dailymail.co.uk article shows the ATF sending two messages:

1.  The 3D printed guns work, so they must be banned!

2.  3D printed guns blow up, so do not make them or attempt to use them!

I don’t think either message is really effective. Both just generate more interest in 3D printed guns . . .

The world’s first printable gun has been deemed a serious safety and security concern after a gun printed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms exploded before it was even fired.

This danger is matched by the problem with fully-functioning 3-D printed guns – they work all too well.

In a way, the error by the Mail is humorous:  How did the BATFE manage to get the printed liberator pistol to blow up before it was even fired? It’s amusing to see the BATFE taking propaganda cues from Australian police, as they were the first to produce video of 3D printed guns blowing up.

Firearms have been produced in homes for nearly 500 years.  Perhaps because liberal writers are familiar with computers and printers, but unfamiliar with files and drills, they see 3D printed guns as much more of a danger than ordinary homemade guns.    As David Kopel noted,  a 1986 federal government study found that one-fifth of the guns seized by the police in Washington, D.C., were homemade.

Homemade guns aren’t new. The awareness or perhaps willingness, of liberal writers to talk about it, is. And that is a good thing.

©2013 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

Recommended For You

45 Responses to Daily Mail: 3D Guns Are Dangerous Because They Work Too Well

  1. Wait, is effective as it works so well… but somehow it blows up before pulling the trigger. What it spontaneously caught fire?

    Man if they have that technology I want it. I want to point at something and make it catch fire, that would be awesome.

  2. Either they work or they don’t you can’t have it both ways.
    Then again a CNC and some block aluminum produces a really nice 1911, but I guess that is asking to much or something.

    • Sorry Dan,

      AL 1911s are a horrible idea. The frame might survive, but the slide would have the locking surfaces shear right off.

    • What they meant to say was “When the guns aren’t busy blowing themselves up they work great!” So I guess you have to make several, and the ones that don’t go all suicide bomber get used for nefarious schemes.

  3. IT IS MY 2nd AMMENDMENT RIGHT TO HAVE AN UNDETECTABLE NON MATALIC GUNS….

    I AM GOING TO START A REVEOLUTION AGAINST THE GOVERMENT (ILLUMINATI) IF I CAN’T HAVE THIS GUN, THAT I WOULD NEVER WANT, DON’T NEED AND MIGHT BLOW UP IN MY FACE!!!! BLAH BLAH BLAH….

    I can hear the whining now. The writer misses the point. Making the gun is NOT the issue. It is the fact it is UNDETECTABLE…… Undetectable by current methods…. except good old pat down…

    There is a law against undetectable guns about to expire December 9th this year. I am ALL FOR it being extended. Yes I am a Patriot, have red white and blue underwear, and I am more American than you, so there. I pray smart fellow reasonable gun folks don’t make a big issue about banning these guns. They have no use but evading security. It is not a constitutional right to pack heat anywhere, any place, anytime.

    • Oh yes it is my constitutional right to pack heat anywhere, anytime. But my rights have been somewhat trampled by political turds who wish to keep their imagined power.

    • I think that the idea that a bunch of plastic guns are going to result in more crimes is ludicrous. There is a big dog and pony show about security with metal detectors. If you ever want to find out how well they work, accidentally leave a roll of quarters in your pocket the next time you encounter one anywhere but an airport. If you are going through a high traffic area, the metal detectors will probably detect the metal about half the time. I’m sure they either turn them off, don’t know how to work the devices or tune them down so they can get the people through the checkpoints. The metal detectors don’t make us safer, they make us feel safer.

      These plastic guns are junk and the author of the article is absolutely correct, they are only news because they are novel. Anyone with the inkling could go to a hardware store and get the supplies to make a gun for a few bucks and the gun they made would be much better than anything they can print on a several thousand dollar printer.

      Greg you are just trying to cause a ruckus and, what’s worse, you’re not very good at it. More American? That is just dumb. Why don’t you log in under another name and try again.

      • Being a retired military cop (USAF SP, 85 to 92), I had a little experience in this world. If a walk-through medal detector is calibrated to detect an average pistol, it will trip off of the foil of a pack of cigarettes or a pocket full of change. We found that a Baretta 92F and a pack of cigarettes had about the same affect on our medal detectors. I have noticed that TSA tends to keep their walk-through medal detectors set fairly high. A low-waged, low-information security guard will likely calibrate the sensor fairly low without realizing that the detector can miss something like a Baretta 92F or a 1911. Since the example they use has some medal, I can say that these medal detectors can trip on it, but as I eluded, it depends on how high or low the operator sets it.

        • While I do not have any experience with these machines other than as a user, several years ago, when I was walking through 3-4 of these a day, I did a little experimentation and found that about half of the non-airport metal detectors in Washington DC, wouldn’t go off with a roll of quarters. It was an informative way of spending otherwise wasted time.

          When I read about the dangers of weapons that thwart metal detectors, it makes me chuckle because I suspect a Desert Eagle would thwart a high percentage of them. Those detectors are another intrusion into our daily life that provide virtually no additional safety and are there for no other purpose than to make people feel safer and for someone to say ‘look, I’m doing something!’.

          I had no idea that a 92S and a package of cigarettes presented the same profile to metal detectors and I can sympathize with the operators of the equipment. They are not only charged with providing security but also moving people through these checkpoints which can get to be a mess at high traffic times. They’d be the first people on the block if someone got into an office building with a weapon and used it, but they also get hounded if folks get too backed up at the points so they are in a no win situation.

          There are a couple of good reasons to look askance at the liberator and other 3D printed pistols but the idea that they will create a bunch of metal detector avoiding criminals is not credible and anyone suggesting that legislation is our societies bulwark against the ‘dangers’ of these weapons is setting themselves up for disappointment in my opinion.

        • “no other purpose than to make people feel safer and for someone to say ‘look, I’m doing something!’.”

          I disagree. They also serve the purpose of softening up the sheeple, turning up the heat under the frog pot another degree, chipping away a little more at our Creator-given Liberty, in preparation for forced anal probes and house-to-house warrantless searches for dissidents to be carted away and reeducated.
          .
          Jesus of Nazareth was executed for being a dissident, you know.

    • And so many terrorists have a 3-D printer on their kitchen table.

      Sheesh, if you want an undetectable gun, just invest in some FR-4 or Delrin and wrap the barrel in some filament tape

      The depth of the grabbers’ stupidity never ceases to amaze me.

    • If these guns are undetectable, how will a law work to catch people with them?

      If they are so easily produced, how will a law stop a criminal from getting one?

      • … which is, or should be, the whole point.

        If something is easy to make, it can not be prevented, and rules to do so are futile and detrimental.

        If something is difficult to make, an easier, more destructive method can be used to kill many more people.

        A way to reduce “homicides” would be to imprison almost everyone in cages and have a “moral elite” rule over them, put food in their cages and give them primitive tools to build things for public use. (If one disobeys the ruling class, of course, the punishment wouldn’t be recorded as “homicide”.) Obviously, I do not recommend this.
        I would guess that allowing the cautious and rule following crowd, the crowd who cares about their lives and has something to lose, to have the best defensive system for them would be a good first step.

    • You realize the ammunition is detectable, right? It’s not the security concern people are making it out to be.

    • “They have no use but evading security.”

      Completely wrong. You’re missing the point entirely. The purpose of the liberator as stated BY IT’S CREATOR was to show that no law would ever be able to make guns nonexistent.

      “It’s a demonstration that technology will allow access to things that governments would otherwise say that you shouldn’t have access to”
      -Cody Wilson

      He even states outright that it’s a horrible design that can easily fail…. That’s still not the point.

    • “Undetectable.”

      Except the firing pin is a nail, which is made out of – guess what! – metal. Ya dingus.

    • Hey troll boy.

      Talk to me when they start making real bullets that pass through metal detectors.

      PS. the “pack heat anywhere, any place, anytime” comment gives you away every time. The People of the Gun do not talk that way. Except in your little wet dream fantasies.

  4. There are days I ponder “How did the British create an empire the size and scope they did?” Because I see no evidence extant that they ever possessed the testicular fortitude to so much as horn in on a picnic. To think that they were ever capable of taking over entire countries halfway around the planet seems utterly absurd now.

    I grew up being told of the Brit’s “stiff upper lip,” their stoic resolve, blah, blah, blah. Current evidence tells us that there is no such thing. There’s just blubbering, crying, running in circles, screaming and shouting.

    I could assault a beach more successfully with a troop of Girl Scouts on a cookie sales campaign than the Brits… because the vast majority of Girl Scouts do not go into hysteric screaming fits when the word “gun” is mentioned, and probably no Girl Scout cares a whit when they’re told that it is possible to make a gun out of plastic in a 3D printer.

    I’ll amend that. A former Girl Scout just told me: “Girl Scouts would be very interested in knowing that it is possible to make a gun out of plastic. They’d want to be able to make one in their very own pastel colors – and maybe more than one pastel color in the same gun.”

    • “Gun Control” did not even start in England until after the first world war, which killed off enormous numbers of patriotic British men, literally the “flower of the Empire”. It changed the demographics enormously.

      Then, it really took off after the Second World War, which was another disaster for western civilization. I doubt that those laws would have made the cut if most of the men lost in those wars would have been employed at running the empire and bringing new technological advancement to it.

        • Now you see why the smart farmer doesn’t kill off his strongest and healthiest breeders. Unfortunately in war the best and the strongest go to where the danger is.

          That just leaves the droolers, inbreds and retards at home with the fertile women.

      • Their breeding stock for those 2 generations were flatfoots and invalids. 4F’s that were no use to the army and the draft. With their small population, those 2 wars utterly destroyed everything good they had as a people.

      • I’d never considered this…I wonder what an academic study into this theory would find.

        I wish I was an academic and didn’t have a real job. I’d totally do this…

        • Good luck finding an “academic” who is even impartial, let alone in favor of supporting the 2A..

  5. “I pray smart fellow reasonable gun folks don’t make a big issue about banning these guns.”

    The entire point of these guns is not are they efficient, are they practical, can they be detected by metal detectors. The point is that there is no possible way short of outright fascism that any government can even ATTEMPT to ban them. The plans have been distributed over the Internet, that’s where the BATFE got them. The printers are available to consumers, as is the plastic. The guns DO work, up to a point, but at least enough to make them more dangerous to the guy standing in front than in back. And it would not take a genius to modify the final pistol to be more durable and reliable.

    The only way to ban these guns, or similar guns that must eventually become available, would be to outlaw the printers, the plastic, the ammunition, and the Internet. I’m sure BHO and Eric Holder can envision such a thing, I’m not sure they could ever get away with it.

    • The panty-wetting hysteria by these silk pantywaists is almost reaching the point where I’m thinking of drawing up plans and prototypes of a single-shot pistol that could be made easily on a ChiCom 7×12 mini-lathe.

  6. There’s no way for the G to prevent these printable guns from being made, laws or no laws — but they can pass penalties for the sale of them and even their mere possession that would be incredibly severe. That’s the tack that I expect the G to take.

    There’s a new demon in town, and for once it isn’t us.

  7. What about ammo? Haven’t heard of plastic bullets yet…lately that’s been left out by people saying they are undetectable. Is that a liberator in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

    • http://www.dansammo.com/images/inv/as30815.jpg

      These are in 308. They still have a brass butt and primer but the case and projectile are plastic. They shoot at around 4000 fps., have no recoil, are loud as hell and FUN. They’ll only work plinking around short range but inside 25 yards they’ll do a number on a bunny wabbit…… or so I’ve heard.

  8. I still can’t tell if these things are so incredibly dangerous we must bury the technology in the deepest hole possible? Or if there is no hope of these ever working so don’t even try it’s not worth the cost of time or materials.

    Rhetorical questions aside….. don’t we already have laws making it illegal to shoot people? Why does it matter what is used to do the shooting? Why does this product warrant extra scrutiny?

  9. i don’t care about a replicated pistol. What I want is a replicator that will print 9mm ammo. Turn that fvcker on full capacity and run it 24/7.

  10. I’d buy one if someone with the right equipment started printing them off and adding serial numbers..

    Of course, they’d need a manufacturer’s license AND the barrel would have to be rifled to be legal…

    But I’d buy one if everything were legit.

  11. Daily Mail is against the 1st amendment why on earth would anyone think they wouldn’t be against the second? Even when it comes to this walmart quality plastic crap they call a firearm.

  12. If you really want to get your hair set on fire, watch this video Fox News Aired on Saturday:

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/2844401044001/warnings-on-plastic-guns-/

    What angered me was that when they get their ex Police Officer Fox News Contributor talking they show a video of someone shooting an AR-15 with a white plastic printed lower receiver and, by omission, allow him to imply this fully functional rifle was “printed” and is fully disposable. Just the kind of news report that feeds the trolls and fans the ignorant fears of John and Jane Q. Public. I tried to protest to Fox News about this but could not find a contact link to lodge a complaint.

    BTW the video has a short commercial embedded with it…so bear with for 30 seconds because the Report is worth watching if you’re concerned about the Media spreading disinformation about “Plastic Guns”. We don’t need this kind of stuff.

    Personally, I see “printable plastic guns” as a minimal threat to anyone. Cartridges are metallic, bores are poor, accuracy is poor, Metal Detectors are an “even-money” bet to detect/not detect metals…etc…etc…It’s plausible some “crazy” will eventually try to use one for some nefarious purpose, but the “crazies”, like the Poor, will always be with us. As long as we continue to ignore their need for effective help, we’ll just have to endure them “acting-out” their delusions.

    • …also, I am once again sick of the undetectable meme. It is not undetectable. It is necessarily bulky, and easy to find in a pat-down. It has a metal firing pin. And, until someone figures out how to make all plastic ammunition, this is all a moot point.

      Now lets talk about the fact that this kind ban will likely negatively impact the entire purpose of 3D printing – rapid prototyping! John Moses Browning used to make working prototypes of his designs out of wood. This allowed him to fine tune and adjust designs until they were just right, without having to waste valuable materials, tools, and sweat. That paradigm is alive and well in hundreds of industries, except now we use CAD and a 3D printer. These kinds of Knee-jerk feel-good legislative efforts are short sighted, unnecessary, and negatively impact all of us.

      I’m already hearing the media talk about how forward looking the Undetectable Gun law was – HA! as if any of the people of the gun do not remember that it was also a knee-jerk legislative reaction to the first polymer hand guns – it was stupid and wrong then, and its stupid and wrong now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *