by jerkstate on 10/12/20, 2:15 PM
Improvised firearms are as old as factory manufactured firearms:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_firearmI disagree with the premise that gun control has been shot down because of this new technology applied to make improvised firearms. First of all, these things are going to be far less effective, durability, reliability and range wise than factory firearms. Second, laws are about scaring transgressors into not doing something with the threat of state violence against them, not making some action a complete impossibility.
by hirundo on 10/12/20, 2:35 PM
As time goes by and this tech improves, restricting guns to a given level will require increasingly invasive regulation. Where once you could accomplish it by regulating manufacturers and dealers and imports, now you have to restrict 3D printers and common items from the hardware store. As 3D printers become common household items, the same level of gun control will require detailed mass surveillance and/or restrictions on common items like pipe and scrap steel.
This may mean that gun control simply fails in non-authoritarian countries, and they either go authoritarian or increasing live without effective controls on guns. As a gun culture the U.S. may be better prepared for this transition.
by aaron695 on 10/12/20, 1:40 PM
by busterarm on 10/12/20, 3:03 PM
The proliferation of technology has never successfully been curtailed through regulation on long enough time scales.
by x87678r on 10/12/20, 3:20 PM
This is a South African newspaper right? Sometimes I wonder if HN headlines are just suggestions for discussion for bored or easily distracted tech workers.
by tengbretson on 10/12/20, 2:20 PM
I wouldn't worry about it too much. It's not like there's a constitutional amendment protecting your right to own and operate a 3d printer.
by MaxBarraclough on 10/12/20, 12:50 PM
A minor erratum: the article refers to the FGC-9 weapon as the FCG-9.
by fouc on 10/12/20, 3:42 PM
Is it true that a $200 3D printer is sufficient?
by hcurtiss on 10/12/20, 2:14 PM
“You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need? We need some bullet control. Men, we need to control the bullets, that’s right. I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why? Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders.
Yeah! Every time somebody get shut we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... Shit, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ass.’
And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars. ‘Man I would blow your fucking head off…if I could afford it.’ ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man. You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’
So even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out. Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property.”
― Chris Rock
by amelius on 10/12/20, 3:13 PM
Why does Apple have more control over my phone than the US government has over guns?