Print your own 30 round AR15 magazine

AR

Here’s a 30 round magazine for an AR15, made just in time to add to the national conversation over things that look scary.

This magazine is the product of Defense Distributed who have previously graced the front page of Hackaday with their 3D printed scary bang bang machine. While continuing to work on their WikiWeapon – a gun printable on a home-built 3D printer – the team decided they could subvert more obtuse gun laws by making their own high-capacity magazine.

The magazine is printed on an extremely expensive commercial 3D printer, but the team is working to make it printable on more affordable models. The prototype magazine survived unloading a full 30 rounds. Video demo of that after the break.

Also on Defense Distributed’s DEFCAD is a sound moderator for paintball and air guns. While the design isn’t yet finalized for those big scary assault weapons, it should be possible to modify it for the big guns.  One of their next projects is a stock, hopefully one that includes a hinge.

Comments

  1. chevalier says:

    Stop calling high-capacity to things that are designed as is. 20 and 30 rounds are standard capacity on an AR15 platform. if something is high capacity at least look at belt feed ar15 lowers or beta C-mag

  2. kb says:

    It’s always nice to take a break from inspiring projects to celebrate the most atavistic instincts.

    • HC says:

      I would say the instinct for self-reliance is far less atavistic than the one for absolute trust in mommy government to keep you safe. You may choose (or be forced) to abdicate personal responsibility, but doing so is by no means a feat of maturity.

      • fdawg4l says:

        I see you’ve been sized and correctly oriented your tinfoil have. Nanu Nanu!!!

        • Volfram says:

          Your statement stopped being relevant the moment New York State passed their new ban.

          • TP Baily says:

            Crazy gun toting rednecks? That would be nice.

          • Eirinn says:

            Mind giving a link? :)

          • Moorbo says:

            Ah, so I assume you are taking a break from fighting the government after the NY law was passed to write that comment.

            No?

            But wait, I thought people like you with guns stopped gun laws and the government intruding on your perceived rights. Or maybe you all just like to talk big about resisting the man.

          • Volfram says:

            Eirinn: google “New York Assault Weapon Ban” and it should be every link for the first 3 pages.

            Seriously, if you don’t know about it by now you must be hiding under a rock. I’M hiding under a rock and I know about it.

        • The government made it legal to murder American citizens without a trial, at the same time it buys 1.4 billion rounds of hollow points, which are illegal in international warfare. We are detained at illegal checkpoints inside borders and we’re groped and microwaved by naked body scanners at the airport. 35,000 drones are scheduled to spy on us to make sure we do not commit heinous crimes like collecting rain water or home gardening. If you think the government is here to protect you, you’re a fool.

          • HC says:

            Quite a few airports use backscatter x-ray machines. Says something rather disturbing when being microwaved is the less dangerous of one’s two options.

          • 0c says:

            And you’re a fool if you think your AR-15 pea-shooter (even modded for full auto) is going to stand up to the US military. Have fun with your “revolution”.

          • Paul says:

            Why haven’t the gun owners stood up and used their 2nd amendment to fight the government? They are always bragging about that but it never actually happens because they are pussies.

          • ryker says:

            0c
            When the revolution happens over 50 % of the military will defend the people.

          • Volfram says:

            Because unlike the kind of people who talk about tackling someone to the ground for open-carry, gun owners recognize that the shift from talk to violence is not to be undertaken lightly. We don’t WANT a revolution. And neither do you.

          • joe says:

            Well said. I’m amazed at how quickly people suggest to give up their freedoms over a few very bad incidents, and how much faith/trust they put into various governments.

            I blame the speed of the internet. These people are just mad RIGHT NOW and want results as fast a google can provide them.

            I wish there was a way to explain to the younger gen that when certain types of guns go away, they will NEVER be back, no matter what needs or desires they may crop up in the future.

          • johnathon says:

            “35,000 drones are scheduled to spy on us to make sure we do not commit heinous crimes like collecting rain water or home gardening..”

            what in THE HELL are you talking about?! please cite your sources or don’t say anything at all.

          • Dego says:

            I do not know about the 35,000 number, but http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/06/military-makes-extensive-domestic-use-of and https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/12/05-9 for just two examples of domestic drone deployment. Also check the wiki page for the reaper drone and look at NASA and Homeland Security. The numbers do not sound so alarming, but there is a big debate in the aviation community about allowing drones to mix with civilian aviation. Quite a few states and counties are asking for permission to use drones for “crime Prevention and “Drug enforcement”. Do some research and be alarmed.

          • drewls6 says:

            The US is actualy not prohibited from using hollow points in combat, we never signed that particular paper. We do however comply with it as an international relations tactic. So even if we started using hollow points we would not be violaing any laws.

        • ehrichweiss says:
      • kb says:

        I think you need to look up “atavistic.”

      • Eirinn says:

        It’s the age old debate all over again. Americans think that weapons will keep them safe and Europeans think it makes matters worse.

        • Federico says:

          Guns liberated americans from europen rule, which probably explains a lot.

          • Ac says:

            Actually the colonies were governed by private corporations. Read the actual history of the Tea/Stamp Act. Even the Redcoats were employees of private security firms based in Bavaria.

            So when you hear today’s so called patriot advocating a reduction in government and letting private companies run things, they’re advocating as Loyalists not Rebels.

          • Whatnot says:

            And gave them new european rule, because they were themselves europeans.

          • joe says:

            yup. And regardless of some calling it “new european rule”, it’s certainly different enough to be desired and maintained.

          • Ca says:

            Ac wrote:
            “Even the Redcoats were employees of private security firms based in Bavaria.”

            you got a source for that or is it the tinfoil talking?

          • Bill O'Rights says:

            Google Hessians. They were German mercenaries. About 30,000 fought in the War of Independence. Technically not “Redcoats” as they didn’t wear the British uniform, but they were actually “employees of private security firms based in Bavaria.” Doesn’t mean he’s not wearing tinfoil a little tight, but he is not lying about outsourced soldiers.

          • colecoman1982 says:

            Yea, I’m not so sure about ALL of your facts but the general gist of it is just par for the course for recent right-wing nuttery. Just look at the “Tea Party”. They named themselves after the Boston Tea Party; which happened to protest taxation without representation; which the modern “Tea Party” explicitly already has…

        • KillerBug says:

          Not all americans think guns will make them safe…Mexico has very strict gun laws, and the roaming gangs are very well armed and violent. California also has very strict gun laws (nowhere near as strict as Mexico) and they have tons of gun crime as well (nowhere near as much as Mexico). This sentiment is not shared by the whole world of course…a while back Israel had a lot of mass shootings. Did they ban guns for civilians? Of course not…they started a program to give free guns to anyone who wanted them! The result? No more mass shootings. The amazing part of this is that this program is being funded by the USA, who is working to ban guns for their own civilians.

          30 rounds is “standard” capacity for an AR15…but there are smaller clips available, and new laws are trying to make these clips the “standard” while banning 30 round clips.

          One of the neat things about a 3D printed gun would be that it would not be an assault rifle…not necessarily anyway. It could be just as deadly, accurate, and fast…but since the definition of assault rifle has nothing to do with these factors, it could get around any laws against assault rifles. Actually, the laws against assault rifles in California (that some legislators want to make national) border on being unconstitutional due to free speech issues more than anything else, as they apply to appearance more than anything, and appearance has been held up as free speech many times.

          You don’t hear about school shootings in Europe for many reasons, the most major being press coverage. That’s not to say there are no mass shootings…I seem to remember a certain someone going on his own personal mission to wipe out Islam not too long ago. Yesterday one person shot one administrator at a school and it was all over the news…no children shot, in fact, no children there…it was an adult school. They went so far as to call the shooter a victim just so they could say there were two victims. With the press this hungry to publicize any shooting in any school, any nutjob who wants attention knows exactly where to go (this goes double when the shooter wants to kill a lot of people…a “gun free zone” is the perfect place to do it). The government originally tried to get the public behind anti-gun laws by smuggling guns to Mexico, but they got caught so now they are going with this method.

          If Mr Obama wants to cut down on gun violence, it is easily within his reach under current laws, and within the powers granted to him by the constitution. The presidential powers have grown over the years, but the fundamental power of the president was originally (and still technically is) control of the military. He sends countless soldiers overseas with fully automatic rifles containing DU ammo, and they shoot so many innocent people that they had to make a new definition of “enemy combatant” that includes any male of “military age” just so the numbers look better. As long as he is supporting this, it is the height of hypocrisy to try to further limit the weapons that are sold to (mostly) non-violent civilians here.

          Personally, as long as my government is enforcing their own will (and not the will of the people) with firearms, I want firearms in the hands of as many civilians as possible. Every totalitarian regime in history has followed the model of limiting civilian access to weapons while overusing them in unjustified ways and it never goes well. A mass shooting is not necessarily terrorism by definition, but using such an event to undermine liberties IS by definition terrorism, even if the person doing it had nothing to do with the shooting. If the choice is between an occasional mass shooting or slavery for all, I’ll gladly accept the mass shootings, even if I or my child become victims. GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH.

          • Eirinn says:

            I guess you’d have to be American to understand that post. As a Dane, just about everything you wrote sounds like utter nonsense. I am honestly not trying to belittle you.

            I honestly think that on that exact subject our cultures are so fundamentally different that making comparisons or pointing fingers would be, not just wrong, but also a waste of time.

            First your understanding of mass media is completely different than mine. If there was any cover-up of a story in Denmark, another agency or group would pick it up and make sure it went public. No I am not kidding you.

            I think we had 3-6 shootings that ended in murder last year in a country with 6mil. inhabitants. Sure crimes are committed with other weapons instead, but the lethal rate is practically non-existent.

            If a girl is walking down the street and attempted raped the rapist will have, in 99.9% of the cases, a knife or bare handed, not a gun. If the rape is successful it is brought up in the media and surveillance is added, light is added and usually the police force are more active in that area. The girl may be harmed, but at least alive. If the girl had a gun i imagine a few scenarios. The rapist WILL have a gun if the girl is able to have one. So either the girl or the rapist will die, harmed or the girl will be pacified before being able to use the weapon at all. There are also scenarios with stray shots hitting innocent bystanders and more. Enlighten the local area, add more security and light to the streets and apprehend the culprit. Stuffing a gun in the girls hands is avoiding the problem altogether and putting the responsibility of her well-being in her hands instead of the ones inserted to protect her.

            When you put guns in the hands of the people you give the people the responsibility of protecting themselves, rendering half of the point of even having a state pointless, police completely pointless.

            We favour added security, education and lights in favour of arms.We have some of the safest streets in the world and even in the roughest neighbourhoods (you’d probably laugh at me for calling it rough) it is safe to walk at night.

            Again, different culture and i am not saying what is wrong or what is right, but to ME it sounds crazy.

          • joecomputer says:

            USA Guns protected by the 2nd amendment came over to England and our soldiers died for your freedom. Enjoy your freedom Eirinn. We won’t hold your short sighted attitude or obvious lack of historical knowledge against you. Next time you are in trouble, you know the USA will be back to help…Your welcome.

          • cHRIS says:

            @joecomputer – he said he’s a Dane – as in Danish, not British. So your comment is both wrong and uninformed. your soldiers did nothing for his freedom. in fact his soldiers, and many other countries’ soldiers have regularily gone around and cleaned up the war-messes that your country have left behind…my own country has done this blindly on many occassions up until the Iraq war that we knew was wrong. Yet you refer to us Canadians as your countries hat…while your citizens have been known to use our flag on backpacks when travelling the world so no one will treat them badly. its okay, we’re okay with that, it gives us a sense of pride knowing that we are welcome almost anywhere…

            Also, most countries in the world think some of your ammendments and laws are utterly ridiculous, just like you’ll find other countries’ laws ridiculous. other countries just don’t have that many mass shootings…

          • MrX says:

            @Eirinn @cHRIS
            We do trust our governments, we trust the police, we trust the society where we live in, we feel safe where we live. It is a completely different mentality over here, so really, no point of trying to explain it to them, they will never understand. The fact is that the problem is on their side, so we shouldn’t really care about explaining things either.

            And by the way, most people here sound like kids anyway. So take some comments with a grain of salt. Most of them are just nerds locked in at home overplaying call of duty and too scared to face the society. If they knew what is to take someone’s life and all the consequences associated to it, they wouldn’t be so liberal about “defending themselves with a firearm”. If they think that all the “downward spiral” that comes after killing someone is better than having the wallet stolen, or the house raided, or being beaten up, then I’m pretty sure they are just kids which didn’t even grow their pubes.

          • joecomputer says:

            @cHRIS. See, you just proved my point. You can’t see past the initial objective, or worse, you are simply spewing rhetoric. Denmark is part of Europe and would most certainly have suffered had the US not intervened both during WWI&II and during the cold war. Unless you were ok with communism or national socialism, which I think might be the case here. Funny how people are getting unapologetic about that lately.

          • Jeff says:

            Elrin said:
            “a gun in the girls hands is [...] putting the responsibility of her well-being in her hands instead of the ones inserted to protect her.”

            what denmark calls its “men” to its girls: “excuze me misses, i think we’d all feel a little bit safer around here if you females would just submit to being raped. if you put up a fight you might upset someone and bring bad karma to the village.”
            -it feels a bit like the ancient religions that sacrificed their virgins to ward off evil
            -or maybe from brave new world where if someone petitions you for sex you must give it to them

            Elrin also said:
            “When you put guns in the hands of the people you give the people the responsibility of protecting themselves, rendering half of the point of even having a state pointless, police completely pointless.”

            self-reliance is to be discouraged at all costs.
            dependence will be rewarded.
            independence will be punished.

            the sovereignty of the commune is absolute.
            the sanctity of the individual is nonexistent.
            the will of the commune is supreme.
            the wishes of the individual is irrelevant.

            i really really hope i just got trolled because your purported philosophy is disgusting.

          • Jeff says:

            are*

          • hat says:

            Stupid Dane. He just doesn’t get it. Perhaps if we tell him about our freedoms in his own language, he’d understand:

            “Vi holdes som gidsler af bevæbnede gale mænd. De har mange våben, truer med at dræbe nogen, der kommer i vejen for dem, og vil ikke lytte til fornuft. De betragter drab på børn uden betydning. Hvis vi ikke overlever, skal du gemme jer.”

      • Moorbo says:

        That mommy government is your government. By abdicating your responsibility to shape that government and write it off as a lost cause speaks far more about your general sense of responsibility than of someone who by your logic is irresponsible for not owning a gun. Particularly when the statistics say you’re 3 times more likely to get a household member killed by keeping a gun in the home and 5 times more likely to have someone in the home kill themselves, and 12 times more likely for domestic violence to end in death. How very mature of you to relegate your control of your rights to, most likely empty, threats of insurrection with an object more likely to kill you than protect you.

        • Andrew says:

          Well said!

        • HC says:

          [citation needed]

        • joe says:

          “By abdicating your responsibility to shape that government and write it off as a lost cause speaks far more about your general sense of responsibility than of someone who by your logic is irresponsible for not owning a gun.”

          This run-on assumes that our “responsibility” involves keeping track of the ~1000* bills that are suggested everyday in this country. You obviously aren’t from America, where people have kids, work 10hrs per day and are on call for the rest, own vehicles, own a property that needs to be maintained, and are consistently lied to through every news outlet available.

          That or you are from America and live a very sheltered life. Possibly behind a computer where you get your imaginary way of life from other countries policies.

        • edonovan says:

          Your statistics are flawed. You should check the cdc website for more accurate numbers.

          3 times more likely to have household member killed? In 2012, there were about 26,000 non-firearm related intentional deaths (suicide/homicide), compared to 31,000 intentional deaths by firearms. Assuming those 11000 homicides were all domestic, that is 1.2 times more likely.

          5 times more likely to have someone in the home commit suicide. In 2012, there were about 19400 suicides by firearm, and 19000 suicides by other means. This is nearly a 1:1 ratio. Assuming everyone understands drano is deadly, I doubt lack of a firearm will stop someone from committing suicide.

          12 times more likely for domestic violence to end in death. In 2012, there were 11000 firearm related homicides and there were 5000 homicides by other means. Assuming a similar ratio of domestic deaths for both, that is only a little over twice as likely. Also, we will assume there is no motivation to use other means if a firearm is not present.

          http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/deaths_2010_release.pdf

          Oh look, I’ve included the source!

  3. Jeff says:

    thank you hackaday :)

  4. Reechard says:

    Just to clarify, a 30 round magazine is standard capacity for an AR15. The phrasing here makes it sound borderline-legal and scary, when it is the defacto standard that is handed to you when you buy the gun, and will be handed to you if you ask the shop owner for a new one. You don’t have to go to some shady back-alley store and say “Give me the “SPECIAL” AR15 magazine please” and then leave with an unmarked paper bag.

    • CaptainJistuce says:

      ” The phrasing here makes it sound borderline-legal and scary”

      I…. think that’s the point. The entire post reads to me as a mockery of the “assault weapon” bans making the rounds yet again, which ARE largely cosmetic(contrary to popular opinion, assault weapon bans have nothing at all to do with machine guns), and bank on confusion and fear to cover the fact that they aren’t doing anything meaningful while still giving everyone the warm fuzzies from “dealing with” the scary-looking bangbang machines.

      And I think BOTH sides of the debate can agree to that summary of the situation.
      It’s pointless political posturing that does very little besides confuse the issue.

    • Ac says:

      Strawman… why?

      The issue is simply high capacity clips. You’ve confused the issue as “clips with capacity 30 or a SPECIFIC weapon”.

    • Joe1 says:

      Not only that, but magazines are pretty much disposable. They’re literally just a specially-cut can and wire in some cases. 100-round magazines are generally considered junk, also. I dare you to test 100 of them and actually need 10000 rounds without using a magazine twice. ;)

  5. Jason says:

    DO NOT ATTACH THE DEFCAD SOUND MODERATOR TO A FIREARM! it is a federal felony as it is considered a suppressor and they do not give out slaps on the wrist. you can submit the proper paperwork and tax stamp info and do it legally.

    • mosheen says:

      You’re not e allowed to make it without a stamp.

      • cde says:

        You’re not allowed to put tissue in a toilet paper tube and stick that on a painball marker either because it’s also considered a suppressor and needs a stamp.

        • msis says:

          This is correct. However, it has been pointed out by the ATF itself that, should the sound suppression part of a paintball marker be an integral part of the assembly* then no paperwork need be filed.

          *meaning the body, barrel, and sound modifying geometry be all milled or welded as one piece with a functional reason to do so.

        • MoFoQ says:

          I take it no-one here read the post about the Sound Moderator (it’s worded as such to avoid certain “distinction”)?

          Quote:
          “Firearms are likely to blow the silencer to bits.”

        • M4CGYV3R says:

          Paintball silencers are completely legal – even without registration or licensing – as long as they can’t be put on ‘real’ firearms.

          • p-ball says:

            Correct me if I am wrong (with citations please) but paintball marker is not seen as a gun by any standards federally (other then some cities recognize it as an air rifle). I know that flying with paintball markers TSA does not view them as a gun and they can be packed in normal luggage.

          • joe says:

            p-ball good question, In NJ I do know that air rifles (including bbguns) are considered firearms and carry the same baggage that normal firearms require, such as a purchasers ID and the whole “to and from range ONLY” laws.

            But airsoft and paintball? I’m curious. Actually I’m amazed that you can fly with paintball gun as normal luggage.

          • Disarm Gov First says:

            Perfectly legal to transport firearms in “regular luggage”. Only things required are that they be unloaded and declared during baggage check-in.

            A side benefit is that you get to lock your luggage with a lock that the TSA *cannot* open. They are not allowed to open your luggage without you present when a firearm is checked. I know guys who travel with extremely expensive professional video equipment. They throw a pistol into the hard case so they can lock it and prevent the TSA stealing the equipment, as they are known to do.

    • concerned says:

      It isn’t even legal to attach it to a paintball or airsoft gun, doesn’t have to be a firearm! The only “suppressors” you can buy for airsoft/paintball that are legal are really just mock ones with no baffling, usually just foam. They do muffle the noise a little but I guess the government only cares if they have baffles for airsoft/paintball. I would imagine any kind of can, baffled or not, will get you in trouble with a firearm. It doesn’t matter what you call it, if it works like a suppressor it is a suppressor.

      I would not be surprised if this guys site gets replaced by a page with just the FBI logo on it, and he would deserve it. I won’t even look at the site, I am sure the FBI is making a list of everyone who does…

    • Anonymous MTP says:

      If the police come-a-knockin’, tell them that the purpose of your sound moderator “was to promote the First Amendment purpose of informing”.

      For those that don’t get the reference:

      It is illegal to possess a 30-round AR-15 magazine in Washington, DC.

      No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm.

      The law makes no exceptions for intent.

      On December 23, 2012, David Gregory of NBC, on the program “Meet the Press”, held up a 30-round AR-15 magazine to show his audience was one was. By simply possessing the magazine, he committed a crime, and broadcast that crime on national television.

      A few days ago, the Washington DC Attorney General decided not to prosecute Mr. Gregory, stating that

      prosecution would not promote public safety…nor serve the best interests of the people.

      [ link ]

      • Joe1 says:

        Well I’m not sure how the law works there, but usually if it’s in your presence (as in literally arm’s distance), you can legally let someone use your class-III weapon. You just can’t loan or sell or give it to them. I remember reading about this issue elsewhere. Has anyone checked on the possibility that the gun came pre-ban cutoff? 1986 was a hell of a year.
        If it is infact illegal, then obviously it’s just another case of ‘some animals are more equal than others’. Yeah, Morgan is d**k as well.

        In protest, one store actually stopped selling weapons to police that they can’t sell to civilians. They should have gone one step further and forbid the feds but hey… LOL.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Looks like it’s about that time when we start seeing some 3D printing laws.

    • nomnim says:

      Law law law, can I get a fucking law against anything I fear. We need a law against the boogieman.

    • The Phantom says:

      Good luck enforcing that, genius. While you’re at it make a law about MIG welders and sheet metal brakes, that’s all you need to make an AR magazine. Ghod forbid somebody might have a Bridgeport CNC mill and a lathe, they could make a whole AK in a weekend.

      You little liberal children are going to have to wake up to reality some day, might just as well be today.

      • Anonymous says:

        It makes you look like less of an idiot when you read what you’re replying to.

        • Anonymous says:

          Disregard that, just saw your gun control blog and it all came together..

          • msis says:

            His point was that a 3D printer is not nearly as effective as a century old machine shop. Many weapons were designed to be made in them, could not be made on a 3D printer, and the whole world has kept turning for the last hundred years just fine.

            Limiting 3D printing will do less to stop gun violence as banning hammers. (by the by, more people are killed by hammers and clubs than guns)

      • Andrew says:

        Um… I think your sarcasm filter needs to be realigned… It’s highly unlikely the OP was serious about it being about time we had some laws for 3d printers. Even if he was being a “liberal child” he was probably just pushing buttons to get the predictable response.

  7. zuul says:

    this is stupid bullshit, i don’t care if you can print and entire gun, this guy’s a douche

  8. Bob Leyn says:

    Great! About time that the average American can 3D print their own weapons. Hopefully soon, we’ll all be able to print hand grenades and personal rocket launchers, too. You know, for hunting and to protect our selves from burglars, and such. Grenades don’t kill people, people kill people. Right?

    • jfs says:

      I know you are being sarcastic, but that’s exactly it. People kill people. Blaming an inanimate object like a gun and trying to outlaw it is stupid, and does not solve the problem. We live in a technological society now, and almost everyone has access to the knowledge and manufacturing capabilities required to wreak destruction on a large scale. Guns are only one way of doing it, there are an infinite amount of other options out there that accomplishes the same thing, are we going to outlaw them all?

      • dan says:

        I think that’s the point though.
        even if you love guns nearly as much as you love America the fact still remains that certain type of weapons are banned or heavily restricted.

        on a side note.
        all those people who keep guns with the thoughts that they may one day need to stand against the government are guilty of sedition. (even discussing the possibility is sedition)
        sedition is a federal crime. and having committed a felony you’d be a felon and can’t own a gun.
        So you either use your gun to defend the government, (and any actions it takes) or you’re a criminal, and should have your gun taken away by the government.

        and last but not least, in stark contrast to all those here that are saying guns are bad.
        am I the only non-american that actually likes the gun hacks, likes to read about them and understands that there is some pretty cool engineering that goes into guns that makes them interesting to read about?

        More gun hacks please!!

        • jfs says:

          None of that makes any kind of sense, are you trolling?

          Your statement about sedition shows your utter ignorance on the history of the US, its constitution, and the rights of US citizens. Go educate yourself on free speech and due process.

          • Joe1 says:

            Lincoln was interesting. Balance between state tyranny and national tyranny is always a careful one. In the 19th century, it was the states getting into people’s private lives and allowing someone to own you. Now it’s the feds telling people what color Kool-aid to drink, so to speak.

        • Andrew says:

          No Dan, you’re not the only non-American who has an appreciation for guns.

          I can’t stand the shoot-em-up, arming myself to protect myself from the government, stupidity but that’s just the fringe. They’re tools of the NRA’s marketing wing and tend to get amplified at times like these.

          The engineering on most firearms is pretty awesome, I’ve always thought so. My grandad was in Europe during WWII and came back with French dueling pistols, a machine gun + some sort of German pilot’s pistol (not a Luger). He also had his rifle (30-30?) and Colt.

          • Bill O'Rights says:

            “I can’t stand the shoot-em-up, arming myself to protect myself from the government, stupidity but that’s just the fringe.”

            George Washington and John Adams were “stupid” and “fringe”? I thought you frowned on name-calling? Can I call you a hypocrite now?

          • Andrew says:

            Sorry Bill, I thought for a moment you wanted to discuss the topic with some rational but
            it’s another attempt at deflection I see…

            I said nothing about George Washington and John Adams but neither you or I can know what they would think about civilians armed to the teeth violently afraid of the government. My guess is that they would be concerned.

            By the way, are you disputing that there is a crazed fringe element or are you part of it?

          • Franc N. Bien says:

            Andrew, surely you do realize that THEY were civilians and THEY were armed to the teeth, and that THEY, with some outside help, fought for and violently won THEIR OWN freedom. Who owned all the cannons? Who owned the warships? Who owned all the weapons used to fight against the british? That’s correct! Private citizens who then banded together and fulfilled their duty to the cause of Freedom.

            And guess who placed orders for automatic, rapid-fire machine guns? JOHN ADAMS in the continental congress! So before you say they couldn’t envision anything except muzzle loading blackpowder muskets, research that! Made by Belton. And there was no restriction put into anything they wrote, even though automatic weapons existed and were known at the time.

            Thanks for playing.

          • Andrew says:

            Hate burst your bubble but it was the French who had the ships and cannons that saved your asses from the Brits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War)

            Thanks for playing ; )

          • Franc N. Biens says:

            First of all, wonderful canard. The issue you brought up was the arming of private citizens and you completely ignored that message in my post.

            But to your discredit:
            You will note that the French entered into the war in 1778, 3 years after it officially began.

            Surely you are smart enough to realize that, while a word of French origin, artillery was not limited to French possession. Canons were widespread throughout the colonies. A cannon is but a simple metal casting; old and established technology even at that time. Cannons were owned by private citizens in that era. Made-in-America cannons, at that.

            Now to naval matters:
            “The Americans also relied heavily on privateering to harass British shipping, with some colonial assemblies taking the lead in authorizing such activity. On March 23, 1776, several months before the Declaration of American Independence, Congress authorized the issuance of letters of marque and reprisal. American privateers took about 600 British vessels during the war. ”
            (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_operations_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War)

            Thanks for presenting both sides of the story. Now would you like to address your comment on the lunacy of armed colonials?

            I think you havent shared your country of origin because it would open you up to claims of hypocrisy, being that most in Europe were assisted greatly not so long ago by these paranoid savages who some call Americans.

          • Andrew says:

            Actually Francis you got me… I should have ignored your comment completely because it’s just a deflection from the topic and I have said nothing about the revolutionary war. I said nothing about Washington, John Adams or anyone else from that era but you suckered me in. I said:

            “No Dan, you’re not the only non-American who has an appreciation for guns.

            I can’t stand the shoot-em-up, arming myself to protect myself from the government, stupidity but that’s just the fringe. They’re tools of the NRA’s marketing wing and tend to get amplified at times like these. ”

            Good job… You’re a good troll.

          • Franc N. Biens says:

            If thats not an admission of having been proven wrong, I don’t know what is! The topic seemed to be heavily armed civilians. You made assertions based on points which I refuted.

            But here is the bottom line:
            Your vision of whatever you are railing against is simply a straw man that has been presented to and accepted naively by you. You have never met an American gun owner. All you have been told, and therefore think, about this topic has been scripted, produced, edited and published for your “education” by certain people with a certain viewpoint. How and why this viewpoint came to be popular in some circles is beyond the scope of this website.

            Partake in some extracurricular research. After all, THAT is the unifying theme of this site. Unsanctioned extracurricular activity. aka Independent Thoughts and Actions. A concept that may be somewhat.. foreign to you.

            Good effort but better luck next time. Freedom is a mindset first.

          • Andrew says:

            By all means Francis, keep on talking. You are only reinforcing my point.

          • Franc N. Biens says:

            Your points were dismantled.

            A metaphor for europeon liberty and individual sovereignty? Perhaps.

        • slashsplat says:

          “all those people who keep guns with the thoughts that they may one day need to stand against the government are guilty of sedition. (even discussing the possibility is sedition)”

          IGNORANT. Sorry. Sedition requires ACTION. Intent without action is not sedition.

          • slashsplat says:

            And discussing the possibility is NOT sedition, unless you are INCITING to perform an action. That falls under that pesky Amendment about Freedom of Speech. That damned Bill of Rights is so annoying, it gets in the way of everything… And you might read the Articles of Confederation and other historic documents that prescribe that it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the people to STOP their government if it gets out of hand.

          • Joe1 says:

            Technically, preparing to fight against a coup is not sedition. What is treason is what the Sons of Liberty did in order to enforce the rights that the constitution spelled out as immutable. They rebelled against the crown and overthrew the colonial government. In fact, the British didn’t seem to recognize us as a separate government for how many years? I guess I can let people look up the War of 1812. Too bad many people seem to think that it’s just a nice piece of paper that can be ignored when inconvenient, or an opposing view that there isn’t a common power behind it and that only the Supreme Court can decide if something’s against the constitution. If enough people disbelieve a law’s legitimacy, then it might as well not be a law but a decree. I’m sure you can plenty of views besides these two. The anarchists don’t even care as to them it’s just a dead tree used by ‘the man’ selectively to ‘oppress them’. ;)

      • walkin says:

        +1 if there is a will there’s a way. sadly sometimes that will is pretty bad.

        If there was only a way to get people to only think happy thoughts. This way I could have my openbolt belt fed guns and shoot them at my rotten watermelons in peace. (I’m gun enthusiast and yes that’s what i like to do)

  9. mizzle says:

    I had considered printing an SKS mag due to lack of local availability. Glad to see it can actually work.

    • edonovan says:

      I would rather find a different method of producing one. 3D printing just isn’t durable enough for my tastes. And you’d still need springs and followers, which are rapidly being sold out, now.

      • slashsplat says:

        Very short term inconvenience. All will be back in stock in a few months. Parts are NOT banned, including ALL of the parts of an AR, other than the lower receiver. Chillax, the market got hit by panic buying and the mfrs are not stupid enough to build factories to accommodate it, so we have a temporary shortage. be patient.

  10. Halloween_Harry says:

    at least their magazine survived, what was it… 23 more rounds than their printed lower did. lol

  11. james osburn says:

    This is a major turn off from the website.

    • walkin says:

      good. Now go away because there are a lot of people who like 3d printing and guns on here.

    • slashsplat says:

      Thanks for sharing. Just hit the BACK BUTTON and you won’t have to be bothered thinking.

    • Joe1 says:

      What, you didn’t notice the highly libertarian or anarchist leanings on a HARDWARE HACKING site?! Oh, the shame! Next, you’ll tell me that a site called “Earth news” doesn’t promote nuclear/coal power or speed demons AKA race cars. :/

      In further news, the CPUSA wants a government monopsony on gun possession. Not ownership, since you know, they’re the CP and it’s the government.

  12. It isn’t possible to modify Vics suppressor (or any other extruded design) to fit centerfire firearms with current materials technology. Steel is required for the primary baffle.

  13. bas[tiaan] says:

    Although this printing stuff might all look freaky, as a trained toolmaker [my colleagues worldwide] and i were always capable of making a lot of perhaps not so legal stuff with just a few simple tools. As long as you are cunning, can drill, bend, weld and mabye mill… There are doc’s, manuals and techniques a few clicks away. So nothing new here really. It seems just a bit quicker & above all [thats freakier] easier to repeat. What scares me most is that now people who DONT KNOW WHAT THE F… THEY ARE DOING could print anything including weaponry.
    You could –and can– always basically build whatever you want, if you want[ed] it bad enough
    Please read learn think be conscious and share

  14. c3p says:

    So happy alle Americans found new ways to print Guns, gotta have your guns. Gotta luv Umerica!
    Grtz from Europe!

    • msis says:

      I shall feed the troll.

      You do know that in the last 30 years an amazingly huge 538 Americans have died in mass shootings. Did you know more people have been killed by drunk driving in the EU in the last 15 days?

      • c3p says:

        You are (of course) right. BUT: Traffic fatalities are declining, because of regulations and technological progress.
        I don’t see many Regulations with guns and technological progress might in fact make things worse (at least until there is a turret that can detect the start of a mass shooting).
        For a satirical take (which features all problem imo) watch the Daily Show Jan.08:

        http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-january-8-2013-stanley-mcchrystal

        • msis says:

          I appreciate your reply. My point more specifically is that trying to solve difficult problems with a relatively low impact to society is extremely wasteful while large problems are left under helped. Take medical research for instance. Great fervor towards breast cancer as a huge killer, yet heart disease is the number one killer of both sexes. If we have limited resources then larger problems should be a priority.

          Just think of it – in the US 11,000 people died last year due to drunk driving. If we completely eliminate all mass shootings we will save 18 people per year. If we reduce drunk driving fatalities by just 1%, that would save 110 people. Though economics does not always apply cleanly to social problems.

    • Steve0 says:

      If it wasn’t for American guns all of Europe would be speaking German, and there’d be none of those pesky non-Aryan people.
      You’re welcome, from America!

      • JB says:

        +1. LOL.

      • randomdude says:

        not really as without loans from america germany wouldn’t be able to fix their industry and start war…

        • macona says:

          If it was not for Europe’s forcing of the Treaty of Versailles the Nazi party may have never taken power and started the 2nd war.

          • randomdude says:

            lol dude they still teach you that BS in school ?? So if someone is poor, robs someone and kills him it’s the victims fault because the victim worked hard his entire life while the poor guy just drank and started fights (and failed miserably) at local pubs??

          • msis says:

            @randomdude

            You are arguing his point for him. After the Great War (never forget Armistice Day) France and to a lesser extent the UK wanted to outright punish the German people. They removed may privileges and rights of all German citizens, even ones not born yet. They carved up Germany’s colonies (which eventually led to the massive ever ongoing military strife that still wracks parts of Africa) and in doing so made the country’s international standing and economic independence very weak. It was a soft form of subjugation where humiliation and depression of the people happened on a massive scale. The National Socialist Party was really a Fascist party. If you know anything about the birth of governmental systems you would be well to remember that Fascist societies are birthed from a disenfranchised, fearful populous where firm discipline and military might is seen as the only way to regain control of their own destiny. The reason why Germany became extremely expansionist where Fascist Spain did not was because of where the uncertainty came from: intentional action by the rest of Europe instead of internal forces.

            In summary you are offended by the idea that you should blame the victim while simultaneously blaming one. Germany at the Treaty of Versailles was the loser of a dog fight, pushed into a corner and then poked with sticks by the rest of Europe for twenty years until it grew rabid. None of this explanation makes it moral, but it does make it understandable. The knowledge of knowing how it came to be will help us prevent it from happening again.

            …And knowing is half the battle! etc. etc.

      • Train1 says:

        I’m so stealing that line…

      • Eirinn says:

        If it wasn’t for Europe, America wouldn’t exist.

        You’re welcome.

      • g says:

        haha funny but very true

  15. wazoo says:

    morons and their guns, printed or not. Just keep making yourself look stupid America.

    • slashsplat says:

      Looking stupid? Are you looking at the same list of accomplishments that America has achieved? You cannot appreciate that the same spirit that gave use the Bill of Rights (all of them) is the spirit that has made the US the most accomplished nation on Earth but almost any measure. It’s a package, warts and all.

  16. diaf says:

    “national conversation about things that look scary.”

    Guess we know where the author stands. Mow ‘em all down them and their bratty little schoolchildren! Yeehaw! #MERICA :D

  17. pokey says:

    If you have the tools already, printing mags would probably be cheaper than buying them in the current economy. 30 round mags for ARs (if you can find them) are pushing $40 a piece, compared to the normal < $20.

  18. MikeK says:

    Another project for little boys with Rambo fantasies.

  19. shaun says:

    How do you morons think actual gun manufacturers make their prototypes? They CAD them up, send the file to one of 1000’s CNC rapid prototype houses (not 3D printers), they load the file into their CNC milling machine, it carves the thing out of an aluminum block, and send you the part. They don’t even ask what the part is for, hard drive, car, airplane, gun, bomb, whatever, they don’t care. In fact my hard drive company even uses some CNC houses overseas and I have no doubt that they’d carve me out a gun part and ship it to me. Despite their being laws against shipping things like this through the mail. In fact I have shipped one through the mail, to a friend of mine to work on and send back. It’s not like the post office opens and inspects the package. Plus, even if they did, 99% of them would never know it was part of a firearm.

    So the liberal idiots notion that these laws are somehow protecting them are ignorant. If the gun toting crazies really wanted to hurt you, they would. And the 22 minute response time for calling 911 is about 20 minutes more then they’d need to do it. something that statistically very rarely happens.

    According to the FBI stats (mathematics, so most liberals won’t get it), only about 400 people per year are injured from rifles (all rifles, not just assaults rifles). Compared to around 16,000/yr by drunk drivers. In fact more people are beaten to death every year then shot by rifles. Flu actually kills more then all of those added together. So what should we be more afraid of. Gun guys, drunks, fist fights, or the folks that served you lunch not using hand sanitizer. Statistics say the latter, but like I said, since it’s math, most liberals won’t get it. To bad we couldn’t outlaw stupid, then we could sell guns in vending machines and there wouldn’t be a problem. But then how would a democrat ever get elected if it was for a bunch of idiot sheep.

    • randomdude says:

      Can’t agree more… an average machine shop has enough tools to make any gun you want to. Today everyone can make guns and you don’t need a 3d printer buy a decent lathe and a mill and you’ve got everything you need

    • Moorbo says:

      All democrats are the same? Way to stick it to all those people who believe all the same stupid things unlike you, who can clearly think for yourself.

      Here are some more statistics on guns: you are 3 times more likely to get a household member killed by keeping a gun in the home, 5 times more likely to have someone in the home kill themselves, and 12 times more likely for domestic violence to end in death. Good thing you can understand math unlike those stupid liberals so you can get rid of your gun right away. I mean you’re so smart that you stated that you believed that you’ve violated laws on shipping restrictions on a public forum.

      • HC says:

        Even more:

        Owning a pool is more than ninety times as likely to cause an accidental death as a firearm. For children ages five and below, it’s almost five hundred times as likely. (National Center for Health Statistics, National Spa and Pool Institute).

        11% of police shootings, that is, non-misses, kill an innocent person. Only 2% of shootings by citizens do the same. Combined with the fact that only one tenth of one percent of defensive uses of guns results in death, the odds of a private citizen who is defending him or herself with a gun killing a bystander is less than one in twenty-six thousand. (Shall Issue: The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws, Cramer and Kopel) (Point Blank, Guns and Violence in America, Gary Kleck)

      • slashsplat says:

        “you are 3 times more likely to get a household member killed by keeping a gun in the home, 5 times more likely to have someone in the home kill themselves, and 12 times more likely for domestic violence to end in death. Good thing you can understand math…”

        Your HuffPost statistics were debunked above. Cite a source.

    • g says:

      one of the best posts on this page! thanks – shaun

    • Joe1 says:

      Well I support gun ownership (as a self-defense tool much like locks on doors and security cameras at a convenience store do) but I have to mention this:
      Claiming that liberals have a monopoly on pig-headedness is about like saying that conservatives all are Baptists.
      To people of all political beliefs and philosophies: You’re welcome!

      I also like to think of it as like this:
      Group A likes whatever’s new, regardless of it’s better.
      Group B likes whatever they’re used to, regardless of it’s stupid.
      Group C likes to use what works best for them.
      Group D likes to sell both obsolete cr*p and inferior ‘new’ stuff equally to A & B and make fun of C.
      (Real people might be members of more than 1 or none of them, though)

  20. Hirudinea says:

    Won’t somebody think of the children? Really the children are getting tired of all this gun debate shit, they just want the guns! (And if you can print guns you can print other useful stuff.)

  21. blank says:

    Giving guns to anyone capable of getting a hold of a 3D printer will happen inevitably. That said when a 747 crashes into another building and the terrorists were using 3D printed weapons then you will a lot of blood on your hands. I hope you can live with that.

    • Ben H. says:

      First of all the tech to make completely composite firearms is not here. you can 3d print some parts, but some at least will have to be made of metal.

      Second you make the fallacious assumption that not creating or outlawing the technology in the us would somehow magically deter a well funded and organized terrorist organization from developing and employing the same.

      Third blaming the inventor for the misuse of their inventions is absurd. Do you believe the blood of thousands of japanese civilians is on Oppenheimer’s hands? Do you believe that innocent blood is on the hands of Samuel Colt, John Garand, or Mikhail Kalashnikov?

    • Whatnot says:

      ROFL, I think the TSA has some responsibility if they let people board with AK47’s.

      And I also think all-plastic brittle AK47’s will kill their users instantly, case solved.

  22. Sam says:

    Completely normal standard capacity*.

  23. john says:

    I hate guns. Almost as much as I hate gun nuts, This article should shine a light on 3d printings ever increasing ability to fabricate contraband.

    • camerin says:

      Guns are not the problem, it is bullets.

      On a more serious note, even if they have a design that is printable. On a typical lamination printer, it is very likely it will explode while firing and injure the user. It will not be long before some idiot hurts themselves. But the heartless bastard in me says let the, get hurt.

      Finally a “gun” could be a rubber band, random length of tubing, pebble and a piece of wood. A little duct tape and it is good to go. Probably as reliable as the 3d printed ones, and a lot less traceable. Look up zip guns. You cannot stop reasonably moderate guns. It is too broad of an area

    • Volfram says:

      so… you’re saying 3D printers need to be banned?

      • digusted says:

        If these gun nuts keep going in this direction, yes.

        • Since banning thins works so well, why not just ban murder? Oh wait…

        • P.S. The way you use the term “gun nut” shows that you’ve been brainwashed by propaganda. People that commit violent crimes are criminals and murderers. By attaching the weapon of choice to the label, you’re demonizing an inanimate object, and shift blame to the gun, instead of the decision made by a psychopath.

          This is a common tactic used by governments who want to disarm their slaves.

          • Joe1 says:

            Actually, I use the phrase ‘gun nut’ to describe pretty much anyone who obsesses over what other people own. Because you’d have to be a nut to thinking forcing people to not own a gun is going to work in the USA while still being a place worth living in. Ditto for forced ownership or irresponsible possession. You have bonafide police that shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a stun gun for example!

        • Volfram says:

          So you want to ban any device which can be used to create a weapon? Or just any device which can be used to produce a gun?

    • Mark says:

      Clearly the problem is welders. With them, people could fabricate a whole AK in only a weekend!

      Please. It’s new technology, and suddenly people are realizing it could conceivably be used to make a gun. Fear is stupid, in this case.

    • JimBob says:

      Would you feel better if people were beating each other to death using a baseball bat?
      The truth is that the vast majority of gun deaths involve a pistol and the killer is known to the victim. Check the statistics.

      • DougR says:

        Technically a vast majority of gun deaths involve a pistol and the victim and killer are the same person. More suicide with pistols than I care to think about. :-(

        • Ben H. says:

          You’d prefer suicide by hanging or poison perhaps? How about addressing what leads to suicide rather than the tool used?

          • c3p says:

            I’m pretty sure Male Suicide drops, when there are less Guns available. The work required to execute the plan would stop some.

          • efter the fyhn. get 'im kijer. everynew'x wints awesre. says:

            why would someone only want to kill themselves if a gun is available?

  24. moo says:

    Is the springs and the follower also made by them or did they buy it? Follower has to be pretty tough if made from normal plastic I would assume it wear out quickly.

    • Jerry says:

      you can buy mag springs at brownells or most other places like that and you can buy followers in bulk as well but you could print the follower and just keep spares if you needed to

  25. ejonesss says:

    considering at a time when america/world is reeling from the school shooting.

    • digusted says:

      Just goes to show how horrible these gun nuts are

    • Volfram says:

      Yes. Reeling, and working on ensuring that something like that NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.

      We can either continue doing what we’ve been doing all along, punishing law-abiding citizens, advertising places where ordinary people will be unarmed, and continue plowing forward into shooting sprees of ever-increasing frequency or severity, or we can be pro-active, and ensure when some psycho tries to murder children, the children will be protected by someone who can SHOOT BACK.

      • You do realize giving school teachers handguns will mean more people get shot, right?

        It’s all about accidental discharge. Give enough guns to enough people, and someone’s going to get shot. It won’t be on purpose, either.

        This is a very back-of-the-envelope calculation, but let’s just assume there are about 200 million people in the US able to own a handgun. About half the population actually owns a gun, so let’s just say there are 100 million gun owners in the US (which is about right, from a cursory googling).

        Now, in 2009, the FBI says there were 23,237 *accidental* shootings. Divide that by 100 Million and you get 0.0002, a VERY rough estimate of the number of accidental shootings per gun owner per year.. Not exact, but we’re just spitballing it here.

        There are about 1.5 million primary school teachers in the US, so multiply it out by .8 Million (I’m guessing 3rd grade teachers are more skewed towards the non-gun owning side), and you get an absurd number: almost 200. That’s a ball park of how many *additional* accidental shootings you’re going to get if you give every primary school teacher a glock. Most of them won’t be fatal, but you’re proposing a policy that would have more teachers shooting themselves/other people than EVERY school shooting EVER, EVERY YEAR.

        No disrespect to teachers, but I’m guessing they won’t be ones to go to the range as much as they should, and you might not be able to drill the ‘booger hook and bang switch’ idea into them as well as someone who actively seeks out a firearm, instead of just being given one. Yeah, that 200 figure is probably a little low.

        Giving teachers guns is a terrible idea. It’ll be like a Columbine or Sandy Hook every few months. Under the news radar, of course, but a lot of people are going to get shot and a few people are going to die.

        • Gert says:

          “There are about 150 million primary school teachers in the US,”
          lolwut

          (absolutely agree with your final statement; just can’t follow the typo’d numbers)

        • steveg says:

          No! Don’t give the teachers guns, that’s retarded, they can’t even handle the job they have now. I want a real cop there to protect my kid, a cop isn’t going to accidently shoot somebodies kid, they know what they’re doing. Not to mention having daily contact with a positive police roll model could potentialy teach millions of children to respect them and not break the law.

        • M4CGYV3R says:

          Dude, you don’t math good.

        • macona says:

          Utah allows teachers to carry. There have been no school shootings there.

          • disgusted says:

            I have this rock that repells tigers. I know it works because I’ve never been attacked by tigers!

            You gun nuts really won’t be satisfied until the world burns, will you? Are you really that emasulated that you can only define yourself by guns?

          • Jeff says:

            hey bud tell me why dont people mug cops? i bet they have magic rocks too!

            also on the topic of emasCulation:

            http://www.tbuckner.com/SEXGUN.HTM

        • Kris Lee says:

          Did you check how many of those 20k did involve somebody besides the gun owner?

          What were the situations where the accidental discharge occured?

          Facts, I just like facts.

          • Eirinn says:

            You like facts that are impossible for you to filter or use out of context that they don’t exist :)

            School shootings are extremely rare in Europe. I can’t remember when I’ve heard of any. Shootings are rare too, they happen, but usually only involving criminals.

            I am not American and I cannot put myself in your shoes so I will not comment on the gun legislation.

            What I will comment on though is putting a gun in a nervous school teachers hands. Protecting the students IS NOT their responsibility. Their responsibility is to ensure your children are educated. The moment you put guns in the hands of teachers you might as well close down the police force or the gun control protocols for being useless.

          • @Eirinn
            1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Europe

            Also, don’t forget the Norway massacre in 2011, where 77 people were murdered, though that was a summer camp, not a school.

            2) Why do you assume all teachers are nervous and can’t handle firearms? Most people can be taught gun safety and how to defend themselves. Cops are not magical gods with special abilities. They’re people like everyone else. Police have no legal obligation to protect you in the US btw.

            Furthermore, nobody is saying every teacher must be armed. But if the choice was there, criminals might think twice before going crazy in a school. So called gun-free zones are just advertisements to psychopaths for unarmed prey.

          • mental2k says:

            Did you actually read that wiki page, y’know the one where you have to link to a different page to see all the American shootings. It’s had more school shootings than the rest of the developed world put together. The UK had one, 17 years ago. But hey, more guns are the answer, right?

          • m1ndtr1p says:

            @Silver Bullet

            The police have no legal obligation to protect you in the US? Really? So what exactly are they there for? Can you be any more ignorant?

            I’ve seen plenty of stupidity around the internet, but that just takes the cake.

          • Jeff says:

            @mint trap

            ever heard of google?

            http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

            you must look in the mirror a lot to see all that stupidity.

        • Leif says:

          “It’s all about accidental discharge.”

          No, not really. Accidental shootings usually occur when the gun is being handled. For example, hunting accidents, somebody is actually pulling the trigger they just aren’t hitting what they intended to hit. Or by dropping the gun, a well designed gun shouldn’t go off that way but we are talking about small fractions here, occasionally they might. Or accidents while cleaning the weapon, woops, forgot to unload, bang!

          A teacher with a concealed weapon will keep that weapon concealed! The only time it should ever come out is when a crazy person is there shooting people and needs to be stopped. For the vast majority of teachers this will never happen (thankfully).

          There are some very low profile slings made for this kind of purpose that are worn under a shirt. They keep the gun out of site (you don’t want the kids knowing it’s there) and very secure, it isn’t getting jostled at all. Granted, a teacher wearing one of these will not be able to get it out if a shooter enters his/her room first. The teacher in the next room over can though.

          A teacher who does not keep his/her weapon concealed… except in the rare, extreme situation where it is needed… should promptly cease to be a teacher, perhaps banned from even entering a school ever again.

        • Volfram says:

          Israel has armed teachers and armed volunteers at their schools. How many school shootings do they have over there?

      • steveg says:

        Amen brother! Obama gets an armed gaurd at his kids school to insure this kind of tragedy never happens to him, as a law abiding tax paying citizen is it too much to ask for to put a cop in the school where my son is? Weren’t All men created equal? What makes him more special then us?how many school shootings could be stopped by just having a trained cop on the premises, but i suppose they have speeders to catch and that apparently is a better use of my money then protecting children in the one place where there parents can’t be there to do it themselves.

      • Andrew says:

        The idea that more guns will somehow do some good is too simple a solution to what appears to be an epidemic of violence. I also don’t think there are any simple solutions to whether regular folks should have access to hi-cap clips and assault weapons. What I do know beyond a doubt is that all weapon sales should require a background check. It won’t stop all gun violence but it will stop some of it and that is a step in the right direction.

        • It’s hardly an epidemic, though the MSM propaganda machine would like you to believe so.
          A gun is a tool, and you can use it for good or evil. If you’re buying a tool to protect your family, do you want the best money can buy, or do you want restrictions, which the criminal will ignore? What happens if a criminal breaks into your house at night, armed with an Uzi and all you have is a government-sanctioned revolver or a bolt-action rifle? What if the criminal has a partner and they’re both armed? Suddenly a “high capacity” magazine seems like a bad idea.
          If you ban all guns, you will live in a world where only criminals have guns.

          • disgusted says:

            wow, you’re pretty much the definition of a crazed gun nut. Are you really that afraid of the world? I find it really sad that HAD posted this article and gave these despicible people more exposure

          • tievoli says:

            if you face someone like that its most likely one of your friends.
            he just got in some mental problems like you could at any time.
            and then he used his tool, for his freedom, you might call it criminal.
            What freedom is depends on which side of the gun you are.

            So what could you do.. say hi friend i’m a gun addict too.
            Give him something he want, sell crack or drugs, or give him money

            Another option would be to run away, take your cellphone and call police.

            And whatever gun you have you wont be faster then these “new” friends who had planned the night.

            Your gun is not a symbol of freedom, its a symbol of keeping freedom in hostage.
            A symbol to create fear. So you will buy more guns and thereby make people who dont care shit about you extremely rich.

          • Andrew says:

            @Silver Bullet: How the heck did you get from my post that said “all weapon sales should require a background check” to “ban all guns”. Were you reading a different post when you hit reply?

          • Joe1 says:

            Wow, exactly what part of that was crazy? Any talk of aliens? I didn’t read anything about how all the neighbors are out to get them, either. The fact that someone owns a gun or thinks that guns aren’t the worst thing ever, doesn’t make someone insane, no more than voting for some politician you don’t like does. What is crazy is thinking that because you say it, it must be true.

        • slashsplat says:

          Awesome idea. Check ALL purchases. Make that a LAW! Then, all the crazies and criminals will HAVE to comply. Brilliant. Maybe we should make shooting people itself illegal, and that will stop ALL the shootings.

          • johnathon says:

            says the guy who sells bolt lubricant..

            you obviously have a financial bias on this issue

    • Rob says:

      It was a tradgedy, yes. People were killed. There are many tradgedies every day. Look at drunk driving deaths, look at malaria deaths, look at chemical abuse deaths, look at tobacco deaths, look at gang violence and domestic violence deaths, look at cancer deaths, etc… Every one a tradgedy. But since when does one death get to be more weighty than another? Death is death. It’s sad, it’s tragic, especially when it’s untimely… but then most are. But I hardly think that America or the world is reeling from the Newtown shooting.

      If there’s reeling to be done regarding that unfortunate event, it’s coming from the politicians and the media. The world should be reeling from the tradgedies unfolding in places like Syria or Darfur. Reactions are a function of scale.

      But somehow we seem to manage to avoid being human and we only choose to care about people who look like us, think like us, sound like us, etc… When we get all caught up in the cause du jour, we ultimately do a disservice to everyone else and we end up looking like short-sighted fools.

      The root issues are not laws of science (metallurgy) or physics (propulsion, reaction, energy conversion), the root issues are matters of morality and conscience. Any miscreant who wants to do harm isn’t going to be suddenly converted to a choir boy because he can’t score a gun in a back alley… he’s going to find some other tool to accomplish his intended goal. Most do… blades, pipes, rocks, etc… are far cheaper (and much less traceable) anyway.

      When we can address issues of the heart and of the mind, then we will see reductions in violence and unnecessary death. Merely treating the symptom(s) won’t change anything.

  26. Timboslice says:

    Printing that ‘moderator’ looks like a good way to get yourself thrown in prison. If you’re thinking about making a sound reducing device that could conceivably be used on a real firearm please do the research, fill out the correct ATF NFA paperwork, get printed, get pictures, pay the tax, and wait for ATF approval to do it legally. Yes, we all know it would be blown to pieces…the ATF probably won’t care.

    • Joe1 says:

      Well the stupidest part is that a silencer of any kind is actually rude NOT to use. But hey, people think that a bunch of cosmetic BS is the definition of an ‘assault rifle’ (note: not ‘Military assault rifle’ as they are also intellectually lazy in that department, too).

  27. steveg says:

    Ok, as an American who does hobby gunsmithing i can tell you you’re not going to be 3d printing a gun or even a decent magazine any time soon; event a plastic sig or glock is made of a very high quality polymer and have quite a few metal parts, there’s no way around it. That’s not what this is about demonstrations point out the futility of gun control laws because it points out to the general public just how easy it can be to make or get ahold of. Criminals will always be willing to break the law, they’re never going to just give up because you made a law. Yes you could easily build an entire ar-15 in a well equipped shop such as mine in a weekend and no that’s not illegal. Moreover there are plenty of less complicated designs such as the sten sub machinegun which was designed specificaly to be buildable in the average mufler shop and used magazines and ammo from the nazis sub machinegun, all the way down to the jaycos which can be made with nothing but a hacksaw, a drill and some files. You can’t uninvent the gun, and while passing a law may make a lot of you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, it doesn’t actually do anything to make anybody any safer

    • steveg says:

      Just a warning: do not even think about building a silencer or other nfa controled firearm without first filling out a form 1, filing it with the atf, paying the tax and getting the paperwork back from them. This isn’t easy you need a signature from the chief of police where you live and it takes a long time to get through the red tape, but if you so much as start building one without doing this first you will be in direct violation of the National Firearms Act of 1934 and you might as well be driving around with a machinegun in your trunk. That thing is most definatly a silencer, the atf doesn’t care if you made it out of plastic. Zip guns fall under the classification of ‘any other wepon’ and as such highly illegal. You can’t legally make a machinegun without a manufacturing level FFL from the atf and then it must be owned by the business and if you ever let the license lapse you must immediately turn your machineguns over to the atf or sell them to a law enforcement offer. You may however as a private party purchase one if it is old enough and you once again go through the trouble of filing a form 1 with the atf, if you can find such a gun expect to pay upwards of $10,000 for it.

      • tievoli says:

        I could explain you how you can create a perfect metal gun from a normal mendel printer, it will be better then best you possibly could make.
        Lighter, stronger, with a mathematical precision unlike you’ve seen anything before.

        But and here is a big difference i wont tell you how to do it.
        Neither would i put it here on hackaday, or display any of my metal prints.

        And that’s a big choice, because people like you would miss use such technology. Did i steal from opensource community ok partly but i wont let my ideas to be used by people who could create such awful devices. I know you like to shoot, think of it as a great tool or self defence or whatever. Just like a drug addicts i’m sure you have a near perfect excuse for your weirdo hobbies. Notice dough that your lobbies are guilty of shootings at schools and shopping malls, happening these days.

        Those lobbies try to blame it on the individuals, but that’s the common mentally ill part.
        Blaming it on an individual and not looking at the main cause, and responsibilities.
        Refusing to see; that anyone if pushed enough, will crack under mental pressure, is shortsighted.

        As anyone will mentally crack, its not ok to legally own a gun.
        If you do so still your a potential mass killer, or state enemy at any time.
        it be safer if such people be locked away from normal society
        as their guns dont contribute to the safety of it

        You need to get out of that civilian arms race.

        • Jeff says:

          i love that in your little world keeping an idea to yourself is “stealing from the community”

          i think i can safely disregard the rest of your asinine drivel.

        • Joe1 says:

          “You need to get out of that civilian arms race.”
          As soon as all the world’s governments get out of it, too. Because that’s what ‘gun restrictions’ are all about. They’re not restrictions at all for the powers-that-be. You should be very afraid of someone who says “trust me, I can do anything for you” while at the same time telling you “don’t do it yourself”. You’ll end up a straight-up slave.

      • slashsplat says:

        “This isn’t easy you need a signature from the chief of police where you live and it takes a long time to get through the red tape…”
        All VERY easy. The Sheriff is happy to sign the paper, and the process is painless. Takes a few months. No big deal.

    • David says:

      Your logic is wrong. Most criminals and crazed mass murderers are not gunsmiths. States with more restrictive gun laws *do* have less gun violence.

      • Bob says:

        “States with more restrictive gun laws *do* have less gun violence”
        Really? Want to tell that to people in DC, Chicago or most of California where the strictest gun laws are yet have the highest violent crime rates?

        • static says:

          Of course islands of strict gun laws is a sea of lax gun laws, will have strict gun laws that appear to fail. That’s not rocket science, but it flies by those make the argument against regulation by pointing to those places as evidence that strict gun laws can’t work. They can and they do is the US, when the last time full automatic guns have been used criminally in the US? Not to mention the US has yet to succumbed to tyranny. I mean tyranny ,not this make believe shit some use to make themself out to be a victim when by all measures they have it made. You are going to have to come up with better argument if we want to retain the law abiding citizens relatively easy access to gun purchase.

          • Joe1 says:

            If you give up the 2nd, the 3rd and 1st are soon to follow. Indeed, it works for most of the enumerated (read: not exclusive!) rights. You refuse to let people to talk to each other in groups, and they’ll protest. Stop them from protesting and they’ll either resort to retaliation for your violence or get rolled over by your tanks. This is civil rights 101 – look up ‘Tenement square’ or ‘June Fourth Incident’ and see what happens when the enforcers have no fear of reprisals. This isn’t crazy or theoretical talk – people actually died because no one dared lift a finger to help.

  28. jojo says:

    here I am being contrary again

    30 rounds is standard capacity for an AR15, not high

    • static says:

      Pretty god damn high if you are the one under attack waiting for an opportunity to make any move to better your survival chances, I believe.

      • Joe1 says:

        For home defense, many use shot guns or higher-caliber handguns. In actual practice, you will likely miss and they may be several attackers and no one ever said they had too much ammo after a gunfight. Besides, the signature sound of a shotgun… Even armed men are afraid of them since even a 80-yo with cataracts can aim it. :D

        I’m more interested in why people concentrate on the fractions of a percent of the time a gun would even _matter at all_ and not the several other lines of defense that should come into play long before lethal force (last resort) is used. There’s an interesting psychology in the romanticism and demonizing of a gun-owner defending their home, but not the motion-sensing cameras, the dog, the well-lit yard, the home-as-castle (read: fortress doctrine), knowing and getting along with your neighbors well, or just plain not presenting a good target(2nd benefit of a dog is the ‘beware of dog’ sign!). The even bigger fraction of time where your life and quality of it are on the line, is when you drive like an idiot on the interstate highway in rush-hour traffic. :P

  29. J.Eriksson says:

    I don’t get it. Why is this so special? Because its a gun? Because of the 3D-printing? Anything that is made out of plastics or any other material for that matter can be replaced by printed parts, you just need to understand the different material properties and compensate accordingly – basic engineering.

    Plastic magazines are old news and therefor so is printed magazines, because 3D-printing is a great way to prototype the product before the expensive injection molds are made for the real parts.

    What you guys don’t seem to understand is how amateurish this printed magazine is.
    They use printed parts from Objets Geometries polyjet technology which makes parts with one of the best surface finish and precision, but its expensive and probably the worst choice for durable parts. Polyjet printed parts are very brittle and will shatter from bending and it will deform in not very high temperatures, hot tap water or direct sunlight is too much. All this can be non issues if you know about them and design the parts with it in mind. But this magazine looks like its a cheap copy of the original metal part with no additional support and from the looks of it, impossible to manufacture it other then with 3D-printing – poor designing. It is also in direct contact with the hot metal parts.

    There are a ridiculous amount of printing materials, some which you can make the whole gun or even cars out of and it will be lighter and more durable then the original but it will cost unimaginable sums of money. But fiberglass reinforced SLS is surprisingly cheap and very durable. You could probably make carbonfiber reinforced SLA parts, used in formula 1 racing, for the same cost of polyjet parts. Polyjet is primary for reproduce the feeling of injection molded plastic parts or surface finish for master parts for silicone molds.

    They state on their website that their goal is to make single use printable guns with the most commonly available 3D-printers – the RepRap machines with FDM technology. So why are they testing their designs with polyjet printed parts when no injection molding is involved and FDM printed parts behaves very differently?

    I don’t understand this hype about 3D-printing which has been the standard way of developing products for 10-20 years. Building your own 3D-printer or any other project and trying to take it to a higher level with cheap tools, great thinking and then share it with everyone – that is awesome, but trying to reproduce things being done ages ago with tools that engineers at that time could only dream of and still fail to understand basic engineering and doing everything wrong – is not.

  30. Andy7 says:

    Come on Hack-A-Day, enough posts about weapons already. THINK before you post stuff on here, making weapons is a BAD THING, end of argument.

    Why to you keep glorifying this kind of thing – STOP IT!
    You’ve really spoiled this website for me and many others now.

    I won’t be following this thread now because there wil be some fool who will try to defend people’s ‘rights’ to defend themselves, bear ams and the rest of that crap. There’s nothing more to add to the discussion apart from you guys STOPPING POSTING THREADS ABOUT MAKING WEAPONS.

    Thanks.

    • disgusted says:

      Thank you! The glorification and fetishizing weapons has gotten out of hand and needs to stop.

    • Sienar Fleet Systems says:

      Thanks!
      This senseless “hack” (what do you need weapons for?) really spoiled the fun reading HAD.

    • digimoto64 says:

      No one made you read it. Take your finger and scroll past the post if you aren’t interested in it. I assure you it will be much quicker and easier for you than clicking on it and posting a pointless comment.

    • Anonymous says:

      Are you seriously asserting that individuals do not have an inherent, inalienable, pre-political right to defend themselves against violence? The right to life, and by extension, protecting that life from those who would take it, is THE MOST BASIC human right that exists.

  31. voxnulla says:

    Reading a comment thread on gun control in the US reads like a 101 in argumentative failure. I don’t know whether these trigger happy masses roam the intarwebz, or whether it brings the worst out in Americans, but if you print it in book form It would read like a Tom Clancy novel before the editors got their hands on it.
    When you lot decent into civil war, I’m sure you’ll make it big and spectacular like you do! In the mean time the sane world will have china as the new ally.

  32. tievoli says:

    I wonder why they make it, are they funded by some political active group who is against @home 3d printing ?

    Possession of any gun should be criminalized and those people should be put to jail.
    And so i think half of all Americans should go to jail too, because they own a gun.
    This is not democracy at work, its keeping politics and democracy as a hostage.
    If people like to live in a country without gun-shoots, the only way is to ban all Guns.
    If people keep guns they as a group all enforce risk of school shootings, they dont like to be blamed for as group, but guilt is their part, for keeping such system in place.

    So dont blame violant video games etc, its you yourself who owns a gun and is a potential risk. Erratic mental behavior can happen in any human life, for reasons outside of his personal actions.
    I am convinced that i can make anyone enough angry to pull a trigger.
    Dont think your so mentally strong, killing is in the human spirit, we have a history of war.
    So to protect society people need to be protected against themselves and eachother. And quite simply if there are no guns, you wont be able to shoot yourself or catch a bullet from someone else, its not that hard to see.

    I also strongly believe that those people dont deserve to be here at hackaday.
    If i show you how to create an awful nasty pipe-bomb.. should it also on hackaday ?
    Then you might as well put some terrorist manual here, to explain how you can disrupt your country. Should that be the future of Hackaday ??… i mean there is a choice here

    • disgusted says:

      Sadly a lot of people don’t get that, and it makes me ashamed that they are also Americans. They are so frightened and seem to have no self worth beyond their abaility to kill. Sickening.

      • Law Abiding Citizen says:

        I pay taxes, I obey the law and don’t even speed. I carry a gun with me every where I go, and not for my own protection as much as the protection of my friends and family. I really hope the Guns that you fight so hard to take away are the same Guns that save your life some day. God Bless.

        http://rense.com/general76/univ.htm

      • an American says:

        The above post without ignorant generalized assumptions is reduced to: “They are also Americans. Sickening.” The way one measures others (about whom you seem to know very little) is often a reflection of one’s self.

        With all of the people we see around world being controlled/exploited/killed by tyrants, you would think there would be more understanding when it comes to those who want the ability to defend themselves.

        That being said – historically, people such as yourself are the ones that will be coming to people like myself for protection when these tyrants start sending their armed servants to enforce their will.

        You can keep trusting a government that wants its citizens disarmed when they start sending ‘doctors’ to abort your child because you’ve had more than one; and have not purchased the proper ‘license’ to have another. If this ‘style of government’ suits you better than your current situaiton, China might be a more amiable place for you to live.

    • NETim says:

      This is entirely projection on your part. You may not be stable enough to handle the responsibility of carrying a gun but everyday, millions of Americans do, without incident.

      You make your choices. You don’t get to make choices for me.

    • Nicholas says:

      why not just ban murder that would also work to stop the mass shootings, wait murder is already illegal. The only thing that will work to minimize mass shootings is to lock up all the crazies, and stop letting criminals off with just a slap on the wrist.

      • voxnulla says:

        What an utterly stupid comment to make. Why then ban anything or legislate anything?
        For all I know you are one of the crazies and seeing that the us is the country with the worlds highest percentage of citizens locked behind bars, I’d say that wrist slapping isn’t the case and that the locking up seems like it doesn’t work! Duh!

    • DaOne says:

      You are a real piece of work! At least when the black Hitler’s reign fully takes over you will be one of the first on the train. This country was founded with and protected by guns. I am sure your one who will be the first to call someone with a gun when you finally figure out you can’t protect yourself. You are a big part as to why this country is failing as a whole. Keep relying on others to fight your battles and see how that works out for you in the end. Sickening! When this country finally does collapse I am sure you will wish you had a gun because your neighbor that does will have the upper hand. Fools… you will see… its coming faster than you think!

      • voxnulla says:

        You are a basket case!

        On this comment alone, any license for a firearm you have should be revoked.

        • DaOne says:

          Just keep pulling the blanket over your head every time you hear something scary and you should be just fine. Read a history book or two and you will be amazed on how history repeats it self. If you think the great USA is above this that you have a rude awakening coming. A revolution is coming. If you can’t see that you are blind! just wait till the government stops all the “entitlements” and you will see just how great it really is to live without a way to defend yourself. Fools!

    • Joe1 says:

      I blame Hollywood. If one didn’t know better, they’d think that it was deliberate to teach people that the abuse of technology was OK but that owning said technology wasn’t OK. There’s some real schitzoid thinking in that town. Want to know the difference between the US and most other countries that have tons of guns, yet little gun violence per million? Hint: Never heard of Swiss movies advocating a gang lifestyle or glorifying crime.
      And I’ve never heard of a Hollywood actor not having dozens of _armed_ guards protecting them. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

      The problem with attitudes like “Put them all in jail” or “exile them” when talking about gun-owners is it soon leads to “better yet KILL them all – they’re just dirty trouble-makers anyways!”. Bah, irony alert! Reminds me of that “Shoot twice and go home” story where so many hated a certain country that has tons of mountains and trees.

    • SteveA says:

      Wow, you really are insane aren’t you?@stat

  33. Jelle says:

    Ha, lots of very long post, let me add my opinion to the pile.
    This PR organisation has based their premise on the myth that a 3D printer is a magical machine that obviates any need of knowledge of the thing you are trying to make. Most people are not able to assemble a gun, let alone a wonky made one that needs some tweaking to make it work once. Just like buying an expensive camera does not make you a photographer, buying a 3D printer does not make you a gunsmith. If you want to be an amateur gunsmith, the go-to tool is a lathe, a CNC lathe if you want it automated.
    If you want a one-shot-is enough-gun a 3D printer is not the tool of choice, google, a file, a hacksaw and a hammer gets you much further faster.
    Not that guns are good in any way, not at all.

    • randomdude says:

      lol you are mistaken… a 3 d printer will let you build almost anything you want to… the problem is that currently all of them use plastic that’s fairly weak… give this technology 5 or 10 years to mature, wait till the find a way to use metals and maybe then you can build a fully functional .22 cal pistol

      Today substractive processes such as milling are the way to go. If you have a CNC mill you can create an entire gun using it… get a barrel (or hydraulic tubing if you can’t get a barrel)and you’re done

  34. steve says:

    If I see more crap like this i’m just going to have to stop coming here. I used to like how HAD would show reasonably neutral or harmless projects but the subject of firearms and especially assault rifles is something that divides people significantly and has no place on this kind of web site. What’s next, back alley abortion hacks?

    • Joseph says:

      Long time reader here as well. I don’t mind reading about firearm hacks (I actually find them interesting), but this story is more about political propaganda than details of an interesting engineering project.

      I agree as well; more of this and I will cross this site off my reading list.

  35. Maave says:

    I’ve been watching these guys for a while, lots of interest on other forums. 3D printers aren’t the end-all to manufacturing, definitely not the fasted, but unattended use is nice. It doesn’t have to be the fastest or most cost efficient when you can let it run while you’re asleep or at work. Props to these guys for their work

  36. Alex says:

    So many infuriating opinions here. Yeah a 30 round magazine is “standard”. Standard on a goddamn assault rifle. What legitimate need is there for an AR15 in American civilian life? You need 30 rounds from a high power rifle to “defend yourself”? Who are you planning on getting robbed by, a cartel?

    Having a handgun for defending your home is one thing. Having an AR-15 and pretending it’s the same thing is stupid.

    • Law Abiding Citizen says:

      AR15 type weapons are for sport, as in target shooting. The full AR15 ammo is too expensive for my taste, so I converted mine to use regular 22LR ammo. I like my 50 round drum, I don’t have to reload as much, and I can have more fun ‘plinking’ little metal disks.

      And who the hell “plans” to get robbed?

    • voxnulla says:

      “Having a handgun for defending your home is one thing. Having an AR-15 and pretending it’s the same thing is stupid.”

      This is true and the gun-nuts can’t even get this simple concept through their thick and empty skulls. But also don’t forget that the handgun for protection only provides a false sense of security. A legally owned handgun is much more likely to be stolen and used in gun crime then it is to successfully protect the rightful owner.

      • Law Abiding Citizen says:

        “A legally owned handgun is much more likely to be stolen and used in gun crime then it is to successfully protect the rightful owner.”

        If you’re going to give such an obviously controversial opinion and give a statistic, please at least site precedent. If my gun isn’t on my person (holster, pocket, hand) It’s in a gun safe. Nobody is stealing that without a cutting torch or dynamite.

        • voxnulla says:

          Most sane people in the world don’t find that the least bit controversial.
          After the thorough debunking of the gun-lobbies intentional badly conducted statistical research which falsely claimed 2.2 million uses of guns used as protection, which was an overestimate by 22 times, the annual number of stolen guns isn’t extrapolated in this manner. With roughly 250.000 guns REPORTED stolen evey year ending up, by definition, in criminal hands, this sets off rather poorly against those 100.000 cases where a legally owned gun did some “good”.
          Consider that 60% of those stolen guns are handguns, then you start getting a glimpse on the problem and the massive blind sightedness that you cultivate in order to keep your false sense of protection and odd definitions of “freedom”.

          The worst part is, this is the prettiest picture you can paint with these numbers about this controversial topic…

          • Law Abiding Citizen says:

            Again, please site a source. without something to back it up, they’re just your numbers

          • voxnulla says:

            To get a match between the paper on statistical error : “The Myth of Millions of Annual
            Self­_Defense Gun Uses: A Case Study of Survey Overestimating of Rare Events
            ~ David Hemenway”
            I took data from around the same period from the most friendly gun source http://www.firearmsid.com/feature%20articles/0900guic/guns%20used%20in%20crime.htm I could find. ( These are people who would gladly bend the numbers )

            Current research by Harvard paint a far more horrific picture. I suggest you go there.

            I hope this cures your apathy in regards to favouring searching for facts by yourself over passively holding on to gut-feelings. Only a coward plays this “cite the sources” game like this on a bleeding comment section of a blog.

            Do you have any opinions of yourself that is not simply parroting gun propaganda or demanding facts, numbers and cite because you yourself seem to have baby seal arms?

          • Law Abiding Citizen says:

            Oh I love clubbing baby seals!

          • Joe1 says:

            Be aware that there are people that would report a sold gun as ‘stolen’ and buy an ‘extra’ every year or two. Not gonna mention in detail why they do this act of civil disobedience or alibi-shopping.

            Statistics… Believe them without looking between the lines, and you might become one. Like people driving a big truck and thinking that it’s way safer than a car… but then have more wrecks because it’s harder to handle! Biggest death traps are the tiny cars that have no power and no shock absorption, either, along with trucks that just love to flip over or get into median-crossing head-on or intersection-crossing T-bone collisions that the small car wouldn’t (as often). Beware the guy in the heavy car, haha.

        • Law Abiding Citizen says:

          Interesting article. It doesn’t seem to quote all the numbers you used, and in fact says that less than 1% of weapons used in a crime were “assault weapons”. Not relevant to your comment, but interesting anyways. You obviously try to keep yourself as well informed as I, but changing your search criteria will change what you get back, here’s a little more recent article about protecting yourself against a crime http://rense.com/general76/univ.htm Please read. Also, it’s hard to take anything you say as credible when you continually slander. “gun-nuts can’t even get this simple concept through their thick and empty skulls” and ” ( These are people who would gladly bend the numbers )”. I hope that some day one of these guns that you try so hard to get rid of, in the hands of one of those “gun-nuts” saves your life from a real psycho that comes into your local coffee shop. God bless… The Parrot Coward.

    • Maave says:

      An AR-15 is excellent for home defense. Most .223 bullets fragment at close range, making wall penetration less likely than pistol rounds or even birdshot.
      And calling .223 “high powered” is laughable. You can barely get any lower power out of a rifle.

    • Rob says:

      Perhaps the 2nd Amendment doesn’t mean what you think it means…

    • Jerry says:

      guys guys guys.. you can have my Assault Weapon when you grant me access to a bonafide Personal Defense Weapon. Sound good to you?

    • SteveA says:

      Really alex? The Dept of Homeland Security just issued a report that the AR-15 is a perfect example of a home defense gun. The less manipulation of your defensive weapon is better. 30rd magazine = less manipulation of our weapon

  37. Im still waiting for a DIY invitro hack :P

  38. buZz says:

    could you guys please stop posting weapons? there are children reading this website

    • Law Abiding Citizen says:

      Are you a parent? What are kids doing reading this website? There’s High Voltage experiments, things you can do with a microwave, homemade thermite (imo much worse than a pipe bomb) and 1000 other things kids (without the proper parent) shouldn’t get into. Parents should watch what their kids read, adults don’t need to watch what they publish on THE INTERNET

    • Whatnot says:

      Yeah remember when that kid read about a weapon and accidentally looked at a picture and then it backfired and he was killed by the papercut after he printed out the page? People should be aware of these risks.

  39. Kent Widman says:

    Never thought adults would be so irresponsible, striving to make it posible for anyone, even kids to print their own guns. That’s mest up. I’m wondering if a 3D printed gun will buckle when fired?

  40. Kevin Keith says:

    Holy shit this entire comments thread is an enormous, festering clusterfuck of stupid.

  41. Guido says:

    Some things you cannot have in america without a whole crapload of paperwork, background checks, site visits by the ATF and FBI and a lot of money. . Some vary state to state, but in most places they are in fact banned and you will go to prison for possesion of them.

    Explosives – Could be considered an “arm”. Can’t have that without an FEL.

    Machine guns – Not without an FFL. Where is the outcry?

    Switch Blade or “automatic knife” – illegal in most places.

    Butterfly Knife – illegal in a lot of places.

    shuriken AKA throwing star – illegal in a lot of places

    The point is, there are a lot of things that are A LOT harder to get than a gun. As gun owners, we need to seriously consider going through a little bit of grief to obtain and own one. period. I also think that if someone steals your gun and you can’t account for it. You need to go to jail yourself. That would curb a lot of gun thefts and force people to be responsable owners. Your dog attacks someone of its own free will, you can still go to jail, shouldn’t be any different than a gun.

  42. axsxpt says:

    Can´t understand… in Portugal there was a similar problem with dangerous dogs, so the animal rights defenders said that the problem was in the owners of the animals. There were missing the point… no animals (or guns, for this matter…) no attacks and no killings… if you can have-it… you will use-it (sane or insane). This fetish for weapons sould be kept for the military…
    btw we have 1 million of guns in the hands of hunters, and guess what !? after criminals murders, they are next in terms of killing themselves (accidental and intended)

  43. mindprobe says:

  44. Sean says:

    Even in places with far stricter gun laws than the US, there are skilled and creative craftsmen with access to machine shops, 3D printers, and whatever else. Unlike with, say, a cryptographic algorithm, though, the existence of this “vulnerability” in the law doesn’t mean that it then becomes useless. I’ve read that in the UK, some criminals use homemade bullets and modified starter’s pistols—sometimes they work, and sometimes they don’t. Personally, I’d happily take that situation over what we have in the US now.

    Also on topic: what do the gun rights advocates think about the NRA’s call for a national mental health database? Personally, I’d be far more concerned about the definition of mental illness than the definition of assault rifle.

  45. enjoy! Thx Law abiding citizen & voxnulla

  46. Dan says:

    It does make perfect sense.

    Point 1, why not have gun control? Personally I don’t mean bans I mean better checks and restrictions, all kinds of things are already restricted why should guns be different?.

    Point 2,
    Firstly, constitutional rights can be taken away, criminals can take their right to vote or their right to legally possess a gun, they did bad things and list their rights.
    Sedition is a crime and planning to overthrow the government is an act if sedition, stocking up on guns with plans to overthrow the government is a seditious act.
    Point is if you want to stick up in guns to overthrow government then the government can take away your guns.
    Seriously look it up.

    The last one, most gun hacks are neat solutions, I like to hear about them.

    • Whatnot says:

      Because guns are constitutionally protected in the US, and the reason for that is to discourage haughty assholes from assuming they are god’s gift to this world and are meant to rule you and tell you what to do without being questioned.

      And if they are in office and control the only people with guns that is so very easy.

      And seeing how individual rights are now massively sneered at by both the president and members of congress and senate.. I think now more than ever there is a risk. Especially since these people are already doing it to the rest of the world outside the US.

      And to change the constitution requires a much larger majority than normal lawmaking, and it also opens you up to a vote of no confidence and a revolution.

      You can however disagree, I am merely telling you why..

      • Alex says:

        Right, because obviously if private citizens can’t own assault rifles, it’s only a matter of time before society breaks down and you end up with authoritarian rule. Except, apparently, for everywhere else in the the Western world that think there are some weapons that shouldn’t be in private hands.

        You people have such warped ideas of what freedom means, and such a screwed up set of values and priorities. Your argument also doesn’t make any sense, since the idea that a private citizen, however well armed, could stave off authoritarianism is obvious stupid. When have you ever seen a shootout with the police that ended with the guy winning? How do you think that same guy would fare against the military?

        • Whatnot says:

          The rest of the western world lives a life of submissiveness to their leaders, and although the US has reached that state too there at least is a glimmer of hope they might remember it can be different and that you can have individual liberties and you don’t need to all be the same and compliant to some image some politician has as to how people should be.

          • Alex says:

            You’re a nut. Listen to yourself. If you know anything about the world beyond your borders you know that saying everyone else in the western world live “lives of submissiveness” is ridiculous. Have you noticed the demonstrations, upheaval and outright riots that have taken place in Europe over the last few years? Does that look very submissive to you? It is the home of some of the most vibrant (and strident) democracies in the world, and have managed to achieve that without giving an AR15 to anyone that wants one.

            Look at the examples. Having or not having guns doesn’t appear to influence whether or not a country is “free” or not. For every America, where you have guns and are free, there are countries like Yemen or Algeria or Iraq or Afghanistan that have guns but are not (really) free. And for every authoritarian country that doesn’t allow assault weapons (China, North Korea), there are dozens of “free” countries that also don’t allow them (Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan). Civilian access to guns simply doesn’t seem to have influenced how democratic places are one way or another.

            On Syria, what you seem not to recognize is that in the Arab Spring overall, guns have been a far less effective method of revolution than mass demonstrations. Demonstrations changed Tunisia and Egypt, private guns failed to overthrow the government in Libya, which required outside intervention and/or military defections, or Syria, which is by far the bloodiest of the uprisings so far. On Afghanistan, what you’re omitting is that the insurgents’ most effective weapons aren’t guns, but home made bombs (that and picking defenceless victims), so why it should be used as an example of why Americans should have any type of gun they want is beyond me.

            But even if the Syrian government could be overthrown by private guns, it is besides the point because you’re talking about the right for AMERICANS to bear arms being justified by the apparent need, one day, to overthrow the AMERICAN government. It is very clearly a whole different kettle of fish defeating the Syrian government/military with some handguns and rifles than the American ones, which are the most powerful such entities ever to walk the earth. What really defends America against turmoil and authoritarianism isn’t the NRA, it’s strong, vibrant democratic institutions. Guns should be a total non-issue, except for the fact that they lead to many more violent deaths and the occasional national tragedy like Sandy Hook or Columbine.

          • Andrew says:

            Awesome post Alex. It’s not going to win over any of the Rambo-esque crowd who are determined that there’s a revolution on the horizon but it certainly provides some balance to the debate and quashes some of the flagrant misinformation about the rest of the world.

          • Whatnot says:

            My examples were a direct reply to your suggestion rifles can’t defeat an army. And it stands strong.

            Your \patriotic’ nonsense about the US army is a bit out there (its power is mainly based on almost unlimited resources in terms of money)., and I remind you that in a civil war the US army which is made up of US citizens might choose the side of liberty, or at least hold back a lot in how they fight their own population. Remember that we are talking about an imaginary situation where some politicians try to do away with freedom, and I don’t think that will go over that smooth with the army, no matter how much propaganda preparation has been done.

            I also don’t compare the US situation with other countries, the US has its specific culture and history, other countries have other reactions and other expectations. I keep my comparison to the statement that rifles cannot defeat an army, which I think in case of a civil war is simply not true in general. But if you ask if a right to bear arms is suitable in all countries it is in my view also obviously not true.

            And even in the US, you have to think and make a choice, is the US a place where there is still a possibility that you can maintain a level of freedom like that? Or do you believe the opposite and think authoritarian is the way to go. It’s a rather important decision and also will require trust in either case, trust in either your government or population and in what they can handle and how they will use the powers you give them.

            To illustrate the difference between countries I’m reminded that in japan many people have bicycles, and none of those bicycles have locks, they find they can rely their bike isn’t stolen, it works for their culture, it would dramatically fail in most of the current western world. My point being to take something completely different to show how cultures can drastically differ and laws and rules and customs are adapted to the local population. So the question is what is the state of US culture at this time. and what the population decides and how important it is to them.

            Or you can simply ignore others and shout and strong-arm and be with whatever the person you decided to blindly follow says of course, which you also see on both sides of any discussion.

        • Whatnot says:

          As for how it’s so stupid and can’t work: The combined NATO is barely breaking even in afghanistan.

          Did you ever consider that your defeatism might simply be that? And that defeatism isn’t all that glorious?

        • Whatnot says:

          Oh and another example is syria, where a leader has a whole army with decent weapons and several thousands of tanks and an airforce and so forth and yet is slowly losing from some ragtag guys who started with rifles.

    • Whatnot says:

      Oh and on that ‘constitutional rights can be taken away’, the constitution says that no law shall be made restricting the rights of people to bear arms, so that stipulation is directed at the lawmakers rather than the people, and so it’s pretty locked down in that respect.

  47. Dan says:

    Yeah, because the constitution cannot be changed right?

    Oh no, the constitution can be changed. It can be amended. Like say the second amendment?

    So as of the second ammendement we determin that there is a right to bear arms and form militia etc…

    But then those right can be taken away. For example murderers, rapists etc anyone who committed a felony crime are prevented from posessing guns,

    I.e their second ammenent right to gun ownership is removed from them.

    The sedition act was repealed in 1920, but is replaced with the alien registration act which give or take is basically the same thing. I.e your right to free speech is only protected when you’re not using that speech to plan seditious acts.

    The alien registration act still exists. Is still on statue, may be unconstitutional, but lets face it, who’s going to listen to the guy that’s indicted under the alien registration act, with all the pictures of his doomsday arsenal who is plotting to overthrow the government.

    Which brings me back to my original point. By hook or by crook if the government want to take away your individual “right” to gun ownership they will.
    And when/if that day comes no amount of assault riffles are going to help you.

    In fact even trying to get some kind of self defence is only going to lead you to be painted as some kind of Waco esq crazy.

    • Anonymous says:

      You misunderstand a very fundamental point. The Constitution does not grant any rights. The government does not have any rights by default; the rights are reserved to, and inherently reside in, the people.

  48. steve says:

    The problem with DefenseDistributed is simply that they will make matters worse. Gun control laws buffer part of the irresponsibility of some people having (or not having) guns.If now the irresponsibility increases and people start printing mags and silencers the laws will just be extended. And that might not only harm gun enthusiasts but 3D printing in general! This is a perfect reason for government to crack down on the impeding avalanche of copyright infringement under the disguise of banning gun printing. The printers will probably be required to have firmware that prevents everything else then white listed items to be printed or similar crap.
    These idiots should machine their crap, nobody would be surprised because that’s the regular way of doing it.
    I’m not anti-gun and a shooter myself but I think if people don’t stand up to the responsibility that they were given by society (via government) everybody – also the responsible people – will lose.

    • Whatnot says:

      That is a good point yeah.

      (I know this article’s commentsection/subject is getting dated now, but I think yours is an important point from the hackers point of view.)

    • anon_anon says:

      So your strongest point to discourage printing of firearms and accessories is that the government might attempt to restrict use of 3d printers? Isn’t this why people are printing firearms for in the first place — to circumvent the laws of an overbearing government? It’s like saying, one should limit use of the printer, otherwise our use of the printer will be limited.

  49. Leonard says:

    Here. Something from the underbelly: What a fucking waste of time and resources!11

  50. How unfortunate. I guess it was only a matter of time before people used 3D home printing in a way that’ll end up needing to be legislated & regulated. I can’t say I’m overly comfortable with the idea of there being openly available weapon projects that can be printed off by anyone with a 3D printer. Jerks, ruining the party for every one.

    • Gravis says:

      3d printer, lathe, laser cutter or just wood blocks. if you ban it, someone is going to find a way around restrictions. take a look at DRM, the idea behind DRM is to prevent pirates from selling copies by having to always insert a game CD or have a solid internet connection the entire time you play. the idea behind smaller clips is to limit the amount of shots a crazed gunmen can shoot or something. however, both are simply an annoyance to everyone and have no real effect. hacks are all about fixing/improving/making a better version of things that are inadequate. so who is the real jerk here?

      • Whatnot says:

        Yes but as steve points out above, if they anyway want to find a handle to attack 3D printers this kind of thing can so easily be misused, all you need to do is parade some kids around at this point and then the bill doesn’t even need the word ‘patriot’ in it.

    • Volfram says:

      In the hands of an innovative mind, there is no object or concept in the entire world which can not be used to harm or heal another.

      That’s right. Anything and everything is a weapon. And a medicine.

      • American Citizen says:

        Some day in the not so distant future, possession of unlicensed tools will be an “intent to create” crime.

        • Bill O'Rights says:

          Sadly such bogus “crimes” already exist. Look up “constructive intent”. You don’t have to have any ACTUAL intent, you merely have to possess harmless bits of metal. Even if you don’t know what they are or how to use them, you’ve still committed a crime the idiots in the government think is worse than even rape. Lunacy.

          • Andrew says:

            Hmm… Interesting. It still sounds like paranoid leaning conjecture, used to support an argument that the government is out to get you. It would be helpful to backup that with some context. Do you have any examples where someone had possession of “harmless bits of metal” without intent to commit a crime yet they were convicted of a crime?

          • Bill O'Rights says:

            I’ll look for some, but meanwhile you may also wish to look at “Three Felonies A Day” by Harvey Silverglate. It’s a time-honored tradition that an important step to tyranny is to make everyone a criminal so anybody can be arbitrarily arrested at any time should they step out of line.

            Also see Naomi Wolf’s “Fascist America, in 10 easy steps”. We’ve already completed steps 1 (“terrorists”), 2 (Gitmo), 3 (TSA), 4 (NDAA et al), 5, and 6 (ICE, DHS).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 96,598 other followers