Assault Rifle Made With a 3-D Printer

The government can't really do anything about it. They can ban plans, but they can't stop information on the internet. That can't ban printers because they're too useful for other things.

The real catch is that these printers are too expensive for most people to buy, without a business purpose.

Forget guns, I figured out a way to turn common uranium into weapons grade uranium with only $23 worth of common supplies. Anyone of printing info for a bomb casing?
 
That's BS how the government would step in just because they want their cut not because some psycho could be making their own guns. That's messed up.

Anyways pretty cool video.
 
People mix up assault rifle and "assault weapon" which is media lingo for anything that looks combat oriented.
I think its usually done on purpose.

1) Its more catching for the media to put "assault rifle" than "rifle", and that = more views = more money

2) Liberals like to call them "assault rifles" so it sounds more menacing to support their gun-control ideals.

After all, no one confuses any other gun terms like revolver vs semi, or ever calls them battle rifles or light machine-guns or sub machine-guns. Thanks democrats! :p
 
"Assault" rifle? Any weapon that can be used to potentially harm or assault somebody is an "assault" weapon.
Does the color make it more lethal and thus more assaultish? Maybe it's just scary looking. :rolleyes:
 
"Assault" rifle? Any weapon that can be used to potentially harm or assault somebody is an "assault" weapon.
Does the color make it more lethal and thus more assaultish? Maybe it's just scary looking. :rolleyes:

25jan2-hello-kitty-rifle.jpg
 
Well, just like every other class of weapon, there is an official definition of an assault rifle, and it is a real term.

1) Magazine fed
2) Medium rifle caliber
3) Automatic

Sadly, I've even heard of things like the BMG called an assault rifle, even though its size and semi-auto firing makes it not even a gray area.

To non-gun people it may seem like small differences, but think about the small difference in definition that makes a sedan, coupe, hatchback, SUV, pickup, and convertible different from one another.
 
Depends, if he was a licensed gun manufacturer he is ok. Otherwise, it would be illegal for him to make firearms and the FBI would have showed up at his office already.

You don't need to be a manufacturer to make your own personal gun, completely legal. He'll need FFL07 if he wants to be a manufacturer.
 
You didn't know the official definition of assault rifle was "mean lookin'?"
So true. For those who aren't familiar with the Assault Weapons Ban from the Clinton era, here's a good rundown on how silly it was.

BTW, just shot an AR-15 for the first time this week, with my brother-in-law-in-law and dad-in-law. Also shot FIL's .30-06. Man, that thing has a kick! (I was just used to my dinky .22)
 
I'm not a gun expert, but what I'm reading is that he can only make some minor parts of the gun with the 3D printing. Would hate to see 3D printing make whole pistols/rifles, and see the plans shared like mp3s..but I'm thinking there may actually be no way to stop this. All depends on if the 3D printers can make all the parts, and my understanding is that you still need significant metal parts that 3D printers won't be able to make any time soon.

3d printers can fabricate titanium parts with a different process known as sintering. Read up!!
 
3d printers can fabricate titanium parts with a different process known as sintering. Read up!!

Yup. Not the greatest metal for firearms for a lot of reasons, but could probably get the job done. Costly though.
 
Yup. Not the greatest metal for firearms for a lot of reasons, but could probably get the job done. Costly though.

Last I priced it, Titanium was a shit ton more expensive than billet aluminum, and I think 3D printers can do billet AL.
 
You don't need to be a manufacturer to make your own personal gun, completely legal. He'll need FFL07 if he wants to be a manufacturer.

LOL...Want to bet?

Tell you what, you make an AR lower without a manufacturers license and see how posting pics of it on the internet work out for ya.
 
LOL...Want to bet?

Tell you what, you make an AR lower without a manufacturers license and see how posting pics of it on the internet work out for ya.

Do all guns need an AR lower to qualify as a gun?

If you make your own six shooter that fires 50cal, do you need a license to make it?
 
LOL...Want to bet?

Tell you what, you make an AR lower without a manufacturers license and see how posting pics of it on the internet work out for ya.

incorrect FUD
 
If they block anyone with software to be able to do this then it will be quickly hacked to allow it to be possible again. If crap hits the fan this would be good to have ;)
 

This does get a bit dicey when you get into certain technicalities. Some people would look at this and think it's OK to manufacture anything they want but you can still run into trouble. You can't make a machinegun, and you can't make an "AOW". Then there's the "sporting purposes" crap associated with building a rifle from foreign parts, say, a semi-auto AK-47 or AK-74 with a home-made receiver but all the parts are from Romania. You can easily violate 922(r) with that. The guy making the AR receiver won't have problems so long as it can't be made to fire full-auto.

The news media might throw a fit over someone being able to print a receiver like this at some point. I'm sure certain idiot politicians would run with this, claiming people can make "untraceable" firearms while forgetting that the 3D printer required to make the receiver costs a lot of money, plus you have to buy the other parts to go on the weapon. Then they'll use something like the Colorado shooting to justify laws to limit 3D printer purchases while forgetting that guy bought everything legally and decided to use what he bought for very illegal purposes. That's no different from plowing your car through a crowd of people on a busy sidewalk instead of driving it on the road where it belongs.

I just hope the guy doing this doesn't attract too much attention from the wrong people. 3D printing is incredibly cool and the last thing we need is politicians with "good intentions" regulating it into oblivion over a non-issue.
 
This does get a bit dicey when you get into certain technicalities. Some people would look at this and think it's OK to manufacture anything they want but you can still run into trouble. You can't make a machinegun, and you can't make an "AOW". Then there's the "sporting purposes" crap associated with building a rifle from foreign parts, say, a semi-auto AK-47 or AK-74 with a home-made receiver but all the parts are from Romania. You can easily violate 922(r) with that. The guy making the AR receiver won't have problems so long as it can't be made to fire full-auto.

The news media might throw a fit over someone being able to print a receiver like this at some point. I'm sure certain idiot politicians would run with this, claiming people can make "untraceable" firearms while forgetting that the 3D printer required to make the receiver costs a lot of money, plus you have to buy the other parts to go on the weapon. Then they'll use something like the Colorado shooting to justify laws to limit 3D printer purchases while forgetting that guy bought everything legally and decided to use what he bought for very illegal purposes. That's no different from plowing your car through a crowd of people on a busy sidewalk instead of driving it on the road where it belongs.

I just hope the guy doing this doesn't attract too much attention from the wrong people. 3D printing is incredibly cool and the last thing we need is politicians with "good intentions" regulating it into oblivion over a non-issue.

The conceptual issue with these 'build your own is legal' folks here is based around assembling a firearm vs. building one.

Putting together an AR form randomly purchased parts is completely, 100%, NOT the same as 'manufacturing' the firearm, as in that case it is legally considered manufactured already. For the legal purposes, the one piece of an AR15/M4/etc..., the lower reciever, IS the firearm, no other parts necessary. Fact is: You cannot build that one part, legally, in the US, without a manufacturers license.
 
The conceptual issue with these 'build your own is legal' folks here is based around assembling a firearm vs. building one.

Putting together an AR form randomly purchased parts is completely, 100%, NOT the same as 'manufacturing' the firearm, as in that case it is legally considered manufactured already. For the legal purposes, the one piece of an AR15/M4/etc..., the lower reciever, IS the firearm, no other parts necessary. Fact is: You cannot build that one part, legally, in the US, without a manufacturers license.

Yes, you fucking can. It's completely legal to manufacture a lower reciever for personal use.

In fact, here, here's a link. Buy an 80% complete one. Completely legal. Stop arguing when you're clearly wrong.

http://www.tacticalmachining.com/80-ar-15-lower-receiver.html

Description
These 80% AR-15 Lower receivers start as 7075-T6 forgings from the lead forge in the US and are fully machined to mil-spec tolerances. The operations left to be completed are as follows/ fire control group, trigger pin, hammer pin, trigger slot and the safety selector hole. This is a not an FFL item. This is not a complete receiver and still requires machining to be done. We have a copy of our ATF determination letter and our determination update stating that it is not a firearm.
 
Here is the latest in what is legal, as of 2011 (Thanks Obama)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

Here is the specific part that can get you arrested:
(a)It shall be unlawful—
(1)for any person—
(A)except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce; or

Now...go build that lower and post it on the internet.
 
its so funny seeing the worlds most advance nation having shit laws on firearms LOL.
 
The conceptual issue with these 'build your own is legal' folks here is based around assembling a firearm vs. building one.

Putting together an AR form randomly purchased parts is completely, 100%, NOT the same as 'manufacturing' the firearm, as in that case it is legally considered manufactured already. For the legal purposes, the one piece of an AR15/M4/etc..., the lower reciever, IS the firearm, no other parts necessary. Fact is: You cannot build that one part, legally, in the US, without a manufacturers license.

simply incorrect, you sir are wrong

http://www.tacticalmachining.com/80-lower-receiver.html

these guys cant even keep up with 80% lower orders...been in business for years
 
Here is the latest in what is legal, as of 2011 (Thanks Obama)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

Here is the specific part that can get you arrested:

(a)It shall be unlawful—
(1)for any person—
(A)except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce; or

Now...go build that lower and post it on the internet.

The specific part of that which won't get you arrested is the part that says "engage in the business."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921

(21) The term “engaged in the business” means—
(A) as applied to a manufacturer of firearms, a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to manufacturing firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the firearms manufactured;
 
It is perfectly legal to make weapons for personal use. Doesn't mean that they're safe to use, as some people have made a working 'firearm' out of cheap PVC pipes, rubber bands and nails that could actually fire bullets. Innaccurate as shit and could kill yourself if you use it, of course. People have used iron pipes and other parts to construct really good lucking and functional weapons too. These are called 'zipguns'. In some parts of the US and Canada, zipguns that fire shotgun cartridges are common.

Constructing guns in this manner applies across the board, and I would assume it would apply to rifles made in this manner. If you don't sell it and just keep it to yourself, then it shouldn't impact anyone. However, if you were on probation after commiting a violent crime, then I'd imagine the cops could remove a gun from your posession, even if you made it yourself. Even if you're making high quality weapons, if you're not selling them or using them for ciminal acts, then why WOULD it matter?
 
Eventually I'm sure it'll be possible to print a working gun. Just a matter of time.

You don't even need to. It's already real easy to make a single shot or revolver "gun" at home that will fire bullets. Look it up.

Better check if it's legal in your state first though.
 
Back
Top