Sunday, November 10, 2013

The World's First 3D Printed Metal Gun



At the second shot, "Looks like it went over the berm, hehehehe."

Naturally these idiots are so excited about their new gun they don't care about safety. It's all just good fun, right?

The gun-rights fanatics are telling us that DMLS (direct metal laser sintering) is just the next step of the plastic 3D printing that was all the rave about a year ago. I'm not so sure that's the case. Even the machine used to print with plastic was prohibitively expensive at about $200,000.  Imagine what the metal one costs, which is used to make precision parts for airplanes and surgical tools.

The real problem with all this is not the possibility of flooding the market with untraceable firearms manufactured in people's basements, that's not going to happen.  The real problem is what the discussion says about the gun-rights advocates. It says they are not concerned at all about the problem of gun violence. They laugh in our faces when we talk about twice as many kids being killed in gun accidents than was previously thought.  They scoff at the suggestion that gun owners need to be more responsible in the way they store their firearms in order to prevent theft. They refuse outright any attempt to close the private-sale loophole.

Instead of even admitting there's a problem, they offer the Utopian future of 3D metal printing for weapons so the killing can continue.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


37 comments:

  1. "At the second shot, "Looks like it went over the berm, hehehehe."
    Naturally these idiots are so excited about their new gun they don't care about safety. It's all just good fun, right?"

    I guess the most reasonable answer is that just because it went over the berm, they knew what was behind the berm. This is pretty common with ranges. BTW, the maximum range of a .45acp round fired at a 45 degree angle is about 1800 yards.


    "We also must gauge the maximum range of typical small-arms ammunition. The .22 long
    rifle is going about 4,590 feet. That’s just under a mile. The .223 travels about two miles. The
    .30-caliber is going about 15,000 feet or three miles. Those are considerable distances."

    http://www.nssf.org/ranges/rangeresources/library/NSRS/12TechTrackOutdoor/RangeDesign.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How can you not join me in denouncing that disgraceful behavior? How can you possible justify it with that bullshit about what was behind the berm and how far the bullet travels?

      Delete
  2. Prototype technology is always expensive, look at the cost of any leading edge breakthrough, isnt that waht you libs have been saying about things like the Tesla automobile "of course it gonna be expensive wait till they get mass production going....", Mikey it sure sounds like you are sticking your fingers in your ears and singing lalalalala!!!

    http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=20839241

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not doing that. I'm saying all the bruhaha about 3d printing is nonsense. The cost is not just a little bit prohibitive, it's very prohibitive. I doubt very seriously if it will become cost effective and eventually add anything at all to gun availability.

      Off topic links or suggestions are best sent to me by e-mail, please.

      Delete
    2. "I doubt very seriously if it will become cost effective and eventually add anything at all to gun availability."

      I wouldn't go that far Mike, I remember back in the seventies my brother bought a Radio Shack TRS(trash)-80 with 16K of memory for $400. Look at what the same amount can buy today in computing power.

      Delete
    3. Exactly, ssgmarkcr. Now I see where geniuses like Mikeb get the brilliant idea that when the Second Amendment was written, the Founding Fathers never anticipated that firearm technology would advance as it has over the past two and a quarter centuries, and would have tailored the 2nd Amendment much more narrowly if they had.

      That's idiocy, of course, but now we know the source of that "reasoning": they're projecting from their own inability to consider the advance of technology.

      Delete
    4. Whether or not 3D printing becomes widely available and changes the entire debate is besides the point of the post, the main point anyway.

      "The real problem is what the discussion says about the gun-rights advocates. It says they are not concerned at all about the problem of gun violence." etc.

      Delete
    5. Mikeb, it's not that we don't care. It's that we refuse to let you play with our rights to no good end.

      Delete
  3. "The real problem with all this is not the possibility of flooding the market with untraceable firearms manufactured in people's basements, that's not going to happen."

    You are correct, if only for the fact that it hasn't happened yet. A .45 semiauto pistol is World War One technology. You can easily buy a mill adequate to build a pistol frame for much less.
    All the three D printing does is save time, as in the need to acquire skills, changing fixtures, etc. Gun owners already follow the existing rules. this is a political statement, that trying to institute a complete ban ultimately wont be any more effective than banning pot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We don't need to enact a legislative ban on firearms or cannabis, when you lack the monetary resources to buy them. We don't need to ban anything when you are too poor to buy anything.

      Delete
    2. I doubt if the 3d printing method does save time. But, more importantly, as you said folks could buy the equipment necessary to make guns the traditional way for much less. The whole thing is exaggerated nonsense and really has no impact on the gun debate.

      Delete
    3. Of course it does, Mikeb. It shows how impractical gun control is. More and more methods are coming on-line to make sure that no gun ban can ever work.

      Delete
    4. Greg, what the hell are you babbling about? The comparison was between 3D printing of guns and the standard manufacture of them.

      Delete
    5. Mikeb, brainless or tedious? Answers at six...

      My point, which should have been obvious, is that with many different means of making guns, gun control is doomed.

      Delete
  4. If they don't care about safety, why are they firing the gun with a string?

    MikeB: "They refuse outright any attempt to close the private-sale loophole."

    You know that not true. Colburn introduced a bill that Ried never brought to a vote. It was pretty much inline with what I have talked about on numerous occasions on this blog, as well as many other pro-gun people. So why do you say things like this Mike? It's apparent your side doesn't want background checks for private sales- they want to end private sales instead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "MikeB: "They refuse outright any attempt to close the private-sale loophole."

      "It's apparent your side doesn't want background checks for private sales- they want to end private sales instead."

      TS has made a very good point. There were proposed solutions put forward to allow citizens to run an NICS check prior to a private sale, but they were disregarded out of hand.

      Delete
    2. A primary directive to handed down to the imperial pretenders who crawl the ruinous mire of Washington is to pass universal background check legislation, to lay the groundwork for legislation or an executive order which would prohibit any Federal funds from use in background checks for the purpose of civilian firearm transfers.

      It is foreseen that a prohibition on the transfer of firearms by civilians may be achieved by the requirement of an impossible background check. Specific exceptions may be provided to members of the proprietary caste.

      Delete
    3. Oh, it's our fault? Why, because we want to end private sales? That doesn't even make sense. We DO want to end private sales. That's the whole point. And it's your side that won't have it, even though you know it's one of the main ways bad guys get guns.

      Delete
    4. Mikeb, we know nothing of the kind. What we do know is that you want guns removed from society. This new technology is an example of how that's impossible.

      Delete
    5. The truth comes out. So it's not that a background check isn't happening- you don't want us to be able to sell a gun privately even with a check. How come you told us that you don't care how it gets done in the past?

      Delete
    6. Selling a gun with a check, makes it no longer a private sale. Get it?

      Delete
    7. I disagree Mike, the anti-gun lobby has often tried to sell that their only intent is to prevent prohibited persons from being able to purchase firearms by avoiding the NICS checks. And then they constantly repeat how 40% of gun sales aren't subject to these checks, but 80 to 90 percent of citizens (those polled) favor requiring background checks.
      If that were truly the case, then there would be no need to include any identifying information about the firearm at all because the only thing that is germane is whether the buyer is a prohibited person. Like a storekeeper checking someone's ID when selling cigarettes or alcohol.
      This would also be in keeping with your previous comments that prosecuting those who lie on the background check form don't need to be prosecuted if the background check prevents the sale.
      If the claimed percentage of those favoring background checks is correct, then making NICS available to citizens for private gun sales would result in an immediate drop in the percentage of gun buyers not being checked. In fact it would drop to under 10%. That would be quite an accomplishment.
      And it could be accomplished without involving gun dealers doing extra paperwork that the buyer would have to pay for. What do you find wrong with that?

      Delete
    8. I don't find anything wrong with that, I've told you that before. I also don't find anything wrong with requiring "private sellers" to send their prospective buyers to an FFL guy before doing the deal.

      Delete
  5. This is an example of how distributed power will keep you control freaks from winning. Do you get it now, Mikeb? We don't want gun control, and gun control is doomed to failure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What use will guns be to you when you are starving? You will soon trade your "distributed power" for a food ration.

      Delete
  6. The gun-rights fanatics [sic] are telling us that DMLS (direct metal laser sintering) is just the next step of the plastic 3D printing that was all the rave [sic] about a year ago. I'm not so sure that's the case. Even the machine used to print with plastic was prohibitively expensive at about $200,000. Imagine what the metal one costs, which is used to make precision parts for airplanes and surgical tools.

    The real problem with all this is not the possibility of flooding the market with untraceable firearms manufactured in people's basements, that's not going to happen.


    I see some intellectually and morally deficient individual has chosen to ignore the fact that this technology is poised to become much more available and affordable in a few months:

    Here’s what’s holding back 3D printing, the technology that’s supposed to revolutionize manufacturing and countless other industries: patents. In February 2014, key patents that currently prevent competition in the market for the most advanced and functional 3D printers will expire, says Duann Scott, design evangelist at 3D printing company Shapeways.

    These patents cover a technology known as “laser sintering,” the lowest-cost 3D printing technology. Because of its high resolution in all three dimensions, laser sintering can produce goods that can be sold as finished products.



    But by all means, keep whistling past the graveyard of your sick, twisted, evil agenda--that will make it all the more entertaining when you see it all turn to ashes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're being silly (sic), again, Kurt.

      Delete
    2. Good to see you back here, Kurt.

      Delete
    3. Thanks, Greg--good to see you again.

      I probably won't be a regular, but it's fun to occasionally swing by and have a good laugh at the enemy's expense.

      Delete
  7. The first gun was printed using converted CAD drawings intended for CNC milling machines. While 3D printers can use these plans they’re not ideal. So Solid Concepts modified the plans for the second gun to reduce the amount of hand-fitting required to assemble the finished product.
    Solid Concepts wan’t entirely certain how the first design would fare. Composed of sintered stainless steel they built the gun without any heat-treating, which would improve the strength of the parts. With version 1.0 still doing just fine through the first 700 rounds, Solid Concepts is doing something a little different for version 2.0."
    http://www.guns.com/2013/11/20/solid-concepts-3d-printed-1911-gets-version-2-0/?utm_source=feedly

    Here is an important advantage of the 3D printing. Design changes can be made quickly since there aren't any fixtures and jigs that need changing. For example, this design will result in a safer and more economical with a very short turn around time.

    ReplyDelete

  8. At present, in the world we have seen various types of 3D printing strategies; the fundamental procedure is comparatively consistent from one to consequent. In additive manufacturing, three-dimensional objects are created from a material in either liquid or particle type. I see that you describe very clearly about 3D printing and 3D printing materials. Click here Best 3D printer manufacturer company in China.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The [lovers of liberty] are telling us that DMLS (direct metal laser sintering) is just the next step of the plastic 3D printing that was all the rave about a year ago. I'm not so sure that's the case. Even the machine used to print with plastic was prohibitively expensive at about $200,000. Imagine what the metal one costs, which is used to make precision parts for airplanes and surgical tools.

    And . . .

    I'm saying all the bruhaha about 3d printing is nonsense. The cost is not just a little bit prohibitive, it's very prohibitive. I doubt very seriously if it will become cost effective and eventually add anything at all to gun availability.

    Technology marches on, Mikeb, and less than a year after your confident assertion that the cost of 3-D printing in metal would remain "very prohibitive," a 3-D metal printer for under $5,000 comes along:

    Aurora says the most common question they receive is if so many companies are selling metal 3D printers for six figures, how are they selling theirs for such a small fraction. Their answer is this:

    “Firstly we’ve developed an amazing team and developed some remarkable new technologies, and this has allowed us to bring the price point right down. On top of that, we’ve had a lot of experience with mass producing things using robots. On top of this, for us this project is not about making as much money as possible. It’s really about making an incredible tool and putting it into the hands of as many as possible."


    You can even print in titanium for under $10,000--you could make a sweet, strong, ultra-light AR with that.

    Yep, Mikeb, technology marches on, as does freedom.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Kurt,

      I just saw this pop up in the news and your comment about development did too. This sounds pretty cool, IMHO

      "It's about to get a whole lot easier to make a semi-automatic rifle at home with no serial number, no background check, and no waiting period. Cody Wilson, the libertarian behind the world's first 3D-printed gun, is now selling an all-in-one desktop CNC mill, called the Ghost Gunner. It can produce an aluminum lower receiver of an AR-15 rifle — the civilian version of the military's M-16 assault rifle — in a couple of hours."

      "Pre-orders for the Ghost Gunner started this week at prices ranging from $999 to $1,299, and Cody Wilson's organization, Defense Distributed, sold out its original run of 175 units in just a day. Another 100-unit pre-order allotment sold out the next day."

      Its especially interesting considering that California's Governor just vetoed legislating a ban on guns in this category. I think its pretty cool, though I think it being just for AR's is sort of limiting, since I already have one.
      Now if they had offered it with software for 1911 frames too, that would make it more attractive. Maybe next year......

      Delete
    2. I think it's a bit of an oversimplification to say it's limited to AR-15s. According to this, software to allow it to mill AR-10s, and yes, 1911s, too, will be coming:

      Ghost Gunner ships fully assembled and ready to build right out of the box. No assembly is necessary and no programming is required. After installing the included software, you'll be ready to manufacture publicly available .dd designs. Defense Distributed is committed to releasing future firearm design files, from the AR-15 to the AR-10 to the 1911, and then continuing with our own designs.

      I'd like one, but maybe I should keep saving until I can afford the above mentioned Aurora printer. Ideally, I'll eventually have both.

      Delete
    3. Oh, also this:

      More than Guns

      Ghost Gunner is capable of manufacturing more than just firearm receivers. With Defense Distributed's open source Physibles Development SDK (pDev), designers can distribute files via our '.dd' file format, which contains all installation and assembly instructions, any required jig files to hold the part in place (that users can print with a 3D printer), and all machine definitions and code to physically manufacture a particular design.

      To a casual user, the .dd file is a one-stop solution to manufacturing any aluminum physible that the public can design to fit into the build envelope. Defense Distributed will be developing in and supporting this format, and we are happy to publish your own innovations and contributions.

      Delete
    4. That makes it much more attractive I must say. I see that the preorder lot which they wanted to sell by the 20th has already been bought up.

      Delete
    5. The Ghost Gunner is in the news again, and this is pretty intriguing. The group Come and Take it Texas is having an open carry rally in Austin in just under a week, and are bringing their Ghost Gunner along, to crank out AR-15 lower receivers all day, right on the Capitol steps.

      And boy, the gun ban zealots are not happy. Some aren't even trying to hide the fact that their supposed angst over "gun violence" is a lie--at least when said violence is against people like the ones demonstrating next week (bold emphasis added):

      Unfortunately the Federal Government CANNOT act on their own. The individual states take precedence. Therefore, stupid, sick, egomaniac Texans are pushing this "I'm the bully, I rule the world" mentality Please God, find a way to stop this sick Texas idea that tries to take hold of the rest of the US of A. Shoot these bastards DOWN. Change the gun laws

      CSGV--one of America's most rabid hate groups.

      Delete