Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   In a world of 3-D-printed guns, Chris Rock's "bullet control" makes more sense   (theatlantic.com ) divider line
    More: Unlikely, shooting sprees, guns  
•       •       •

9578 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Dec 2012 at 10:12 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-12-18 09:06:54 AM  
6 votes:
Uh. Any gun manufactured like that would fall apart after a few rounds. It requires well-made metal parts that are machined to fit perfectly, or the sheer force from the round will rip it to shreds. Newton's laws, and all that.

Also, bulletsaren't terribly difficult to make, nor is gunpowder. The primers could cause issue, reloading them is really, really dangerous.

This is not a problem we can just wave away with a simple amount of legislation. It's going to require a multi-step buyback of firearms, investment in mental health programs, regulation of magazines and ammunition, and probably some serious cultural changes (specifically the media) before tragedies like Sandy Hook stop happening. It will be long, hard and really goddamn expensive. It will be immensely unpopular - the left will say it's not good enough, the right will say it's too much, but it's the only real option.
2012-12-18 10:29:11 AM  
4 votes:
The real issue is that reloading is not a big thing right now given how cheaply you can get bulk ammo. Between the time to reload and that risks that stem from having a shiatload of gun powder sitting around in a cask, most people prefer just to buy bulk ammo even if it costs more.

If you make bullets harder to get, more people will get into reloading and we'll have a whole cottage industry of selling reloads.

The general issue with expensive bullets is that guns are the most useful when the act of drawing and firing the weapon is muscle memory. It's why the military and police spend so much time on the range. It's also why self defense instructors tell people to practice. The gun is no good against the rapist if you just freeze up. By making bullets more expensive you reduce the range time and expertise of legit gun owners. You can do a lot of the initial training with a CO2 blowback gun that has the same weight and shape as your handgun, but at the end of the day you need to send real rounds down range to get used to the recoil.
2012-12-18 09:57:24 AM  
4 votes:

vpb: Gun nuts like to point at Switzerland


What's your definition of a "gun nut?" Someone who believes in the Bill of Rights?
2012-12-18 10:34:25 AM  
3 votes:

MethylTryp: Tax the shiat out of it, like cigarettes. $.30/round. Put that money towards these mental health programs that all the gun people think will magically solve our gun violence problems.


Then all we have to do is get the criminals to buy their ammo legally. Just like every other gun control scheme, it only stops the people who obey the laws.

Last I checked, shooting up a school is illegal. But, oh, maybe he would have been stopped by a possession charge, is that it? Seriously?
2012-12-18 10:16:24 AM  
3 votes:
We do not live in a world of 3-d printed guns.
2012-12-18 09:00:09 AM  
3 votes:

vpb: stratagos: Because it of course is impossible to make your own bullets

Pretty much. Even re-loaders need supplies.


I'm willing to bet I can get lead, saltpeter, sulfer and charcoal if I set my mind to it
2012-12-18 03:20:11 AM  
3 votes:
The argument always made sense.
2012-12-18 10:33:08 AM  
2 votes:

MythDragon: Um, sure you can 3D print a lower reciever, but you can't really do that with the upper part (That's the part the bullets come out of for those that don't know). Well, technically you can. It's possible to craft a fully plastic gun that will fire. Once. You may not enjoy having a palm full of plastic shrapnel though.

How long have we hard 'modern' guns? About a 100 years or so. Since the first couple of semi-automatic weapons came out (the 1911 and a few before) guns really haven't changed very much. So we have had 'high power' guns with 'large capacity' magazines for a good century now. If guns were the cause of shootings, where have all the mass school and mall shootings been for the last 90 or so years? It's only been in the past 10 years that we've had crazies walking into a building and start shooting kids. The guns have been around long before that. And restrictions have gotten much tighter since the 1900s. Obviously there is another issue here. We need to look at why people are crazy. Is it too much lead in the water? Antibiotics in the meat? CIA brainscanners not calibrated properly? If people wheren't going on mass public shootings 20 years ago, why has it suddenly become a thing?


This is the real issue, and the one for which I have no answers. Breakdown of the family, increased medication of kids, tv/video game addictions, people unwilling to call crazy people crazy.

no idea. but, maybe some of those things
2012-12-18 10:29:17 AM  
2 votes:

Triumph: vpb: Gun nuts like to point at Switzerland

What's your definition of a "gun nut?" Someone who believes in the Bill of Rights?


He means anyone that doesn't piss themselves and sob uncontrollably in the corner at the thought of a firearm
2012-12-18 10:24:28 AM  
2 votes:
Um, sure you can 3D print a lower reciever, but you can't really do that with the upper part (That's the part the bullets come out of for those that don't know). Well, technically you can. It's possible to craft a fully plastic gun that will fire. Once. You may not enjoy having a palm full of plastic shrapnel though.

How long have we hard 'modern' guns? About a 100 years or so. Since the first couple of semi-automatic weapons came out (the 1911 and a few before) guns really haven't changed very much. So we have had 'high power' guns with 'large capacity' magazines for a good century now. If guns were the cause of shootings, where have all the mass school and mall shootings been for the last 90 or so years? It's only been in the past 10 years that we've had crazies walking into a building and start shooting kids. The guns have been around long before that. And restrictions have gotten much tighter since the 1900s. Obviously there is another issue here. We need to look at why people are crazy. Is it too much lead in the water? Antibiotics in the meat? CIA brainscanners not calibrated properly? If people wheren't going on mass public shootings 20 years ago, why has it suddenly become a thing?
2012-12-18 10:21:45 AM  
2 votes:

Triumph: vpb: Gun nuts like to point at Switzerland

What's your definition of a "gun nut?" Someone who believes in the Bill of Rights?


Believing in the Bill of Rights makes you a radical these days.
2012-12-19 02:35:40 AM  
1 vote:
If I'm going to shoot 20 kids then myself, why the fark woudl i care about how much the ammo costs? Of course high ammo costs makes sense, if you are a farking retard.
2012-12-18 03:00:53 PM  
1 vote:
Every time there's a shooting these same plans get floated around. Now don't get me wrong, I think it would be cool to see what happened if you taxed ammo at $1 a round or whatever. You'd see about ten years worth of R&D on caseless ammo happen in 6 months, and some wicked cool weapons that could hold maybe a thousand rounds and still be shoulder fired.

But let's get back to reality. Ammo restrictions won't work. You'll have better luck minting trillion dollar coins to fix the deficit.

The workable solution is accountability. Rough idea - grade each weapon from 1 to 10, with a bolt action low caliber rifle being somewhere around a 2, and a belt-fed 50cal Browning being a 10. Semiauto carbines maybe a 7. Make laws according to those levels. Anything 3 and above has to be registered and tracked by the government. With anything 6 or above, the registered owner has to have the weapon locked up or in sight at all times. No exceptions. Your brother gains access to your AR15, you go to jail. Mental health evaluations start at 3. At 8 you need a note from a psychologist. You get the idea.

We already do this partially. You can't get a full auto without a FFL. Just make it a spectrum so that everyone is happy. It'll be a lot easier to get a note from your doctor and do some paperwork than it will be to print an AR15 lower receiver. No more wharrgarble over what is an assault weapon and what isn't. Each weapon gets it's own rating.
2012-12-18 11:45:54 AM  
1 vote:
First off, they aren't bullets, they are catridges or rounds of ammunition. A cartridge is made up of a case, projectile (or bullet), propellant, and a primer for setting the propellant charge off.

stratagos: vpb: stratagos: Because it of course is impossible to make your own bullets

Pretty much. Even re-loaders need supplies.

I'm willing to bet I can get lead, saltpeter, sulfer and charcoal if I set my mind to it


What are you gonna shoot that from? That sounds like a recipe for a muzzleloader and a flintlock at that. Cap locks will still need caps to set them off. Regulating the sale of caps would have the same effect on your recipe and methods as the proposed control of the sale of ammunition as mentioned in the article.
Modern cartridge based firearms require a primer to set the charge off and they use smokeless propellant. The ingredients you describe sound like the makings for black powder. In a modern firearm, ESPECIALLY an AR-15 type where combustion gasses enter the firing chamber, Black powder would be a 3 to 5 shot between cleanings affair. And I mean full dissassembly cleaning too. Ar-15 have very strict powder requirements. It must burn incredibly clean or the residues will jam the action.

I know for a fact that you can get the ingredients you describe without much trouble however the inference that you could use them to supply yourself with ammunition for modern firearms is laughable.
2012-12-18 11:15:57 AM  
1 vote:

dennerman: MythDragon: How long have we hard 'modern' guns? About a 100 years or so. Since the first couple of semi-automatic weapons came out (the 1911 and a few before) guns really haven't changed very much. So we have had 'high power' guns with 'large capacity' magazines for a good century now. If guns were the cause of shootings, where have all the mass school and mall shootings been for the last 90 or so years? It's only been in the past 10 years that we've had crazies walking into a building and start shooting kids. The guns have been around long before that. And restrictions have gotten much tighter since the 1900s. Obviously there is another issue here. We need to look at why people are crazy. Is it too much lead in the water? Antibiotics in the meat? CIA brainscanners not calibrated properly? If people wheren't going on mass public shootings 20 years ago, why has it suddenly become a thing?

I'm going to make the case that the rise of the information age, the internet and 24 hours cable news especially, is what has changed in the last 10 years. Now the disturbed person who is angry at the world knows they can be famous and finally let everyone know how much they were hurting by sharing that hurt. What's more, they'll get the "satisfaction" of knowing that tens of millions of people all over the planet will feel that impact.

What's the solution? That I don't know. I would start by asking that news outlets voluntarily never reveal the name and picture of the perpetrator and focus all coverage on the victims and measures that should be taken in the future to prevent these types of things. If we eliminate the global forum we will hopefully reduce the incentive.


www.priorfatgirl.com
2012-12-18 11:12:51 AM  
1 vote:

Triumph: vpb: Gun nuts like to point at Switzerland

What's your definition of a "gun nut?" Someone who believes in the Bill of Rights?


That would be someone who thinks the highly regulated ownership of guns in Switzerland is somehow justification for unregulated ownership of guns in the USA. Bill of Rights, check. But then, the Swiss case does not apply, because all of their guns are registered and regulated, or 'infringed' if you will.
2012-12-18 11:07:28 AM  
1 vote:

ha-ha-guy: The real issue is that reloading is not a big thing right now given how cheaply you can get bulk ammo. Between the time to reload and that risks that stem from having a shiatload of gun powder sitting around in a cask, most people prefer just to buy bulk ammo even if it costs more.

If you make bullets harder to get, more people will get into reloading and we'll have a whole cottage industry of selling reloads.

The general issue with expensive bullets is that guns are the most useful when the act of drawing and firing the weapon is muscle memory. It's why the military and police spend so much time on the range. It's also why self defense instructors tell people to practice. The gun is no good against the rapist if you just freeze up. By making bullets more expensive you reduce the range time and expertise of legit gun owners. You can do a lot of the initial training with a CO2 blowback gun that has the same weight and shape as your handgun, but at the end of the day you need to send real rounds down range to get used to the recoil.


The tax could be written to only apply to rounds that leave the range. You want to practice at the range, no tax.
2012-12-18 11:02:53 AM  
1 vote:
Not to threadjack (really), but I would laugh if Obama's proposal was to leave guns alone, but expand Obama care to include comprehensive mental health care. The sight of Tea Baggers embracing Obama care as an alternative to oppressive gun control would be luls worthy.
2012-12-18 11:02:19 AM  
1 vote:
Also, as a point of order about strict gun control laws stopping mass murder...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting
2012-12-18 10:58:44 AM  
1 vote:

JackieRabbit: Gun Control! Gun Control! Boy-howdy but the politicians are making big hay out of the Newtown massacre. Suddenly... Gun control!!!!

Isn't this like closing the barn door after the horses have got out?

The problems is that none of their brilliant plans are going to work. Something akin to Canada's Possession and Acquisition License program may help, but not much. We farked up long ago when we lifted the ban on civilians owning assault weapons. We can't put that genie back in the bottle. Bullets would be even harder to control than the guns that fire them. If someone wants to kill a lot of people, he will be able to get all the guns and bullets he needs, regardless of their legality.

I see no effective way to stop crazy.


This. I've spent a lot of time arguing for reasonable solutions that don't involve bans that would work. Instead, no one listens unless it involves a ban. So you know what? Screw reasonable. My guns are mine. I will own them, and use them as I choose within the framework of the law. I will resist any attempt to punish me for exercising a hobby, in the same way that bans on drugs are resisted and ignored.

Get back to me when you're willing to admit that a gun ban won't be as effective as legalized drugs and a huge revamp of our mental health care system in this country, as well as a change as to how our society sees guns in general, and the attitudes espoused by many.

Because, as I'm sure it's been said, if we had a more comprehensive way to deal with people who are clearly mentally defective, then we may not have the issue everyone's pissing their pannies over right now.
2012-12-18 10:55:23 AM  
1 vote:

MythDragon: How long have we hard 'modern' guns? About a 100 years or so. Since the first couple of semi-automatic weapons came out (the 1911 and a few before) guns really haven't changed very much. So we have had 'high power' guns with 'large capacity' magazines for a good century now. If guns were the cause of shootings, where have all the mass school and mall shootings been for the last 90 or so years? It's only been in the past 10 years that we've had crazies walking into a building and start shooting kids. The guns have been around long before that. And restrictions have gotten much tighter since the 1900s. Obviously there is another issue here. We need to look at why people are crazy. Is it too much lead in the water? Antibiotics in the meat? CIA brainscanners not calibrated properly? If people wheren't going on mass public shootings 20 years ago, why has it suddenly become a thing?


I'm going to make the case that the rise of the information age, the internet and 24 hours cable news especially, is what has changed in the last 10 years. Now the disturbed person who is angry at the world knows they can be famous and finally let everyone know how much they were hurting by sharing that hurt. What's more, they'll get the "satisfaction" of knowing that tens of millions of people all over the planet will feel that impact.

What's the solution? That I don't know. I would start by asking that news outlets voluntarily never reveal the name and picture of the perpetrator and focus all coverage on the victims and measures that should be taken in the future to prevent these types of things. If we eliminate the global forum we will hopefully reduce the incentive.
2012-12-18 10:53:00 AM  
1 vote:
I saw that episode of CSI too.
2012-12-18 10:44:49 AM  
1 vote:

hdhale: Any competent lawyer would get this bullshiat thrown out in a court in 5 minutes as attempting to subvert the 2nd Amendment.


A competent lawyer would ride it for three or four years worth of legal challenges and make bank along every step of the way.
2012-12-18 10:42:49 AM  
1 vote:
Perhaps the best argument in favor of limiting ammunition, though, is this. The mantra of firearms advocates is the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which reads:

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.

It doesn't say a single thing about the right to own bullets. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, bullets were largely inert slugs, loaded into flint-lock muskets propelled with loose gunpowder packed into the muzzle. There was no need to assure the right to ammunition, which may be the loophole the government needs to dramatically curtail the scourge of gun violence.


Any competent lawyer would get this bullshiat thrown out in a court in 5 minutes as attempting to subvert the 2nd Amendment.

Now...in NYC today, assuming I know the right guy, I can get my hands very easily on a cheap pack of Marlborough Lights. Not imitations, the real thing. How? Simple. The black market.

So you want to make it so that ammunition is grossly expensive. Let's say you can even get enough Liberal judges to buy off on that and it passes Constitutional muster, which of course it won't. How soon before the black market becomes the place to buy ammo and we create a whole new crop of gangsters who get rich? A New York Minute, that's how long.

/Drew, I love you man but find whoever greenlit this bovine scatology and give them some wall-to-wall remedial training
2012-12-18 10:39:56 AM  
1 vote:

aevert: ha-ha-guy: If you make bullets harder to get, more people will get into reloading and we'll have a whole cottage industry of selling reloads.

That's illegal without a federal firearms license.


Well THAT has always stopped people from making a buck or two.
2012-12-18 10:39:53 AM  
1 vote:
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.

Writer doesn't understand what he's quoted.

"Well regulated," can be taken to mean, as Alexander Hamilton argued, and has been interpreted through both legislation and the courts to mean, "arm, train, equip and organize." "Keep and bear arms" was written in the time of the musket. It stands to reason the bullets were part of the equation.

Once again we come back to the "militia being necessary to the security of a free state," and those exist in the form of the Army and Air National Guard, with the separate militia being state defense services, like the Texas State Guard. It is not you and your whacker buddies, with your SUVs clad with ham radio call signs, Skywarn stickers and NRA slogans, with a bunch of surplus gear, playing army. In fact you and your buddies get in the way during real emergencies where real first responders are needed.

Anyway it's not a simple as taking the bullets away, when it can be argued they're a crucial part of bearing arms.
2012-12-18 10:39:22 AM  
1 vote:

cig-mkr: 3-D printing isn't new by any means, we used to call it "stereolithography" in the early 90's.
Worked in a prototype NASA related machine shop that had one.
hush hush, top secret.


We had two at my college, weird how things change. They're pretty cool devices.
2012-12-18 10:38:46 AM  
1 vote:

aevert: ha-ha-guy: If you make bullets harder to get, more people will get into reloading and we'll have a whole cottage industry of selling reloads.

That's illegal without a federal firearms license.


And you think the preppers will care? Drive out to some dude's farm, cash on the barrel, leave with ammo.
2012-12-18 10:35:18 AM  
1 vote:

MythDragon: poot_rootbeer: MythDragon: If guns were the cause of shootings, where have all the mass school and mall shootings been for the last 90 or so years? It's only been in the past 10 years that we've had crazies walking into a building and start shooting kids.

This is incorrect.

educate me then. What cluster of mass shootings have we had before the 90s.?

(I'm not counting gang violence. That was a criminal directing death at other criminals.)


there was that fella in texas in the bell tower. think that was the 60s. but that wasn't the norm back then. i was wearing an onion tied to my belt, as was the style at the time
2012-12-18 10:34:57 AM  
1 vote:
bullets / guns are not so much the issue IMHO as is guns/arms that shoot a shiatload of rounds in a tiny space of time. that's where things get dicey right quick. it's like power guzzling a 1/4 keg instead of a 12 oz can. ridiculous.

if a concern is squelching madmen who have snapped a good start may be to do like a Farker told us they do in some Asian countries. stop having one P.D. in one town housing a large crew of donut munchers. station your crew in small posts all over town.

i live in a tiny town with a huge amount of well paid law enforcement. heavy on the mini vans, SUVs, soccer moms & school kids. i really doubt tax payers would object to having a uniform that circulates from school to school on a secret schedule.
2012-12-18 10:34:44 AM  
1 vote:

poot_rootbeer: Kit Fister: Except they make 3d printers that will print in steel or titanium...

3D-printed metal parts have different structural properties than those that are cast from molten metal, or stamped or milled from solid metals.


Yeah but you can mass produce all the low stress parts of the gun via printer and then just handmake (or rig up some ad hoc machine shop to stamp) a few key parts out. The threat is not a fully assembled and auto M-4 coming out of the printer, but rather that now one dude with a printer and a basement full of machine tools can make a few dozen guns a day, whereas in the past it might have taken a week to spit them out.

Also for guns subject to lower stresses, you can likely print the whole thing. A .22 or whatever will work just fine with printed metal I bet.

/plus the lower is the legally controlled part, so in theory you could buy everything else legally in bulk and just have a machine spitting out lowers
2012-12-18 10:34:28 AM  
1 vote:

johnnyrocket: The pro-gun crowd has argued themselves into a corner. If their argument is everyone have a gun, then every 6 year old needs a gun. If their argument is less gun control, then everyone should be able to buy bazookas. If their argument is more criminal prosecution, then every slightly weird person should be what? Locked up?

The jig is up, there's too many guns, too many powerful guns, too much gun worship and fetishes. Time to come down hard on these 100 round automatic killing machines.

They serve no purpose but to mass kill.


3/10

/had me until "100 round automatic killing machines"
2012-12-18 10:32:50 AM  
1 vote:
Meh.
Black Market weapons imported from foreign countries will work just fine.
2012-12-18 10:31:36 AM  
1 vote:

vpb: It works in other countries. Gun nuts like to point at Switzerland because military members keep their rifles at home. What they don't mention is that they are not allowed to keep ammunition. It isn't allowed to leave the range except for certain authorized units.


Swiss reservists who maintain a firearm also keep a sealed tin of ammunition. That tin is checked annually when the reservist reports for duty: if the tin is unsealed, the person goes to jail. Most ammunition in Switzerland is sold at shooting ranges, and the law says that it must be used at the range. However, enforcement of that law can be spotty.
2012-12-18 10:31:28 AM  
1 vote:

Coolfusis:
This is not a problem we can just wave away with a simple amount of legislation. It's going to require a multi-step buyback of firearms, investment in mental health programs, regulation of magazines and ammunition, and probably some serious cultural changes (specifically the media) before tragedies like Sandy Hook stop happening. It will be long, hard and really goddamn expensive. It will be immensely unpopular - the left will say it's not good enough, the right will say it's too much, but it's the only real option.


Hey there, stop making sense! We want easy solutions that should please everyone at once, if you don't have that we don't want to hear it! Good day, sir!
2012-12-18 10:30:46 AM  
1 vote:

ha-ha-guy: The real issue is that reloading is not a big thing right now given how cheaply you can get bulk ammo. Between the time to reload and that risks that stem from having a shiatload of gun powder sitting around in a cask, most people prefer just to buy bulk ammo even if it costs more.

If you make bullets harder to get, more people will get into reloading and we'll have a whole cottage industry of selling reloads.

The general issue with expensive bullets is that guns are the most useful when the act of drawing and firing the weapon is muscle memory. It's why the military and police spend so much time on the range. It's also why self defense instructors tell people to practice. The gun is no good against the rapist if you just freeze up. By making bullets more expensive you reduce the range time and expertise of legit gun owners. You can do a lot of the initial training with a CO2 blowback gun that has the same weight and shape as your handgun, but at the end of the day you need to send real rounds down range to get used to the recoil.


I have a feeling that people who bring up regulation like this don't like guns at all.
2012-12-18 10:28:17 AM  
1 vote:

MythDragon: Um, sure you can 3D print a lower reciever, but you can't really do that with the upper part (That's the part the bullets come out of for those that don't know). Well, technically you can. It's possible to craft a fully plastic gun that will fire. Once. You may not enjoy having a palm full of plastic shrapnel though.


There are printers that work with materials other than plastic. They're still a bit pricey, but how much does it cost to acquire a fully legal full-auto weapon?
2012-12-18 10:26:54 AM  
1 vote:

MythDragon: If guns were the cause of shootings, where have all the mass school and mall shootings been for the last 90 or so years? It's only been in the past 10 years that we've had crazies walking into a building and start shooting kids.


This is incorrect.
2012-12-18 10:26:30 AM  
1 vote:
Tax the shiat out of it, like cigarettes. $.30/round. Put that money towards these mental health programs that all the gun people think will magically solve our gun violence problems.
2012-12-18 10:26:19 AM  
1 vote:
Why is the answer always more and bigger government....Maybe we should start in the home...Where DAD should be!!!
2012-12-18 10:25:39 AM  
1 vote:
why don't we just regulate SSRIs instead? They are the main factor in most of these mass shootings anyway.
2012-12-18 10:21:09 AM  
1 vote:

stratagos: Because it of course is impossible to make your own bullets


If somebody is committed enough to their cause to hammer copper sheets into misshapen bullet casings and refine their own urine into saltpeter for homemade gunpowder, I say let them do it.

They'll get about five rounds off before they jam their weapon, and then their compound will be leveled by a drone strike.
2012-12-18 10:20:57 AM  
1 vote:
The writer is a moron. FTA:

"It doesn't say a single thing about the right to own bullets. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, bullets were largely inert slugs, loaded into flint-lock muskets propelled with loose gunpowder packed into the muzzle. There was no need to assure the right to ammunition, which may be the loophole the government needs to dramatically curtail the scourge of gun violence."

Arms is a broad term and includes not only the guns (or any personal weapon a soldier would be using) but also the things necessary for it, like ammunition. This argument the writer is using is as stupid as the one that claims it only covered muskets.
2012-12-18 10:20:22 AM  
1 vote:
Wait... Do the anti-2nd amendment folks actually think you can just print out a firearm?
2012-12-18 10:18:36 AM  
1 vote:

Coolfusis: Uh. Any gun manufactured like that would fall apart after a few rounds. It requires well-made metal parts that are machined to fit perfectly, or the sheer force from the round will rip it to shreds. Newton's laws, and all that.



3D printers today are like computers of the 70s. Big industrial ones cost a fortune, personal desktops are mostly toys. That will change swiftly.
2012-12-18 10:17:49 AM  
1 vote:
Wouldn't pull the trigger on that thing. After a few rounds it would blow up in your face.
2012-12-18 10:15:16 AM  
1 vote:
The bullet is part of the cartridge.
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-12-18 07:58:01 AM  
1 vote:
It works in other countries. Gun nuts like to point at Switzerland because military members keep their rifles at home. What they don't mention is that they are not allowed to keep ammunition. It isn't allowed to leave the range except for certain authorized units.
2012-12-18 07:40:57 AM  
1 vote:
Because it of course is impossible to make your own bullets
2012-12-18 05:16:20 AM  
1 vote:
I'm sure we won't have any class war talk when the rich are the only ones with guns. Only the boot strappy people have guns. Stop being jealous of the 1%.
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report