing their cars, but when a multi-billion dollar oil company spills millions of gallons of crude into the sea causing years of environmental damage due to negligence, fine them a few million dollars and tell them they’ve been very naughty…

    So tired of politicians being in the pocket of Capitalist scumbags.

  • krolden@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Will they require a background check for CNC machines and lathes as well?

  • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I personally have a 3d printed gun that I’ve put a few hundred rounds though and is still holding up just fine 3d printing is plenty strong enough

  • deania@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    By that logic, they should ban water pipes to stop people from making water pipe shotguns