And remember in many states it’s perfectly legal to make your own guns too
So transparent and stupid. Makes me want to print guns.
Please don’t, the plastic will almost certainly break after just 1 shot.
If you want to make your own gun, you should use your 3d printer to create parts for a CNC machine, and use that to make the gun.
??? No just no…there are tons of files out there for 3d printed lowers and uppers. You still need metal parts, like the barrel and BCG, but you absolutely can 3d print firearms parts that last thousands of rounds.
Also, that’s not how a CNC works.
Please don’t, the plastic will almost certainly break after just 1 shot.
There are so many legislative changes that could be made to curb gun violence in the US and most states and federal government have done next to none of them. Seem ironic that the one thing new York does also allows a degree of surveillance over personal technology? Well intentioned my ass, this is as well intentioned as internet age controls.
We should refuse to even talk about “gun violence” in relation to these 3D printer bans because that’s not even slightly what they are about.
They are 100.00000% about totalitarian surveillance and destruction of property rights. “Reducing gun violence” isn’t even an excuse; it’s an outright lie.
Isn’t it literally more effective and well known to make a gun from the hardware store than by 3d printing too?
Such as? Anything equal or adjacent to “restrict guns and ownership” is a political non-starter, and most anything less I can think of is impotent and/or easily circumvented.
A populace full of well-fed, financially secure, educated and literate, and medically cared for people is significantly less likely to go around shooting each other than the clusterfuck we’ve got going on now. Violence, gun related or otherwise, doesn’t just happen in a vacuum.
There is one form of gun control that has been effective and stood the test of time: Taxes.
The NFA has been working for almost a hundred years.
If politicians actually wanted to restrict gun ownership (rather than garnering temporary political support via impotent temporary policies the way California does) they’d use the NFA as a template.
As long as it is impossible to get the majority of states to agree to amend the constitution, any policy that infringes on citizens rights to bear arms is temporary at best.
There are decades of precedent in US courts that makes taxes and licensing not an infringement.
Ahh yes, the “make it so only Bezos and Musk can afford firearms for their minions” approach to gun control.
I’m not a big fan of the NFA either, but its existence exposes the true nature of gun control policies in Cali or NY… To make “progressive” politicians look better during their campaigns without actually affecting their constituents gun control goals.
I personally believe reducing gun violence must start with increasing quality of life in the areas that suffer it the most (eg food, homes, healthcare, etc).
I also think it’s crazy that we don’t have any form of licensing system besides CCW… When that is also proven to not constitute infringement.
I understand that licensing (and taxation specifically) can be used to marginalize people, but I feel like firearms licensing that is as available as a drivers license is a pretty mild concession.
I don’t carry but I got my CCW voluntarily because I believe in licensing and it’s the only form available.
I’m going to go ahead and point out that this was literally the original intent of the NFA: It was implicitly to disarm black folks, with the expectation that rich white people would be able to afford to remain armed. It was also meant to apply to all concealable firearms in general, i.e. pistols, which is why there is so much malarkey in there around short barrelled rifles and shotguns and so forth.
