I understand that the piece in question is promoting the false narrative that this is tied to 3D printing, rather 3D printing has just made it more accessible. As others here have pointed out, the physics behind gunsmithing has been widely known for hundreds of years.
The takeaway I had was more about societal issues that lead to people feeling the need for a gun to begin with, just a different perspective on the same issue.
So, like, I agree with you. We need to make people less miserable. We need to find ways to make people feel less marginalized through better representation, and a reduction in authoritarian measures. I also feel that ending the cycle of abuse that leads to damaged children growing into harmful adults should be prioritized and addressed with better social services (free healthcare including mental healthcare) and societal reforms. You and I fundamentally agree on this, and everything I’m about to say below is the result of me being in a bad mood because my FIL shared some fucking stupid racist GOP misinformation with me about the cats and the Haitian people. I’m being pedantic (and frankly irritating) about this, but I’m just not regulating myself very well today.
I guess I’d question how much more accessible 3D printing is making it. Like, there are definitely gun parts you can 3D print, but they tend not to be the important bits. You can somewhat successfully 3D print the important bits, but that requires a lot of knowledge and skill (printing with high strength/high temperature plastics like Nylon or polycarbonate isn’t easy, even with the newest crop of printers), plus a good printer (which is either expensive, or was self-built which increases the knowledge and skill required). If someone wants to make a gun with a 3D printer, they’ll have to get a printer (and either spend $1000+ or spend $500 + months making one), learn how to use it, learn how to print with better filaments, buy all the vitamins (i.e. parts that can’t be printed) and then they’ll end up with a kinda shitty gun. Alternatively, they can do what Yamagami did and buy some cheap metal pipe and a battery and some tape. They’ll get a kinda shitty gun without all of the 3D printing hassle for much cheaper.
Hell, if someone wants to make a good gun then machine tools have never been cheaper. I have a metal lathe and milling machine sitting out in my shop right now. I do not (and will never) make guns, but I could. My dad does competitive target shooting (Palma rifle) and has asked me if I could machine stuff for him which is why I’ve thought of this (I told him no, btw). My lathe was built in the 1950s and was $500. My mill is more expensive (about $4000 brand new), but I’m sure you could make a gun with a used $1000 mill. Machining is harder to learn than 3D printing, but with machine tools you can make more capable guns (i.e. semiautomatic/automatic, accurate, precise, reliable). The drawings are out there, and I’m sure I could turn some 4140 and O1 steel scrap pieces I have into a little gun. I can even make my own springs with my lathe. I have a granite lapping plate so I can make parts that are incredibly flat and smooth. I have a MAPP gas torch that I’ve used to harden and temper tool steel. A small home machine shop can produce a gun that’s as good as anything from, say, the 1940s.
Should we say that companies like Harbor Freight or Grizzly are making homemade guns more accessible because they’re selling cheap lathes and mills? I don’t feel that’s fair. Our technology and automation is getting better in general, which is making guns more accessible. It’s why Yamagami was able to kill a world leader with parts from the hardware store. We can’t really do much to stop the hardware store problem. All we can do is what you said. We can remove the things that make people feel the need to own a gun.
Excellent comment. Don’t worry about being in a bad mood, that’s totally valid when talking about a subject like this. I agree, we shouldn’t be allowing the conversation to be presented in a twisted light where we act like its a problem of technology and not a social ills problem.
Which is precisely why I wanted to talk about it from the point of view of social ills instead of “oh no, scary 3D printers, ban them or only let licensed professionals use them!” Because while pushback against that perspective is important, that only goes so far if we’re not able to express and articulate a vision of a world where people won’t feel that way or feel the need to blame it on the technology. Kind of like how the left struggles to identify positive male role models for young men, who end up feeling like they’re being told they are evil for being born a man and get sucked into the right-wing manosphere pipeline because those people are at least not making them feel like a villain for existing.
It’s also why I chose the fellow I did, because he did it without a 3D printer (I guess I should have made that more clear in my original comment, my bad). You’re absolutely right that we cannot just solve the hardware store problem without severely limiting access to tools regular people use every day.
However, if we don’t or can’t articulate the alternative, we can’t and won’t get there.
Which cements what I meant about saying “you’ll see more of this happening” not just because 3D printers have simplified certain aspects and made it more accessible to non-traditional gunsmiths, but more because of the social ills which push people to feel the need to pursue such a thing to begin with. As the social ills are not fixed, more people will turn to violence to be heard, whether that’s with traditional methods or modern technology. Violent people are just as likely to use a drone with a bomb strapped to it as they are a molotov cocktail. As you said, it’s not about the level of technology, it’s about why people feel the need to get violent to be heard to begin with.
I understand that the piece in question is promoting the false narrative that this is tied to 3D printing, rather 3D printing has just made it more accessible. As others here have pointed out, the physics behind gunsmithing has been widely known for hundreds of years.
The takeaway I had was more about societal issues that lead to people feeling the need for a gun to begin with, just a different perspective on the same issue.
So, like, I agree with you. We need to make people less miserable. We need to find ways to make people feel less marginalized through better representation, and a reduction in authoritarian measures. I also feel that ending the cycle of abuse that leads to damaged children growing into harmful adults should be prioritized and addressed with better social services (free healthcare including mental healthcare) and societal reforms. You and I fundamentally agree on this, and everything I’m about to say below is the result of me being in a bad mood because my FIL shared some fucking stupid racist GOP misinformation with me about the cats and the Haitian people. I’m being pedantic (and frankly irritating) about this, but I’m just not regulating myself very well today.
I guess I’d question how much more accessible 3D printing is making it. Like, there are definitely gun parts you can 3D print, but they tend not to be the important bits. You can somewhat successfully 3D print the important bits, but that requires a lot of knowledge and skill (printing with high strength/high temperature plastics like Nylon or polycarbonate isn’t easy, even with the newest crop of printers), plus a good printer (which is either expensive, or was self-built which increases the knowledge and skill required). If someone wants to make a gun with a 3D printer, they’ll have to get a printer (and either spend $1000+ or spend $500 + months making one), learn how to use it, learn how to print with better filaments, buy all the vitamins (i.e. parts that can’t be printed) and then they’ll end up with a kinda shitty gun. Alternatively, they can do what Yamagami did and buy some cheap metal pipe and a battery and some tape. They’ll get a kinda shitty gun without all of the 3D printing hassle for much cheaper.
Hell, if someone wants to make a good gun then machine tools have never been cheaper. I have a metal lathe and milling machine sitting out in my shop right now. I do not (and will never) make guns, but I could. My dad does competitive target shooting (Palma rifle) and has asked me if I could machine stuff for him which is why I’ve thought of this (I told him no, btw). My lathe was built in the 1950s and was $500. My mill is more expensive (about $4000 brand new), but I’m sure you could make a gun with a used $1000 mill. Machining is harder to learn than 3D printing, but with machine tools you can make more capable guns (i.e. semiautomatic/automatic, accurate, precise, reliable). The drawings are out there, and I’m sure I could turn some 4140 and O1 steel scrap pieces I have into a little gun. I can even make my own springs with my lathe. I have a granite lapping plate so I can make parts that are incredibly flat and smooth. I have a MAPP gas torch that I’ve used to harden and temper tool steel. A small home machine shop can produce a gun that’s as good as anything from, say, the 1940s.
Should we say that companies like Harbor Freight or Grizzly are making homemade guns more accessible because they’re selling cheap lathes and mills? I don’t feel that’s fair. Our technology and automation is getting better in general, which is making guns more accessible. It’s why Yamagami was able to kill a world leader with parts from the hardware store. We can’t really do much to stop the hardware store problem. All we can do is what you said. We can remove the things that make people feel the need to own a gun.
Excellent comment. Don’t worry about being in a bad mood, that’s totally valid when talking about a subject like this. I agree, we shouldn’t be allowing the conversation to be presented in a twisted light where we act like its a problem of technology and not a social ills problem.
Which is precisely why I wanted to talk about it from the point of view of social ills instead of “oh no, scary 3D printers, ban them or only let licensed professionals use them!” Because while pushback against that perspective is important, that only goes so far if we’re not able to express and articulate a vision of a world where people won’t feel that way or feel the need to blame it on the technology. Kind of like how the left struggles to identify positive male role models for young men, who end up feeling like they’re being told they are evil for being born a man and get sucked into the right-wing manosphere pipeline because those people are at least not making them feel like a villain for existing.
It’s also why I chose the fellow I did, because he did it without a 3D printer (I guess I should have made that more clear in my original comment, my bad). You’re absolutely right that we cannot just solve the hardware store problem without severely limiting access to tools regular people use every day.
However, if we don’t or can’t articulate the alternative, we can’t and won’t get there.
Which cements what I meant about saying “you’ll see more of this happening” not just because 3D printers have simplified certain aspects and made it more accessible to non-traditional gunsmiths, but more because of the social ills which push people to feel the need to pursue such a thing to begin with. As the social ills are not fixed, more people will turn to violence to be heard, whether that’s with traditional methods or modern technology. Violent people are just as likely to use a drone with a bomb strapped to it as they are a molotov cocktail. As you said, it’s not about the level of technology, it’s about why people feel the need to get violent to be heard to begin with.