Federal Ban on Printing Guns?

Chucky Schumer wants to put the cat back in the bag:

“If the legislation is not renewed, individuals will be able to easily carry a 3D plastic gun through a metal detector and gain access to an airplane, school, sporting event, courthouse or other government buildings,” Schumer said in a statement.

And how is this going to stop that? This is about as effective as a “no guns” sign. The cat is out of the bag here, and it’s not going back in.

Schumer raised alarm bells, saying anyone with $1,000 and an internet connection can access those CAD files and make their own guns, making it too easy to bypass security at airports, sporting events or any other venue that relies on metal detectors or x-ray machines for security.

And that will still be true even after you pass a law. So what is this going to do? Other than land people with a little too much curiosity for their own good in prison. Is it really so hard to understand that people intent on bypassing airport screening tend to be what we call “highly motivated” criminals, and are thus the least likely to be dissuaded by the fact that there’s a law against hitting “Print”

h/t Jacob

11 Responses to “Federal Ban on Printing Guns?”

  1. HappyWarrior6 says:

    This is part of the “scare the pants off of them so they’ll vote for anything for safety” strategy. The jury is still out as to whether or not it will work this time. There has to be an end to this crap sometime. I am so sick of the impetus to “do something” when something does nothing at all but appeal to the worst of the worst element of the voting population: The nannystaters. How long until the emperor has no clothes on the efficacy of gun control to do absolutely nothing to solve the problems the anti-gunners present?

  2. Jack says:

    This also shows how legislation can be, at best, a cargo cult.
    Note the prhasing
    “If the legislation is not renewed, individuals will be able to easily carry a 3D plastic gun through a metal detector and gain access to an airplane, school, sporting event, courthouse or other government buildings,” Schumer said in a statement.

    By his own words the current prohibitions of carrying a gun to any of those events, most of which do not have metal detectors, are worthless. But he has faith that somehow telling people hitting print is a crime will… prevent people with the intention of commiting a larger crime.

    And as mentioned there’s no thought on what *effect* the law would actually have and what would happen if it is simply ignored. No the thinking is: “We need to do something! This is something!” And “Because our intentions are good this will work.” And “Sure it may only hurt people with no intention of commiting a crime, but they need to be punished anyway.”

  3. MrPickle says:

    Anybody with a $300 mini-mill can “print” their own guns as well…….

    • Alpheus says:

      That’s what I find deeply ironic about this. We’ve had the technology to “cut out” guns from materials for some time now, and it’s been affordable for anyone interested in pursuing it. How is a mill or a lathe all that different from using a printer to create a gun? Besides likely being somewhat faster, but not nearly as fast as casting, which is tricky to do right, and forging, which requires huge weights.

      Of course, the difference between casting/forging and printing/machining is that the former is ideal for mass production…while the latter is only practical for personal one-offs. And because machining has been around forever, there’s no reason to fear it, I suppose…

  4. Andy B. says:

    I’m not too up on the materials science of plastics these days, but logic tells me that if you can 3-D print a functional gun these days, you could probably machine one that was as good or better, out of better material.

    It would further seem that anyone hell-bent on terrorism using a plastic weapon, would not be stopped for long by stopping one method of manufacturing them. I doubt people would be doing this for a hoot. They would likely spend some money, to get it done any way they could.

  5. KM says:

    The only cliche that Chucky didn’t use was,”It’s the preferred weapon of criminals!”

  6. Alex says:

    Even if you had an all plastic gun, the ammo would still show up on a metal detector. Funny how the antis never mention that part.

    • Sam P says:

      Non-metallic bullets and paper cartridges (but do you even need cartridges for what is likely to be, in effect, a one shot pistol? muzzle-loading pistols!) Getting rid of a metallic percussion cap is harder, but perhaps piezoelectric ignition might be workable.

  7. Zermoid says:

    In all reality gun control has been impossible since the hardware store was invented.

    As proved by a guy in Britan, can’t remember his name…..

    • Sebastian says:

      What technology is doing is dropping the amount of knowledge needed to accomplish the task. Yes, primitive zip guns have been around for a while. But we’re on the cusp of being able to build real, quite high functioning firearms with very little skill. It’s not quite like hitting “Print…” yet, but it’s close.

  8. Jack of All Trades says:

    PA Luty Zermoid… That was his name…