3D-Printed Gun Advocate Given Green Light to Distribute Plans to Others

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,683
Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson has been given the green light to distribute his 3D-printable gun plans but with stipulations. U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik has issued a temporary injunction on the State Department's settlement with the company and has blocked Mr. Wilson from posting the blueprints online with this statement, "the files cannot be uploaded to the internet, but they can be emailed, mailed, securely transmitted, or otherwise published within the United States." Cody has started taking donations from others to distribute the 3D-printable plans legally.

At a news conference Tuesday, Wilson said his company will mail USB drives to customers, who can pay whatever they want. By the end of the event, Wilson said he had already received more than 400 orders. He also suggested Defense Distributed may send the files through email or secure transfer online. Wilson has framed the issue in terms of the First Amendment. He argues he has a right to post the files because they are free speech. Ultimately, he says, he sees the legal battle over the 3D-printable designs as good for his business and good for his cause.


Please follow the forum rules and leave the politics and name calling out of the thread. If you can follow these simple rules then I can bring you more interesting articles like this.

Thank you,

Cagey
 
Bittorrent technically isn't uploading to the internet, so there is that. It's like e-mailing, only on a potentially massive scale.
 
The right to bear arms! (but only if someone profits from it)

That's been the whole problem with this issue right? I mean gun people want little to no gun control and getting guns for free and with no restrictions over the internet seems like the jackpot.
 
Last edited:
I don't even begin to know how to nibble around the edges of this one without getting political.
 
This whole 3d printed gun "ghost" is blown way out IMO.

Hell you can get 80% (AR15 lowers, Glocks, Sig's, 1911 etc) and make your own with some minor jigs, it will cost you some but a lot less than a 3d printer and you'll have a real working gun that won't blow up after a few rounds.
 
I'm calling this now, regardless of your opinions on the pros/cons of gun control we won't be keeping them out of the hands of individuals determined to cause great harm.

The true answer to reducing mass shootings is becoming a better society where we:
1. Are better at being civilized human beings towards each other
2. Aren't afraid to let children learn to fail
3. Know how to react when they do (be supportive but don't do everything for them)
4. Fix our politics and mass media so they're not polarized to one extreme or the other, treating every issue as if it can be boiled down to left or right without a single iota of critical thinking or nuance.

What say you all?
 
Ultima99 said:
I'm calling this now, regardless of your opinions on the pros/cons of gun control we won't be keeping them out of the hands of individuals determined to cause great harm.

The true answer to reducing mass shootings is becoming a better society where we:
1. Are better at being civilized human beings towards each other
2. Aren't afraid to let children learn to fail
3. Know how to react when they do (be supportive but don't do everything for them)
4. Fix our politics and mass media so they're not polarized to one extreme or the other, treating every issue as if it can be boiled down to left or right without a single iota of critical thinking or nuance.

What say you all?
Click to expand...

That all sounds great but people with legitimate mental issues can't process numbers 1, 2, and 3 like normal people. I think we can all agree that anyone that thinks shooting a whole lot of people is at all an option clearly don't think normally. Being mentally ill is not a product of your upbringing either. Some people are born wired differently.
 
Sonicks said:
The right to bear arms! (but only if someone profits from it)

That's been the whole problem with this issue right? I mean gun people want little to no gun control and getting guns for free and with no restrictions over the internet seems like the jackpot.
Click to expand...
Just a picture of the POTUS. Nothing political, I swear.
91495_upload_2017-10-4_12-2-15.png


The key part of Amendment II is "...shall not be infringed" and, yes, 3D printing is seen as a way to circumvent the countless arguably unconstitutional regulations that limit one's access to firearms.
 
People freak out about this because they don't know about guns. If they did, they should be significantly more "worried" that someone can make a DIY shotgun in 15 minutes out of $10 of pipe from home depot. Also a guy made an AK47 out of a shovel but that's neither here nor there...
 
The ability to download the plans from a website versus receiving them in an email is a difference without a distinction. I don't know what this Judge's reasoning is, but it doesn't make sense to me.
 
Ultima99 said:
I'm calling this now, regardless of your opinions on the pros/cons of gun control we won't be keeping them out of the hands of individuals determined to cause great harm.

The true answer to reducing mass shootings is becoming a better society where we:
1. Are better at being civilized human beings towards each other
2. Aren't afraid to let children learn to fail
3. Know how to react when they do (be supportive but don't do everything for them)
4. Fix our politics and mass media so they're not polarized to one extreme or the other, treating every issue as if it can be boiled down to left or right without a single iota of critical thinking or nuance.

What say you all?
Click to expand...
While that will help some, ultimately it comes down to this:
1. When seconds count, police are minutes away.
2. An armed society is a polite society.
 
Seventyfive said:
People freak out about this because they don't know about guns. If they did, they should be significantly more "worried" that someone can make a DIY shotgun in 15 minutes out of $10 of pipe from home depot. Also a guy made an AK47 out of a shovel but that's neither here nor there...
Click to expand...
I agree and think that if we still educated people about guns in grade school like we did up to the 1970s gun violence wouldn't be as big an issue as it is now.
PaulP said:
The ability to download the plans from a website versus receiving them in an email is a difference without a distinction. I don't know what this Judge's reasoning is, but it doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...
I think the judge believes that e-mail is controlled distribution, while having somewhere to download it isn't.
 
Seventyfive said:
People freak out about this because they don't know about guns. If they did, they should be significantly more "worried" that someone can make a DIY shotgun in 15 minutes out of $10 of pipe from home depot. Also a guy made an AK47 out of a shovel but that's neither here nor there...
Click to expand...

It is because the same group of people that don't know firearms also think 3d printers are like star trek replicators.

With what you can buy and make at walmart and lowes, people shouldn't worry about 3d printed guns yet.
 
Good.

Buncha damn control freaks in this country.

No one gives a shit about a crazy person until they get a gun. Ha HA fucking HAH.

3D print any damn thing I want.
 
Sonicks said:
That all sounds great but people with legitimate mental issues can't process numbers 1, 2, and 3 like normal people. I think we can all agree that anyone that thinks shooting a whole lot of people is at all an option clearly don't think normally. Being mentally ill is not a product of your upbringing either. Some people are born wired differently.
Click to expand...

This goes right back to my point about nuance and critical thinking. You can't make a blanket statement saying "being mentally ill is not a product of your upbringing" because that is only true part of the time. Sometimes it is not due to upbringing, just like a baby being born missing a hand isn't due to upbringing, but you should well know that sometimes it is due to upbringing and environment because mental illness takes many forms.

Such a critical issue is worth debate and is worth debating well.
 
PaulP said:
While that will help some, ultimately it comes down to this:
1. When seconds count, police are minutes away.
2. An armed society is a polite society.
Click to expand...

You're making the assumption everyone is as interested in continuing their existence as you or I are.

While I'm not anti-gun, I'm also not sure where the strongly pro-gun community's certainty comes from that "if only everyone had a gun" the world would be safer.

I don't it's in question that there are a lot more crazy people out there who just need the right spark, not to mention that every single one of us has a breaking point.

It's possible you could convince me that it might reduce the body count and prevalence of massacres, but my intuition tells me we might have a great deal more small shootings.

This is probably a good topic for discussion. Thoughts?
 
TwiceOver said:
Is that printed or milled? I didn't see a lot of "printing" going on in that video.
Click to expand...
That was his company milling a gun in a CNC. I was going to post a picture of the plastic gun, but the video looked cooler.


3D-Gun.jpg
 
EdKiefer said:
Damn, I didn't even check out vid, yeh that looks like 80% kits to me, I didn't see/notice any 3d printing .
Click to expand...
No offense to the inventor, but I think his CNC stuff is freaking awesome and those plastic guns look like... Well... Must remain politically correct so lips sealed.

:) :) :)
 
Armenius said:
I agree and think that if we still educated people about guns in grade school like we did up to the 1970s gun violence wouldn't be as big an issue as it is now.

I think the judge believes that e-mail is controlled distribution, while having somewhere to download it isn't.
Click to expand...
The judge is just wrong. It is dead simple to set up a web page where people could request an email and then have it automatically generate the email or create a distribution list to make it easy to manually send the email (if that is a requirement of the injunction). Under these rules, the people that really want the plans will be able to get them without any limits or background checks. This is functionally equivalent to dismissing the suit, which is what he should have done in the first place.
 
cageymaru said:
That was his company milling a gun in a CNC. I was going to post a picture of the plastic gun, but the video looked cooler.


View attachment 99969
Click to expand...
I could have sworn there was a movie that someone had an all plastic gun to get through security, and it looked like that. Maybe a bunch of movies did that. Either way, I think that gun looks kinda slick.
 
"Shall not be infringed" means just that. If you compromise the 2A then you might as well just give up all your rights. I know I won't be.
 
Ultima99 said:
You're making the assumption everyone is as interested in continuing their existence as you or I are.

While I'm not anti-gun, I'm also not sure where the strongly pro-gun community's certainty comes from that "if only everyone had a gun" the world would be safer.

I don't it's in question that there are a lot more crazy people out there who just need the right spark, not to mention that every single one of us has a breaking point.

It's possible you could convince me that it might reduce the body count and prevalence of massacres, but my intuition tells me we might have a great deal more small shootings.

This is probably a good topic for discussion. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'll put it this way: I'm someone who's battled various mental problems for a very, very long time. I don't trust me having access to firearms, so why should the rest of you? If I had easy access to a firearm in my younger years, I almost certainly wouldn't be having this debate right now.

I find the "If everyone had a gun" argument asinine; taken to it's logical extreme, you get "If only everyone had a nuke, all conflict would end". Funny how our international policy is the exact opposite of our domestic one...

That all being said, the real issue here is there's really no law on the books that regulates the ability of an individual or organization producing and distributing CAD files for firearms. This is the domain of legislatures; they're the ones that have to regulate this if they so choose.
 
Armenius said:
The key part of Amendment II is "...shall not be infringed" and, yes, 3D printing is seen as a way to circumvent the countless arguably unconstitutional regulations that limit one's access to firearms.
Click to expand...

You ignore the first half of the second amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...

The Second Amendment was instituted because of the Constitutional requirement allowing for a free standing army, something that was noticeably absent from the Articles of Confederation. Conservatives were worried about the possibility of the individual states being forced into submission by disarming their local militias, as the British attempted to do during the Revolution. The Second Amendment was passed to ensure this could not (legally) happen.

The Second Amendment, as written and intended by the founders, was NOT designed to protect individuals from federal/state oversight in regards to gun ownership; that narrative has been pushed almost exclusively by the NRA in order to increase gun sales. Even the current Supreme Court has made it clear that Congress/States can regulate gun sales within the limits they have set (EG: Individuals do not have unrestricted access to firearms).
 
cageymaru said:
No offense to the inventor, but I think his CNC stuff is freaking awesome and those plastic guns look like... Well... Must remain politically correct so lips sealed.

:) :) :)
Click to expand...
Yup, the movie reminded me of some game Dev movie :), the lighting was so dim and quick shots but yeh I re watched they were more work than a 80% kit.
It might of been CNC, not sure but doesn't really mater once you get to that level.
I would rather do it all on manual machines, as long as your talking small amounts.

Was cool looking vid.
 
gamerk2 said:
The article itself is political by virtue of it's content; you really can't post a political article and then say "but no politics".
Click to expand...
Then I can't post obscure interesting tech in the future. I mean all everyone has to do is talk around the politics and be nice to one another.

Do you think the 3D printed guns should be allowed? Don't have to "choose a side." There is a way to talk in a civil manner about it without starting an argument.

As soon as one person puts his foot down to choose a side the thread gets closed. And that means I'll be reluctant to post more stuff like it.

I just see it as forum members in the community policing themselves because they know the rules. They weren't made to silence people. They were created to keep arguments off the forums.
 
Last edited:
And here I want to get a 3d printer to make fun movie props and dumb shit to put around the house.
 
gamerk2 said:
You ignore the first half of the second amendment:



The Second Amendment was instituted because of the Constitutional requirement allowing for a free standing army, something that was noticeably absent from the Articles of Confederation. Conservatives were worried about the possibility of the individual states being forced into submission by disarming their local militias, as the British attempted to do during the Revolution. The Second Amendment was passed to ensure this could not (legally) happen.

The Second Amendment, as written and intended by the founders, was NOT designed to protect individuals from federal/state oversight in regards to gun ownership; that narrative has been pushed almost exclusively by the NRA in order to increase gun sales. Even the current Supreme Court has made it clear that Congress/States can regulate gun sales within the limits they have set (EG: Individuals do not have unrestricted access to firearms).
Click to expand...

I'll just post the link so as not to argue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
 
Ultima99 said:
I'm calling this now, regardless of your opinions on the pros/cons of gun control we won't be keeping them out of the hands of individuals determined to cause great harm.

The true answer to reducing mass shootings is becoming a better society where we:
1. Are better at being civilized human beings towards each other
2. Aren't afraid to let children learn to fail
3. Know how to react when they do (be supportive but don't do everything for them)
4. Fix our politics and mass media so they're not polarized to one extreme or the other, treating every issue as if it can be boiled down to left or right without a single iota of critical thinking or nuance.

What say you all?
Click to expand...

1. Respect life, Defend life, All life. All life matters
The rest will fall into place after that.
 
Raffin said:
I'll just post the link so as not to argue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
Click to expand...

Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms.
Click to expand...

The Heller decision took the Second Amendment and stretched it to expand to individuals. Regardless, the Court held that prohibitions on the sale of arms to specific individuals, licensing requirements, and the ban on certain types of weapons remain permissible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top