Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by chromas on Wednesday August 01 2018, @09:09AM   Printer-friendly
from the when-the-second-meets-the-first dept.

Trump says public availability of 3D-printed guns 'doesn't seem to make much sense'

President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he is "looking into" the availability of plans for the 3D printing of guns, writing on Twitter that he had already been in touch with the NRA on the issue.

"I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn't seem to make much sense!" the president wrote on Twitter Tuesday morning.

After a years-long legal battle, Defense Distributed, a Texas-based group, has announced plans to release instructions on Wednesday for guns that can be created by a 3-D printer, including a handgun and parts for a semi-automatic assault rifle. Although plans were not supposed to be available until Wednesday, instructions have already begun to appear online for download, CNN reported Tuesday.

From Defense Distributed's still barebones website:

August 1, 2018

Defense Distributed relaunches DEFCAD after reaching a settlement agreement with the US Department of State, concluding a multi-year federal lawsuit. The age of the downloadable gun formally begins.

The DEFCAD website is now up (as of July 31) but files supposedly can't be downloaded until August 1.

Even our resident Trump supporters/enthusiasts can bash him for even thinking about encroaching on our digital gun liberties.

Also at The Hill.

"U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik issued a temporary restraining order Tuesday afternoon that bars Cody Wilson from sharing 3-D gun print files online August 1.

The order provides time for Democrats to continue pressing President Trump to intervene and prohibit future publication of files all together."

Previously: Landmark Legal Shift for 3D-Printed Guns

Related: The $1,200 Machine That Lets Anyone Make a Metal Gun at Home
Japanese Gun Printer Goes to Jail
Suspected 3D-Printed Gun Parts and Plastic Knuckles Seized in Australia
FedEx Refuses to Ship Defense Distributed's Ghost Gunner CNC Mill
Man Who Used CNC Mill to Manufacture AR-15 "Lowers" Sentenced to 41 Months
Ghost Gunner Software Update Allows the Milling of an M1911 Handgun


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Bot on Wednesday August 01 2018, @09:26AM (35 children)

    by Bot (3902) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @09:26AM (#715573) Journal

    I suggest you promote free and open hardware guns.
    What will happen if they get to destroy NRA's market is that NRA will not bother paying politicians anymore.
    In turn politicians will do what they naturally want to do, which is removing power from peons.
    So weapons will be banned AS YOU WANTED FROM THE BEGINNING.

    If this strategy seems to you overly cynical, I remind you that your immigration strategy to destroy and rebuild society is exactly the same.

    --
    Account abandoned.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Insightful=1, Interesting=3, Touché=1, Total=8
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @09:39AM (17 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @09:39AM (#715575)

    Well, that or the plastic gun buyers get slugged with ever greater carbon taxes until buying multiple use weapons become economically viable again, but that's a win for environmental policy as well.

    Hmm .. maybe plastic guns was why Mel Gibson had so much trouble finding petroleum products in the apocalypse ...

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:01PM (16 children)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:01PM (#715606) Journal

      Defense Distributed is also working on printed metal guns. It's just not as feasible as plastic printing for most people.

      While a plastic gun might be able to make it through a metal detector (which may be an attractive quality to some), a printed metal gun wouldn't have a serial number, and you wouldn't have to be subject to a background check or put on some watchlist as you might from buying a normal gun.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 5, Informative) by VLM on Wednesday August 01 2018, @01:19PM (3 children)

        by VLM (445) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @01:19PM (#715647)

        While a plastic gun might be able to make it through a metal detector (which may be an attractive quality to some)

        For a variety of complicated legal reasons "a gun" in the USA is legally the lower receiver, "the hand grip". So if you want to propagandize that you've made a completely plastic gun, thats pretty easy when the barrel is two pounds of steel pipe, the breech block bolt apparatus is a pound block of steel, etc. Since the invention of interchangeable mass produced parts a couple centuries ago its been a battle to define "Whats a gun".

        A pretty good SN automobile analogy is if I told you a piece of the dashboard with an engraved VIN number is legally a car. Which it is. Of course people talking about cars usually mean the whole 4000 pound thing, or have images in their head of engines and transmissions. In the propaganda sense of this story, YES I can 3-d print a Ferrari. What I'll do is 3-d print a plastic copy of the frame with an engraved copy of a real Ferrari's VIN number, then I'll legally register it and bolt the other 3999 pounds of aftermarket "not-a-car" unlicensed unregistered parts on to it, and ta da, I've 3-d printed a Ferrari.

        Likewise the other side is also lying in that a "semi-automatic assault rifle" is a misnomer, there are no non-automatic assault rifles. OR they're playing the propaganda game of redefining something we don't like as an assault rifle.

        Another "big lie" in the propaganda is there's been STL files of guns and gun parts floating around since consumer 3-d printing was "invented" a decade ago. This is kinda like how the internet existed for decades with millions of users before legacy media did its gatekeeper thing and decided it officially existed. Likewise I don't believe the stories about "plans already released" because there's been plans released in the 00s for 3-d printing. Most I've seen are pretty shitty handguns; make a crappy 1970s era homemade zip gun and epoxy it to a 3-d printed ergonomic handgrip. Its "printing a gun" in the same sense that hiring a general contractor means "I built a house" or my daughter bedazzling some glitter beads on some jeans from the store means she "made her own jeans".

        The final weirdness in the propaganda is where I live and given my (lack of a) criminal record, there's nothing wrong with my 3-d printing a gun; I can do it perfectly legally in a fully documented and government supported manner. I even have a safe to store it in once its made. I've never done it before, but its pretty easy to fully legally manufacture a firearm and people do it all the time, when doing custom gunsmithing and metalworking stuff. The insinuation in the propaganda is, of course, that its illegal to make a gun and only a criminal would ever want to, but in the real world away from Tumblr its merely gunsmithing metalworking business as usual, its just not a huge deal. I have made a boat, and those regulations also intersect state and federal law, and very hand wavy I'd say its much harder to legally make a motorboat than it is to legally make a gun if you want to follow all the laws and have all the paperwork you're supposed to have. That said, both tasks are not exactly difficult for above 90 IQ people, a couple forms here and there, some checks for fees/licenses here and there, the paperwork cost is a rounding error compared to the associated costs of the project.

        • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday August 01 2018, @04:59PM (2 children)

          by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @04:59PM (#715789)

          The car analogy is just silly. Everyone knows you wouldn't download a car. That's just common sense, right ?

          • (Score: 3, Funny) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:10PM

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:10PM (#715958)

            You wouldn't steal a handbag.

            You wouldn't steal a car.

            You wouldn't steal a baby.

            You wouldn't shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet.

            You wouldn't go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman's grieving widow.

            And then steal it again!

            Downloading films is stealing. If you do it, you will face the consequences.

          • (Score: 2) by legont on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:31AM

            by legont (4179) on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:31AM (#716013)

            Well, not sure about cars, but one can definitely download (for a relatively small fee) plans for an airplane and build it. In fact I just came from Oshkosh where around 20,000 such "nuts" were present. That's builders mind you. Visitors counted at 600,000

            Making a lower receiver is a rather simple task compared to building of an airplane. Seeing 6 years old building basic airplane parts makes me think they could easily make guns as well.

            BTW, all the equipment necessary to make a real metal gun is available at maker space facilities including mobile maker buses https://www.makerbus.ca/ [makerbus.ca]

            --
            "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @07:02PM (11 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @07:02PM (#715854)

        idk why people keep acting like all guns had serials before this new danger was born. US citizens have always had the right to build their own firearms. this is just a new way to do that. tough shit, fuckheads.

        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday August 01 2018, @07:11PM (10 children)

          by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday August 01 2018, @07:11PM (#715858) Journal

          I already covered that in another comment. Obviously, not all people have the skills or tools needed to build a gun. Printing one could be easier. They can pool money together with others to buy a 3D printer, and print other stuff with their 3D printer.

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: 2) by legont on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:41AM (3 children)

            by legont (4179) on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:41AM (#716017)

            It would be more convenient and practical to rent a maker facility and cnc mill the lower receiver. They could off course buy a mill. They are in 5-10 grand range new and can be found under 1000 on garage sales.

            --
            "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
            • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:53AM (2 children)

              by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:53AM (#716023) Journal

              You bring up an interesting point. I assume by "maker facility" you mean "hackerspace" or such? They might specifically forbid making weapons in the contract you sign with them, or go completely bonkers if you do make one. I expect someone will try to do just that and an incident will make the news.

              --
              [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
              • (Score: 2) by legont on Thursday August 02 2018, @03:03AM (1 child)

                by legont (4179) on Thursday August 02 2018, @03:03AM (#716051)

                Well, I imagine a conservative community just buying a maker bus to educate their children. A few AK47 per night can be made easily from kits available over the Internet. The kits are usually a fully capable rifles with lower receivers cut in half. While I never tried it myself, I am pretty sure i can do it (and I have friends with cnc mills). It appears to be legal as well or though I did not research it either.

                Regardless, I think it did not happen yet simply because it is currently easy to buy a gun. Once liberals achieve their goal of making it hard, the gun maker movement will explode and will never end after that because people will quickly discover the wonders of cheap custom designed instruments.

                This is the main reason I personally against stricter gun regulations. The technology is out there already and can't be stopped. Regulations will just force people to use it sooner.

                --
                "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
                • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @07:54AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @07:54AM (#716109)

                  Conservative communities don't need a bus. They have garages with tools and equipment. Their children already learn how to use those. Makerbuses are for city people who never learned to build a house, repair a vehicle, weld, or use power tools.

          • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:56AM (5 children)

            by mhajicek (51) on Thursday August 02 2018, @02:56AM (#716047)

            If you have an iq over 80 and $10 you can build a gun from plumbing pipe.

            --
            The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
            • (Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:24AM (4 children)

              by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday August 02 2018, @04:24AM (#716068) Journal

              Do you have to have an IQ over 120 to make it safe and reliable?

              --
              [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @08:02AM (2 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 02 2018, @08:02AM (#716110)

                There is no safe in guns. Period. Any gun can jam and blow up in your hand. Buy the best-rated steel tubing you can and you'll get /safer/, but it will never be /safe/. Zip guns are generally recomended as one-time use only, reliability isn't a concern. Hit the target, toss your pipe, burn your clothes, good to go.

                • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:46PM (1 child)

                  by mhajicek (51) on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:46PM (#716173)

                  And any neural network can become Skynet and take over the world, right?

                  --
                  The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
                  • (Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday August 02 2018, @06:34PM

                    by Bot (3902) on Thursday August 02 2018, @06:34PM (#716379) Journal

                    Not if it is bootstrapped by systemd.

                    --
                    Account abandoned.
              • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:45PM

                by mhajicek (51) on Thursday August 02 2018, @12:45PM (#716172)

                No, just proof test it with a hot load, and anything less powerful will be safe. And a slam fire pipe gun is likely to be more reliable than a modern semi due to its dead simple design.

                --
                The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday August 01 2018, @10:30AM

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday August 01 2018, @10:30AM (#715585) Homepage Journal

    I don't think you quite know what the NRA actually is. You might want to change that situation.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:20AM (1 child)

    by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:20AM (#715596)

    Even better, make them readily available to one minority group [youtube.com] or another.

    • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:21AM

      by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @11:21AM (#715597)

      Whoops, more 'marginalized' than 'minority' (at least per the thrust of that clip). Maybe it doesn't really matter.

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:05PM (13 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:05PM (#715610) Journal

    I had similar thoughts to you, but it's a bit more complicated than that:

    https://archive.fo/cX1og [archive.fo]

    From a small-town pharmacist to a commercial pilot, it's not just gunmakers that are funding the National Rifle Association’s political battles.

    The organization's overall revenue, which includes membership dues, program fees and other contributions, has boomed in recent years – rising to nearly $350 million in 2013. The majority of this money funds NRA initiatives like member newsletters, sporting events and gun safety education and training programs.

    [...] A CNNMoney analysis of federal campaign finance records shows that much of this money comes from everyday Americans. And these contributions, which the NRA uses to keep pro-gun lawmakers in office, are on the rise.

    Some political funding comes from big corporations, many within the gun industry, which donate millions to the NRA. But companies are barred from donating to the NRA’s political action committee, which the agency uses to fill campaign coffers, run ads and send out mailers for and against candidates.

    So If NRA comes out strongly against printed weapons, they are really sticking it to a number of their members who I'm sure are not interested in any such restrictions. The only way I could see them justifying it is by making an appeal about the "safety" of the printed weapons (possibility of them causing injury to the user) despite the fact that this is really a First Amendment issue, safety be damned.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by khallow on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:10PM (10 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:10PM (#715616) Journal

      So If NRA comes out strongly against printed weapons

      And of course, they don't have any reason to come out strongly against printed weapons.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by takyon on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:20PM (8 children)

        by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:20PM (#715622) Journal

        President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he is "looking into" the availability of plans for the 3D printing of guns, writing on Twitter that he had already been in touch with the NRA on the issue.

        "I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn't seem to make much sense!" the president wrote on Twitter Tuesday morning.

        Remains to be seen. Very vague tweetage.

        And you can't think of a reason why a (partially) gun industry backed organization would want to ban printed weapons? I've already thought of 2.

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:29PM (4 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:29PM (#715625) Journal

          I've already thought of 2.

          Let's see those reasons.

          • (Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:42PM (3 children)

            by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday August 01 2018, @12:42PM (#715634) Journal

            Printed weapons are a challenge to gun industry profits (doesn't have to be true now or at any point in the future, they just have to cynically believe it might).

            Printed weapons are unsafe for their users (profitable meatbags who buy guns *and* donate to the org). The NRA says "firearm education and safety is paramount" [nra.org]. If they don't believe printed weapons can be used safely, they may be willing to look the other way while politicians put in place a "common sense (printed) gun control". Even though doing so would be short-sighted at best (and Cody Wilson made some pretty reliable printed guns IIRC).

            This has little to do with the gun industry specifically, but the NRA might support a printed gun ban simply because the tools undermine existing regulations and it's a battle they have little interest in fighting. It's not like the NRA doesn't support certain aspects of "gun control". [nraila.org]

            --
            [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
            • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday August 01 2018, @05:07PM (1 child)

              by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @05:07PM (#715795)

              We all know that "madman mows crowd with gun" helps to raise sales, but what happens to the bottom line when the headline is "printed gun blows up in user's face" ?
              Is the NRA going to seed bad plans on the web to cause mistrust? If yes, how good are they at scaring their potential customers away from printing without scaring them away from guns?

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:23AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 02 2018, @01:23AM (#716007) Journal

              Printed weapons are a challenge to gun industry profits (doesn't have to be true now or at any point in the future, they just have to cynically believe it might).

              That's a circular argument not a reason why they would "cynically believe it might".

              Printed weapons are unsafe for their users

              That's a typical problem with homemade weapons.

              If they don't believe printed weapons can be used safely

              "If".

              This has little to do with the gun industry specifically, but the NRA might support a printed gun ban simply because the tools undermine existing regulations and it's a battle they have little interest in fighting.

              The NRA has a more than 80 year history of such expediency (for example, supporting bans on silencers and sawed off shotguns) in order to get what they want (relatively low federal-level restrictions on firearm manufacture, ownership, and usage). But what's so dramatic about printed firearms that they'll get political capital for supporting a ban? It's already illegal to use plastic/X-ray transparent firearms, for example.

              And we still have the matter that it's not a reason to want to ban printed firearms, but rather any marginally useful technology that happens to be high FUD. 3-D printing neither has the necessary level of FUD nor in the long run, the marginal utility.

              The problem with banning printed weapons is first, that sooner or later such printing technology will see widespread application in firearm manufacture (not necessarily of critical high stress components like barrels or firing pins). Poorly designed regulations can inhibit firearm manufacturers and users from adopting state of the art technologies for normal firearm production. Second, as already noted, there's the First Amendment matter. One of the more loathsome federal-level regulations of the past twenty years, ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) was used to suppress mere distribution of a firearm design. This is a greater threat than any ban on firearm types because it sets a precedent on banning distribution of ideas about firearms, a far more intrusive restriction on firearm-related freedoms than the usual gun control regulation.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @06:15PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @06:15PM (#715837)

          I suppose you could count the advertising in their magazine, but that really isn't going to support a lobbying effort. Magazines are not all that profitable. (cost of paper, printing, mailing...)

          Fundamentally, the NRA is member-supported. Millions of people have joined.

          It's not evil corporations. It's not Russian collusion. There really are millions of ordinary Americans who love their 2nd amendment so much that they are willing to part with some money for it.

          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @08:59PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @08:59PM (#715905)

            > It's not evil corporations.

            dateline January 2013 [businessinsider.com]:

            Since 2005, the gun industry and its corporate allies have given between $20 million and $52.6 million to it through the NRA Ring of Freedom sponsor program. Donors include firearm companies like Midway USA, Springfield Armory Inc, Pierce Bullet Seal Target Systems, and Beretta USA Corporation. Other supporters from the gun industry include Cabala's, Sturm Rugar & Co, and Smith & Wesson.

            The NRA also made $20.9 million — about 10 percent of its revenue — from selling advertising to industry companies marketing products in its many publications in 2010, according to the IRS Form 990.

            Additionally, some companies donate portions of sales directly to the NRA. Crimson Trace, which makes laser sights, donates 10 percent of each sale to the NRA. Taurus buys an NRA membership for everyone who buys one of their guns. Sturm Rugar gives $1 to the NRA for each gun sold, which amounts to millions. The NRA's revenues are intrinsically linked to the success of the gun business.

            The NRA Foundation also collects hundreds of thousands of dollars from the industry, which it then gives to local-level organizations for training and equipment purchases.

            dateline December 2012 [theatlantic.com]:

            In recent years, the group has become more aggressive about seeking donations, both from individuals and corporations, and that in turn has led it to become more deeply entwined with the gun industry. In 2010, it received $71 million in contributions, up from $46.3 million in 2004. Some of that money came from small-time donors, who've received a barrage of fundraising appeals warning of President Obama's imminent plot to gut the Second Amendment and confiscate Americans' firearms. But around 2005, the group began systematically reaching out to its richest members for bigger checks through its "Ring of Freedom" program, which also sought to corral corporate donors. Between then and 2011, the Violence Policy Center estimates that the firearms industry donated as much as $38.9 million to the NRA's coffers. The givers include 22 different gun makers, including famous names like Smith & Wesson, Beretta USA, SIGARMS, and Sturm, Ruger & Co. that also manufacture so-called assault weapons.

            Some of that funding has given the NRA a direct stake in gun and ammo sales. As Bloomberg noted in its January article, Sturm, Ruger & Co. launched a campaign to sell one million guns, and promised to donate $1 of each purchase to the group. Since 1992, MidWay USA, which retails gun supplies including ammo and controversial high-capacity magazines, has allowed its customers to round up each of their online and mail orders to the nearest dollar, and automatically donate the extra to the NRA. Together with other companies that have joined the effort, MidWay has helped collect more than $9 million for NRA. MidWay's owner, Larry Pottfield, also happens to be the the group's largest individual donor.

            > It's not Russian collusion.

            That's something the Department of Justice is investigating [mcclatchydc.com]. Do you have some information that they need to know? Will you share that with us?

            • (Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday August 02 2018, @03:00AM

              by Arik (4543) on Thursday August 02 2018, @03:00AM (#716049) Journal
              That pisses me off. Both Crimson Trace and Ruger make good equipment, I hate to have to boycott them.

              --
              If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 5, Informative) by DannyB on Wednesday August 01 2018, @02:46PM

        by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday August 01 2018, @02:46PM (#715691) Journal

        NRA supporters are as deluded as Trump supporters.

        The NRA is not an organization about helping citizens to have firearms. It is a gun manufacturers trade association in disguise.

        Therefore the NRA will be AGAINST being able to 3D print your own firearm -- because it hurts firearm SALES. And that is the ONLY thing that NRA actually cares about. It's not about lives. It's not about rights. It's not about freedom. Or protecting onself or property. It's not about the 2nd amendment. It's only about sales.

        --
        Fact: We get heavier as we age due to more information in our heads. When no more will fit it accumulates as fat.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Wednesday August 01 2018, @06:02PM (1 child)

      by ilPapa (2366) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @06:02PM (#715826) Journal

      NRA stands for "Not Really American".

      Why should we care what an organization that has been co-opted by Russian intelligence thinks? I'm more concerned that the President of the United States believes he needs to talk to a lobbying group before he can make policy.

      --
      You are still welcome on my lawn.