Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by LaminatorX on Thursday October 02 2014, @03:31AM   Printer-friendly
from the gun-without-a-bang dept.

When Cody Wilson revealed the world’s first fully 3-D printed gun last year, he showed that the “maker” movement has enabled anyone to create a working, lethal firearm with a click in the privacy of his or her garage. Now he’s moved on to a new form of digital DIY gunsmithing. And this time the results aren’t made of plastic.

Wilson’s latest radically libertarian project is a PC-connected milling machine he calls the Ghost Gunner. Like any computer-numerically-controlled (or CNC) mill, the one-foot-cubed black box uses a drill bit mounted on a head that moves in three dimensions to automatically carve digitally-modeled shapes into polymer, wood or aluminum. But this CNC mill, sold by Wilson’s organization known as Defense Distributed for $1,200, is designed to create one object in particular: the component of an AR-15 rifle known as its lower receiver.

That simple chunk of metal has become the epicenter of a gun control firestorm. A lower receiver is the body of the gun that connects its stock, barrel, magazine and other parts. As such, it’s also the rifle’s most regulated element. Mill your own lower receiver at home, however, and you can order the rest of the parts from online gun shops, creating a semi-automatic weapon with no serial number, obtained with no background check, no waiting period or other regulatory hurdles.
http://www.wired.com/2014/10/cody-wilson-ghost-gunner/

 
This discussion has been archived.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: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Thursday October 02 2014, @07:33AM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Thursday October 02 2014, @07:33AM (#100848) Homepage Journal

    Comments like the parent assume that it is obvious that this product should be banned? Why? It's a milling machine with a program, so what?

    - Laws are supposed to regulate illegal behavior, but creep more and more towards regulating intent. If killing someone is illegal, throw murderers in jail. No, let's outlaw weapons (UK) - throw anyone in jail who has a weapon. Outlaw parts of weapons (lower receivers). Outlaw the ability to manufacturer parts of guns. Etc. etc.

    - The US war on drugs is similar. Outlaw dangerous drugs, then outlaw component chemicals, then outlaw components of the components. Simple iodine is now a harshly regulated chemical, even though it's primary use is as a disinfectant.

    With every step along this path, the laws become less clearly enforceable and criminalize a greater range of perfectly acceptable activities. In the end, we are all criminals, living our lives at the mercy of government bureaucrats who could - any time they wish - find a reason to prosecute us. This is not a healthy society.

    So...why do people like the parent just assume that milling machines like this should be banned?

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 02 2014, @07:45AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 02 2014, @07:45AM (#100851)

    > Comments like the parent assume that it is obvious that this product should be banned?

    No, my comment assumes that laws are passed with intent and when something comes along that is specifically designed to circumvent that intent then a new law gets passed to close the loophole. I make no judgement whether or not the law SHOULD be written.

    > The US war on drugs is similar.

    Indeed, It is the perfect example [wikipedia.org] of how the law gets updated to deal with loopholes.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mcgrew on Thursday October 02 2014, @02:07PM

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Thursday October 02 2014, @02:07PM (#100950) Homepage Journal

    So...why do people like the parent just assume that milling machines like this should be banned?

    Because they're "thinking" with their emotions. Emotionalism and logic mix about as well as oil and water.

    --
    mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
    • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by BasilBrush on Thursday October 02 2014, @03:18PM

      by BasilBrush (3994) on Thursday October 02 2014, @03:18PM (#100985)

      You're confusing emotion with morality.

      --
      Hurrah! Quoting works now!
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mcgrew on Thursday October 02 2014, @03:50PM

        by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Thursday October 02 2014, @03:50PM (#101001) Homepage Journal

        I don't think so. People want to ban guns out of fear. What does gun ownership have to do with morality?

        --
        mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @12:35AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 03 2014, @12:35AM (#101206)

          Women and women-like men.

        • (Score: 1) by BasilBrush on Friday October 03 2014, @01:12PM

          by BasilBrush (3994) on Friday October 03 2014, @01:12PM (#101369)

          You demonstrate your confusion well.

          --
          Hurrah! Quoting works now!
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by opinionated_science on Thursday October 02 2014, @05:10PM

    by opinionated_science (4031) on Thursday October 02 2014, @05:10PM (#101031)

    the founding fathers anticipated a government using fear excuses to ban weapons and included the 2nd amendment...

    it is a turning point in history that the 1st amendment requires the 2nd to be effective...

    • (Score: 2) by Alfred on Thursday October 02 2014, @05:38PM

      by Alfred (4006) on Thursday October 02 2014, @05:38PM (#101049) Journal

      Amen and amen.
      They lived under something oppressive, replaced it with something better and could not have done so without firearms and mortal force.
      They wanted this option available in the future for when their then better system went the way all governments go.

    • (Score: 2) by JNCF on Friday October 03 2014, @01:31AM

      by JNCF (4317) on Friday October 03 2014, @01:31AM (#101224) Journal

      it is a turning point in history that the 1st amendment requires the 2nd to be effective...

      And the beauty of printable weapon files that they wrap the 2nd amendment in the 1st, so that the 1st amendment protects the 2nd amendment which protects the 1st amendment which... well, you get the idea.