512
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
512 points (100.0% liked)
3DPrinting
15688 readers
288 users here now
3DPrinting is a place where makers of all skill levels and walks of life can learn about and discuss 3D printing and development of 3D printed parts and devices.
The r/functionalprint community is now located at: !functionalprint@kbin.social or !functionalprint@fedia.io
There are CAD communities available at: !cad@lemmy.world or !freecad@lemmy.ml
Rules
-
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
-
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
-
No porn (NSFW prints are acceptable but must be marked NSFW)
-
No Ads / Spamming / Guerrilla Marketing
-
Do not create links to reddit
-
If you see an issue please flag it
-
No guns
-
No injury gore posts
If you need an easy way to host pictures, https://catbox.moe may be an option. Be ethical about what you post and donate if you are able or use this a lot. It is just an individual hosting content, not a company. The image embedding syntax for Lemmy is 
Moderation policy: Light, mostly invisible
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
And if I download a parts list, buy the components, and make the printer myself I guess I can just cruise new york "printing guns" for people without any hassle from the man.
Printing ghost guns, so far, is just a boogyman politicians trot out when one of their corporate sponsors thinks one of their revenue streams might be threatened by DIYers.
I agree that this is a boogeyman law.
I don't understand the threat to revenue streams. From gun manufacturers? Would anybody who is allowed to purchase a gun bother with a 3D printed one other than for the novelty of it?
My biggest gripe is that I feel that politicians usually don't get involved in creating laws until way late. Think laws around the regulation of AI or cloning or genetically modifying humans. Is there a credible threat related to printed weaponry? I seriously doubt it.
I saw something similar a few weeks ago on the national news to allow local police to shoot drones around regulated airspaces. In this case it's a football game. The stadium security said that a drone flew in and distributed pamphlets but could have easily carried in a bomb. Again, this is a theoretical threat, but they're more likely concerned about illegal filming of a sporting event.
3d printed guns are an excellent boogey man for manufacturers of not-gun things that 3d printers can make much better than guns.
It doesn't have to be from gun manufacturers. Any manufacturer can go to the politician they own and say "People are making open source versions of our highest profit margin widget, find a way to make it stop." Then politician says, "Well, New Yorkers want more gun laws, we can abuse that..."
Heard a story of a British officer giving an American secret service officer the rundown of Westminster Palace in anticipation of an American president visiting. They asked why there weren't any screens at the viewing gallery (or maybe about why there were??? One of the two) and the British officer cited an incident where Tony Blair had a pink powder thrown on him during PMQs. The American asked how they dealt with him, to which he got the reply "Oh we just arrested him after" The American was shocked. "What!? We would have shot him, that could have been anthrax for all that you know"