3D Printed Liberator Pistol: Video, more angles, loading detail


PDA






Dean Weingarten
May 6, 2013, 10:42 PM
In this YouTube video, more details are revealed about the first pistol to be completely produced by a 3D printer. There is one metal part, but it is made from a common nail, and is so ubiquitous that it does not offer any impediment to the creation of these pistols.

Interesting details in this video include how the pistol is loaded. As I thought previously, the .380 ACP, 9x17, 9mm Kurtz, or 9mm Corto, all different designations for the same cartridge, is pushed into the chamber of the barrel by hand, then the barrel is simply snapped into place in the frame of the pistol.

If more than one barrel is printed, relatively fast reloading is possible because the cartridge case need not be extracted. Each barrel would be loaded before use. To reload, the fired barrel would be snapped out of the frame with a rapid upward tug of the off hand. A new loaded barrel would be snapped into place. With a little practice reloading should be possible in 2 seconds.

The video shows that four barrels were printed for the pistol.

As the pistols do not appear to be expensive to make once the 3D printer is available, the common custom from the days of military single shot pistols could be adopted, and a brace (pair) of pistols could be carried.

From the front angle of the video, after the shot, you can see the dark spot of powder residue in the end of the barrel.

YouTube Video link

Dean Weingarten Defense Distributed Distributor

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/05/3d-printed-liberator-pistol-video-more.html

If you enjoyed reading about "3D Printed Liberator Pistol: Video, more angles, loading detail" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rcmodel
May 6, 2013, 10:53 PM
NOT a Liberator pistol!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/M1942_liberator.jpg/450px-M1942_liberator.jpg

And NOT THAT GUY again!!

I am seeing his face in my dreams at night after all the news coverage from the anti-gun news media coverage he is getting!

He even made a azz of himself to the other side on 'America's Gun, The AR-15' the other night by coming across as a nut-case anti-government anarchist.

(Although a well spoken, and not too crazy-eyed and drooling one.)

rc

Dean Weingarten
May 6, 2013, 11:01 PM
The designers and makers call it a "Liberator", in honor of the original.

AlexanderA
May 6, 2013, 11:58 PM
"Zip guns" have been around for a long time. The difference now is that we have high-tech ("3D printed") zip guns instead of low-tech ones. It seems to me that as long as we have "real" guns available, by legal or illegal means, zip guns won't be much of a factor. Heck, even teenage delinquents don't resort to zip guns any more. They don't have to. Crude, homemade guns are a rather quaint and antiquated idea.

rcmodel
May 7, 2013, 12:06 AM
The designers and makers call it a "Liberator", in honor of the original. Nothing honorable at all about calling a plastic one-shot zip-gun a "Liberator" in 'honor' of a gun at least one man died for while manufacturing them at government request to help try to win WWII.

This guy is slightly wacko, in a computer genius sort of way, IMO.

Regardless of his intent?
He is doing the gun debate more harm then good, at just the wrong time!!


IMO: He should be flying under the radar until he comes up with something worthwhile that really works.

Right now, it appears to me he is more concerned with getting his face on TV and Youse-Tubes, then with our gun rights!

rc

pikid89
May 7, 2013, 12:10 AM
they seem to me to be doing it the right way, since Defense Distributed did just get a manufacturers FFL

General Geoff
May 7, 2013, 01:46 AM
The guy is a self-admitted 'free market anarchist.' That doesn't make his contributions to the RKBA any less astounding. Inventing a printable firearm is very much analogous to the invention of the printing press, and just as the printing press revolutionized the written word, so too will printable guns revolutionize the right to keep and bear arms.

Texan Scott
May 7, 2013, 06:11 AM
I'm waiting for a printable black powder blunderbuss. Then, no need to buy ammo either!

Kiln
May 7, 2013, 06:20 AM
Nothing honorable at all about calling a plastic one-shot zip-gun a "Liberator" in 'honor' of a gun at least one man died for while manufacturing them at government request to help try to win WWII.

This guy is slightly wacko, in a computer genius sort of way, IMO.

Regardless of his intent?
He is doing the gun debate more harm then good, at just the wrong time!!


IMO: He should be flying under the radar until he comes up with something worthwhile that really works.

Right now, it appears to me he is more concerned with getting his face on TV and Youse-Tubes, then with our gun rights!

rc
I disagree. The point behind this thing is to have a gun used for only a couple of shots (like the original) intended for people under socialist control.

I don't think it could be more ironic at a time when socialists have more power than ever in the USA.

Inebriated
May 7, 2013, 07:42 AM
NOT a Liberator pistol!

Dangit rc, I wanted to post that!:mad:

hnk45acp
May 7, 2013, 01:55 PM
The media has had a field day with this guy but I think his argument is a sound one. Put the power back into the people's hand. The argument that it will make it easier for criminals to get guns is BS, they get guns anyway and probably much more cheaply. It takes the control of an object out of the hands of the government and that's always a good thing

AethelstanAegen
May 7, 2013, 04:59 PM
Put the power back into the people's hand.

Well let's be honest here though. Really it's "Put the power back in to the people-who-can-afford-a-$8000-3D-printer's hand." I don't think this really gives your common man a more viable resistance weapon that they couldn't build more effectively with a pipe and a handful of home improvement supplies. Really, it does just seem to rile up everyone, perhaps creating pressure for increased regulation on homemade firearms and really in no way gives your average citizen of totalitarian-land a means of resistance. I do kind of think he's a guy with access to some fun technology that has managed to create a storm in a tea cup for his own fame.

essayons21
May 7, 2013, 05:28 PM
There is a certain amount of skill required to set up and operate most of the 3d printers on the market. Just like you can't plop someone down in front of a CnC mill with no training, these printers aren't exactly plug-n-play. However, as costs come down and technology improves I think you will see cheaper, more user-friendly models with the same resolution.

The media and the left is all in a tizzy over this for some reason. I guess they don't realize that someone with zero mechanical knowledge can go to a hardware store and make a 12ga shotgun in a few minutes, for less than $20 in materials, and with nothing but a hacksaw.

The anti's view guns as some sort of evil magical beings, and don't understand that they are among the simplest of modern machines.

Anybody with any sort of machining or shop experience and access to a drill press could do much better than this 3D printed gun for much less money.

I could care less about this new "Liberator." 3D printing is an immature technology and I'm not ready to bite. In 5-10 years it will be a different story.

However, I think what Defense Distributed is doing by hosting these CAD files of firearms and accessories is great. It is the ultimate example of why gun control will never work... the knowledge is out there. If the products are no longer available from the factories, the factory will just shift to our garages and workshops, which is where all industry began in the first place.

gc70
May 7, 2013, 10:08 PM
As I thought previously, the .380 ACP, 9x17, 9mm Kurtz, or 9mm Corto, all different designations for the same cartridge, is pushed into the chamber of the barrel by hand, then the barrel is simply snapped into place in the frame of the pistol.

I did not see rounds being loaded in the linked video and the range on which the gun was tested was marked ".22 Rimfire Only."

Could you provide links to stories or videos about the calibers in which the gun has been made.

barnbwt
May 7, 2013, 10:18 PM
The media and the left is all in a tizzy over this for some reason

Many in this country fear the idea of people being able to do stuff themselves, and hate the means to do so.

*snark hat on*

"Yawn, wake me up when it's perfected, proven for 10+ years, and won three wars. Then we'll know if it's worth getting excited over. This guy's gonna do nothing but ruin the sweet gig us home-builders have by exposing the legality of making our own guns. He should wait to release these prototypes until after they're accepted by everyone, everywhere."

*end snark*

TCB

junyo
May 7, 2013, 11:27 PM
Well let's be honest here though. Really it's "Put the power back in to the people-who-can-afford-a-$8000-3D-printer's hand." I don't think this really gives your common man a more viable resistance weapon that they couldn't build more effectively with a pipe and a handful of home improvement supplies. Really, it does just seem to rile up everyone, perhaps creating pressure for increased regulation on homemade firearms and really in no way gives your average citizen of totalitarian-land a means of resistance. I do kind of think he's a guy with access to some fun technology that has managed to create a storm in a tea cup for his own fame.Defcad's target device is a Reprap 3D printer, which can be bought/built for in the neighborhood of a grand. And it's a LOT easier to use than a CNC mill.

And the point isn't a viable weapon, the point IS to get people riled up. Hippies do think guns are produced by evil NRA wizards pronouncing secret incantations on a temple underneath Mt Doom. These guys, more that any letter writing, phone calling, BS political process are demonstrating to those hippies that gun control is now beyond their grasp.

God, I get so sick of people crapping on someone that's actually punching the opposition in the face. If the guy had printed a Glock 19 I swear there'd be people complaining that it was useless until he could print a 1911.

tarosean
May 7, 2013, 11:43 PM
Really it's "Put the power back in to the people-who-can-afford-a-$8000-3D-printer's hand." I don't think this really gives your common man a more viable resistance weapon that they couldn't build more effectively with a pipe and a handful of home improvement supplies.


Pretty much... I can buy a topshelf handgun, shotgun and AR or AK for about the same money that will last my lifetime. Or a thousand disposable ring of fire / hi points..

Heck even a mini lathe is only about a grand.

jerkface11
May 7, 2013, 11:49 PM
You guys are living in the wrong century. The printers get cheaper every year. And they aren't $8000.

pikid89
May 8, 2013, 12:09 AM
Try $499

http://portabee3dprinter.com/shop/

Dean Weingarten
May 8, 2013, 12:41 AM
Here is an article with a lot more detail on how the pistol works. It references the .380 ACP.

http://www.examiner.com/article/defense-distributed-declares-government-monopoly-on-force-obsolete

bigbayou87
May 8, 2013, 01:05 AM
I agree with junyo. The message is more powerful than the gun itself.

c4v3man
May 8, 2013, 01:45 AM
I wish he would come across a little more professional. I suppose it's very likely that he intends to portray himself as a little wacky, dangerous, etc since it's obvious that's the greatest way to get the media to show up.

I just wish he would have used a ransom rest, over a chronograph, with a target, etc to demonstrate safe usage of an untested process. Pulling the gun up and firing basically un-aimed at a berm just comes across as sloppy and haphazard.

That being said, the technology exists whether or not Distributed Defense brings it to the media's attention. While it may not be the best representation, it's hardly the worst.

Tanasie
May 8, 2013, 01:52 AM
When it was introduced during WW2 it was called a 'Liberator" pistol..they were produced to fire the .45 cal. acp cartridge, they didn't have an extracter and were issued with a short wooden dowel to push the spent casing out. They were air dropped to guerilla forces in S.E. Asia.

AethelstanAegen
May 8, 2013, 02:26 AM
Try $499

That 3D printer you linked is only $500. That was not the 3D printer these things are built on and not all 3D printers are created equal. At the moment it's really only the high end stuff that they've been able to successfully do this on. I don't particularly care one way or the other what he's doing, but he's certainly not proving the point that gun control is impossible or in some way providing anything you couldn't provide with just an MS paint file on how to build a gun out of some piping. The importance of the project is WAY over inflated.

God, I get so sick of people crapping on someone that's actually punching the opposition in the face.

I don't think he's really proving any points with the opposition at all. They don't see this as a situation where "gee, this makes our gun control useless" they see it as "Holy cow, we need to really step up our gun control plans and regulate home construction because are printing these out now."

CoRoMo
May 8, 2013, 11:05 AM
I'm going to wait until they get all the wrinkles smoothed out before I get one. Usually the first model hits the market with a few kinks that need to be corrected. Ruger will surely recall it soon and then it'll be gtg. Does anyone know if they are using MIM parts in this model?



;)

mgmorden
May 8, 2013, 11:33 AM
Well let's be honest here though. Really it's "Put the power back in to the people-who-can-afford-a-$8000-3D-printer's hand." I don't think this really gives your common man a more viable resistance weapon that they couldn't build more effectively with a pipe and a handful of home improvement supplies.

Today's $8000 3D-printer is tommorrow's $150 special at Best Buy. Trust me, technology like this gets cheap and FAST. I remember when flat panel monitors came out I told my roommate that I wanted one (thought they were cool). He laughed at how "stupid" I was because 15" ones were several thousand dollars at the time. Less than 3 years later I had a 17" model sitting on my desk that I paid $350 for. Now less than 10 years later you can get a 23" one for under $150.

More so than anything else, technology drops in price over time.

gym
May 8, 2013, 12:08 PM
Don't forget that 15 or so years ago, a good computer would cost $2-3000.00 dollars, and an Apple still does. You can easily spend 5 grand on the newest apple desktop or laptop. So this is not that far out considering my next door neighbor has several new apple machines and monitors. I myself have 3, and 6 monitors, But I have been building machines since they first came out.
I am sure that you will be able to buy of make you own 3d printer for a couple thousand or less in a few years. And as the designs get better and the "materials" that are used for resins get stronger. You could see a fully functional semi or revolver type gun made that would function almost as good as a low end new pistol. Perhaps a few metal parts will be needed like springs or barrels, but that could easily be overcome with a "kit" of some sort.
That would open a whole new market, good, or bad, I don't know. But I do know that the government will do something about it before it gets there but it's impossible to prevent the software from getting out and into anyone's hands who can use a search engine or has ever seen the hacking websites that have just about anything you can imagine on them

jerkface11
May 8, 2013, 12:18 PM
But I do know that the government will do something about it before it gets there

Didn't they ban all plastic guns in the 80's?

Old Fuff
May 8, 2013, 12:33 PM
I understand that they have made an AR15, lower, so I presume that a 1911 Colt-style frame wouldn't be out of the question. All of the other parts are unrestricted and easily available. :uhoh: :evil:

The leftist mainstream media knows absolutely nothing about guns, and as a consequence will blow this thing way out of proportion. Some of them still believe that a Glock pistol cannot be detected by an airport scanner, and the general public can buy "cop-killer" bullets. I expect Sen. Shumer will demand FBI background checks on 3D printer buyers. As it is said, they're is no cure for stupid.

Not to worry, by next week the media will have forgoten all of this and moved on to something else.

BBQJOE
May 8, 2013, 01:59 PM
I think this all just goes to show that try as they might, there is no way to keep firearms from anyone. Something like this just about nullifies gun control.

DNS
May 8, 2013, 02:10 PM
I'm waiting for the app.
;)

hnk45acp
May 8, 2013, 03:02 PM
The tech will get cheaper and the materials will be more commonplace. It's not the end product that's important it's the power to become a manufacturer and controller of your own technology without other institutions (gun companies, shipping companies, parts companies and the govt.) getting involved.
Buy printer, get material and that's it.

Old Fuff
May 8, 2013, 03:13 PM
From pre-history to present, as long as they're have been weapons someone has tried to control who could have them, and without exception those efforts failed as technology brought forth improved and better ones. This example is simply another example - but by no means the only one.

So those who want to control who can have what will try to excercise control over the technology, and ultimately they will fail again.

amflyer
May 8, 2013, 03:24 PM
Want to impress me? Print me up a case of CCI Mini-Mags, then we'll talk. Otherwise it's just a stunt.

mgmorden
May 8, 2013, 04:03 PM
Want to impress me? Print me up a case of CCI Mini-Mags, then we'll talk. Otherwise it's just a stunt.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

"But what...is it good for?"
- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of DEC

History is full of people who thought a lot of technology was useless or "just a stunt". Trust me - 3D printing is revolutionary. Not just for guns (that's just a the on-topic part of the tech for this board), but just in general. Being able to replicate plastic objects (and other materials as the tech matures) at home with the click of the mouse is HUGE.

I'd wager that within the next 10-15 years, you'll find a 3D printer in almost every household, and the ones that you'll be buying for your home in 15 years will make today's uberexpensive ones look like toys.

Nathanael_Greene
May 8, 2013, 04:29 PM
How long before somebody asks for a 3-d printable holster?

Jim, West PA
May 8, 2013, 04:40 PM
Well there goes all the plastic now to panic buying driving all other petrolium product prices thru the roof.:rolleyes:
Mmmm... milk will now go back into glass bottles and taste soooo good :D

gym
May 8, 2013, 04:57 PM
That "the holster" would be similar to the glock holster and could be done easily now. In the 60's I worked on an IC, Integrated Circuit" testing machine, that was the size of 2 Jen air ovens, for the Government, My dads plant was a subcontractor for al the big guys of the day, "Most are gone now", Grumman, Lockheed, Republic, etc. But I remember from the "transistor" days we would say how the heck much can they possibly put on these chips?
And they were huge then, like the size of a small "flash drive", It's amazing how much we have evolved since then, someone sent me an email of things that weren't around in the 1920's and I just looked at it for 10 minutes, trying to imagine what life was like back then,
At the rate we progress technologically we haven't seen anything yet. I believe that in a few years you will be able to order some things online, not just guns, and it will be printed to your printer. Of course not all items can be duplicated but a lot can, and as the technology goes forward it will get more sophisticated so as to possibly make the internals of an object by scanning it with new types of lasers, and new materials that are being developed.
Meanwhile I still drop calls on my new cell phone, and tires still last 2 years tops.
People are spending a million dollars to see the moon, but you can't get an operator to answer your local bank.
I think once they formulate a resin that is just "harder & stronger "than what they have now, it will be the dawn of a new day for guns. Weather they can make a rifled barrel in the future has a lot to do with it also, it probably will happen, just like springs , "when they find a new material".

Sambo82
May 8, 2013, 05:37 PM
The tech will get cheaper and the materials will be more commonplace. It's not the end product that's important it's the power to become a manufacturer and controller of your own technology without other institutions (gun companies, shipping companies, parts companies and the govt.) getting involved. Buy printer, get material and that's it.



Bingo. I think people here are really missing the significance of this. I know people feel that he's giving gun owners a bad image, but the entire point of this is to create a world where it doesn't matter what people feel about gun ownership, because it would be unregulatable. If these cad files are freely available for download, say on a torrent hosting site, then the government could no more regulate them then they can regulate common media piracy.

Yes, zip guns have been around for a long time. Yes, with a length of pipe and some hand tools someone could make a slam fire shotgun in their garage, but the image and idea of being able to manufacture a firearm, from start to finish with little firearms knowledge from your home computer is profound. "Watershed" might be too strong of a word, but I have literally won dozens of arguments with anti's bent on regulation by bringing up the fact that anyone, anyone, can just "print" a firearm from home. Under such circumstances they have to concede that banning would do no good for obvious reasons, and background checks would do no good because there is no transaction. When I then ask them if they have any other ideas, they respond in the negative, and I usually close by telling them that technology has simply changed our ability to regulate things.

The price of printers is dropping on a weekly basis, and more and more often they can print with better materials. Printing in aluminum and even titanium is possible now, and it's a matter of time before that becomes affordable, too. Cody Wilson's slightly arrogant personality aside, this is kind of a big deal.

Tully M. Pick
May 8, 2013, 06:10 PM
The first CD burner I bought back in the '90s cost $2000 and took forever to burn a CD.

Where will this tech be in 20 years?

BobTheTomato
May 8, 2013, 07:58 PM
Most of the printers use plastic right now. Just imagine when you can print with metals that have a halfway decent strength to them. A printer like that plus a scanner and as long as you can break down your firearm you can copy it.

junyo
May 8, 2013, 09:18 PM
I don't think he's really proving any points with the opposition at all. They don't see this as a situation where "gee, this makes our gun control useless" they see it as "Holy cow, we need to really step up our gun control plans and regulate home construction because are printing these out now."And?

They can regulate whatever ever they want. Unless they ban the internet, plastic filament and stepper motors they can suck it. Again, that's the point. And with the people that understand this - which is most of the sub 25 year old population of the first world - it looks like confused old men who don't understand the universe that they now inhabit, railing about the dangers of rock and roll and demon rum. It's a cultural wedge issue for the RKBA movement. Please, please, please God let the gun grabbers try and control/outlaw 3D printers. They'd make every maker in the world convert to our side.

444
May 8, 2013, 09:55 PM
I am sure this hasn't been lost on the people here, but the ability to make a gun didn't start with 3D printing.

Every gun ever made was built on machine tools that any one of us could own. Lathes, mills, drills................................. were the ancestors of 3D printing and they not only CAN make a gun, they made every gun ever produced.

So what is the difference ?

The-Reaver
May 8, 2013, 10:40 PM
I think the point is instead of supplying France with pistols. This takes the place for modern America. We can just pump these things out. :-)

jerkface11
May 8, 2013, 10:56 PM
How many would you have to turn in at gun buybacks to pay for the printer and supplies?

Nickel Plated
May 8, 2013, 10:57 PM
So what is the difference ?

3D printers are (or soon will be) easy to use by anyone and will be in practically every home in the U.S.

Lathes, mills, and drills require skill that many people don't have time or money to learn and require at least some workshop space to store and operate that many people simply don't have. (Try running a lathe and mill in a studio apartment)

With a 3D printer, you download a gun design (which I'm sure will be plentiful once the market gets going) click "Print" and go take a nap. Enjoy your new gun in a couple of hours.

junyo
May 8, 2013, 11:04 PM
I am sure this hasn't been lost on the people here, but the ability to make a gun didn't start with 3D printing.

Every gun ever made was built on machine tools that any one of us could own. Lathes, mills, drills................................. were the ancestors of 3D printing and they not only CAN make a gun, they made every gun ever produced.

So what is the difference ?Democratization, cost and simplicity.

The fact that tools exist that allow something to be created isn't the same thing as those tools being cheap, available or easy to use. Photography didn't start with digital, but digital photography sure as heck was a seismic shift. Because it made a PITA process (developing your own film and/or printing your own images isn't that hard, how many people actually did it on a regular basis?) simple, faster and cheaper. A guy with a decent camera and a PC could now afford to shoot a lot, learn, and experiment; thus he was largely put on the same footing with the local 'pro' (whether that increased the quality of photography is a different conversation).

People keep looking at the object produced and not what the process represents, or how it's being marketed. Long before DD was pushing this I was telling people that technology would obsolete gun control, and the answer was 'Sure, for people like you, cause you're a tech guy.' The willful ignorance of the gun control advocate is that guns are super complicated; if people want to be mad, they should be mad at the enterprising CNC mill maker didn't publicise his sub $1k 3 axis CNC mill that could be operated by anyone that can use Sketchup. Oh yeah, there isn't one. And they're not exactly simple to operate. Lathes, mills, drills represent an entirely different level of cost and complexity than a printer. Sure they do a better job, now. But the printing technology is a lot less far along it's life cycle than physical machining tech is. What's different here is the down the road potential of the completely untrained/unskilled person to be able to produce a functional defensive firearm, and what that means to the future of the state's ability to control the RKBA.

Dean Weingarten
May 8, 2013, 11:19 PM
I believe that Defense Distributed's demonstrated ability to print functional magazines had an impact in getting that restriction dropped from the debate.

splattergun
May 8, 2013, 11:38 PM
As was mentioned in an earlier post, 3D printers are sold as low as $500. They are not complicated to use. I's nearly as simple as sending a Word file to your inkjet. 5 years ago my daughter was using a $10,000 3D printer (while they were still a new novelty) in a high school technology class. The class got 2 hours of training on the CAD software and 30 minutes training on the machine. 2 weeks later she was printing prototypes of a complicated bushing/bolt of her own design. The learning curve to print a simple gun for which drawings already exist is not extremely steep.

But the 3D pistol is not a serious threat, IMO. It is impractical even as a "Liberator" or "Zip" gun. ABS plastic is quite brittle, has a low melting temp and, unless you want to spend the money for virgin plastic, quite inconsistent quality. Yes, printers and materials will improve in quality and come down in price. A few guns will be printed. Some will Kaboom, demonstrating the weakness of the concept. But I don't believe they will replace even the cheapest Saturday night special in our mythology.

Nickel Plated
May 8, 2013, 11:57 PM
But the 3D pistol is not a serious threat, IMO. It is impractical even as a "Liberator" or "Zip" gun. ABS plastic is quite brittle, has a low melting temp and, unless you want to spend the money for virgin plastic, quite inconsistent quality. Yes, printers and materials will improve in quality and come down in price. A few guns will be printed. Some will Kaboom, demonstrating the weakness of the concept. But I don't believe they will replace even the cheapest Saturday night special in our mythology.

Once they start printing in metal (some of which already can infact) then it will be perfectly possible to build a gun that's more than just a single-shot, manually-loaded zip gun. Semi-automatics and revolvers will be entirely possible.
At that point I believe it will easily replace atleast the lower end pistols on the market. Simply because it'll be the way which those lower end pistols are made.
If a company wants to make a gun on a budget, why spend money on all the mills, lathes, drills and people needed to operate them when you can have one machine take the place of pretty much all of them and just have a couple of guys for the whole shop just to keep an eye on things and feed more material in the printer.

barnbwt
May 9, 2013, 12:05 AM
I think this all just goes to show that try as they might, there is no way to keep firearms from anyone. Something like this just about nullifies gun control.


Even the gunnies who want him to stop can't do a thing about it :D

Honestly, this tech couldn't come at a better time. Yes, you can machine your own gun, but the number of privately-owned Bridgeport Mills-per-capita is probably as low as it's ever been in this country. Economics and short-sightedness have moved heavy industry--and the expertise to wield it--overseas, and we have orders of magnitude more guys who know how to program a spreadsheet than work a manual lathe. Since CNC shows no prospect of ever coming down in price (it's climbing in capability, but the capital investment on these rigs is still enormous) we're left with the prototypers, if we are going to have robots make our stuff (since we no longer know how).

I's nearly as simple as sending a Word file to your inkjet
Anyone who remembers (I barely do) early tape and inkjet printers knows they jammed constantly, required maintenance and tweaking, and were generally a pain to deal with. Prototypers are no exception, and unless you get a model from someone who's already set theirs up and calibrated/debugged everything, it's not anywhere close to simple plug and play (especially if you are building your own). The parts still have to be finish sanded and fitted to eachother if FDM plastic extrusion is used. The closest thing to what most folks envision is SLA printing which is pricier (the Formlabs Form 1 printer coming out is 5000$) but comes out looking injection-moulded and is much stronger than FDM extrusion-forms.

And all that is assuming a person knows how to use CAD software or design things in the first place. It's more akin to programming, than playing a video.

TCB

Old Fuff
May 9, 2013, 12:08 AM
The technology is far from perfected, but it represents a threat to those within the government that dream of having all-powerful control over "the people."

Most of them have little knowledge (or maybe none) of how firearms are made, or how they work. They presume that they can't be produced with anything short of a completely equiped factory. Tell them that both guns and ammunition can be home made, and they either sputter in disbelife or blow up and go through the roof.

This being the case they are now floored by this report that anyone with a computer and printer can make anything from a banned 30-round rifle magazine to a complete gun. This of course is not quite true, :evil: but it has ripped the ground out from under them. Given their limited insights the only thing they can think to do is push the panic button and then call for additional legislation.

What happens next will be interesting... :D

gym
May 9, 2013, 12:37 AM
While in the car this afternoon, the subject was brought up on WZZR, a popular 24 hour a day, "talk radio show", here in Florida. They have been talking about it all week, you can call in and discuss anything you choose to "within limits" like sports dating , etc. This topic has gotten a lot of attention on air lately as I have heard it several times in the last few weeks. Today they said that the 3d printer was used to make an "ear", for a patient in a hospital, and a finger for another. If true it's a phenomenal achievement. I would think that they could make prosthetic devices identical, "in looks" to the original body part in reconstructive surgeries. I am going to research it further, but it would be great for our troops who have been severally injured fighting for us, along with everyone else who needs this kind of surgery.
It also shows how useful these machines are starting to be, not just for guns. Which also works out well to stop any actions such as banning them for their use in areas that the government doesn't care for.
I found it to be fact and they are starting to use the technology right now,
http://www.singularityweblog.com/bespoke-innovations-3d-printed-prosthetics-if-lizards-can-grow-tails-humans-should-print-limbs/

Nickel Plated
May 9, 2013, 12:38 AM
And all that is assuming a person knows how to use CAD software or design things in the first place.

That's not even particularly necessary. I'm sure there are more than a few gunnies out there who know how to use CAD software and would be more than happy to make publicly available gun designs. Then all u do is download and print.
You don't need to know how to crack a videogame in order to get yourself an extra copy. You go to a torrent site and just download it. There are plenty of people out there who know how, and are willing to do all the technical stuff for you. You just reap the benefits.

barnbwt
May 9, 2013, 01:00 AM
I recall reading recently about a man who had had a large portion of his skull replaced with a printed part derived from the intact opposite portion. Was said to be about as tough as a helmet that would have been needed to protect the soft spot, but obviously less obtrusive.

I hadn't heard about the ear; I still think that ear they grew on the mouse was the coolest/freakiest medical experiment ever, though :D

I'm sure there are more than a few gunnies out there who know how to use CAD software and would be more than happy to make publicly available gun designs. Then all u do is download and print.

The printers aren't (and never will be, by physical limitations) as consistent unit-to-unit as the internals of a video game system. The stepper motors, limit switches, fusers, and other bits have too many degrees of freedom for a one size fits all solution. Just like how no one would ever do something foolish like blindly run a downloaded AR-lower toolpath on their CNC machine. What works for one, may not work for some, so you have to verify. I will say that printing is easier than CNC simply because you're less likely to break something while tuning it, and because it's so much cheaper to mess around with :D.

I can't believe no one with a printer has chimed in on any of these threads so far. I guess they aren't as common as the media would like us to believe ;)

You don't need to know how to crack a videogame in order to get yourself an extra copy.
Not that I have (in case any FBI are listening) but a great many of those cracks are either buggy, junk, viruses, or perfect. On a computer I can always re-image, that's not a huge risk. On something containing high pressure inches from my face, well...:eek:. Talk about a case study in how laws have been ineffective at stopping the distribution of easily copied material, though. The game developers eventually figure out ways to make it more difficult to crack the game; I'm not sure how a firearms designer could do something similar to prevent duplication of a physical object, especially since 3D laser scanners are coming out :D. I guess they'll start incorporating pieces that can only be made by fancy trade-secret processes like MIM or drop-forging :rolleyes:

TCB

Capybara
May 9, 2013, 02:27 AM
ANYTHING that makes Schumer, Bloomberg, Feinstein and Dear Leader pee their pants at the implication is fine by me. They are going to regulate anything and everything they can ram through in the next few years anyway so I take this as a nice PR/propaganda salvo in our present cultural war for our civil rights.

AethelstanAegen
May 9, 2013, 03:09 PM
I can't believe no one with a printer has chimed in on any of these threads so far. I guess they aren't as common as the media would like us to believe

My brother-in-law has one he built himself and it's certainly an impressive machine. I get the point you guys are trying to make but I really think the whole story gets more publicity than it deserves. It's really not that much different than making blueprints for other homemade firearms available online (which has already happened). While the technology is pretty revolutionary (3D printing itself), this project really doesn't strike me that way...more of a continuation of things that have happened for a long time already.

444
May 9, 2013, 03:29 PM
Right

I think some people missed the point of my previous post. I understand that this is revolutionary technology. However, the technology to build guns is and always has been around. This is just the latest version of it. I fully realize that you have to know what you are doing to make a gun on machine tools, but that isn't all that rare that someone does. Again, I grant you that you also have to own some expensive equipment to duplicate a really fine quality firearm, but even this could be gotten around.

I don't know about today's school system, but when I was in high school, pretty much every high school had a machine shop. And taught you at least the basics of how to make simple things on them. My senior year, we were told we could make anything we wanted as long as we submitted drawings of what we were going to make prior to starting the project (he later ammended that to prohibit any kind of dope smoking devices, ice picks, or brass knuckles). At that time, if I said I was going to machine a gun, nobody could have cared less. And if it turned out nice, the school administration probably would have congratulated me and had pictures of it in the paper.

I would think that any heavy industry would have a machine shop along with the people to run the machines. I can't tell you how many of my dad's things I tore up when I was a teenager that required my dad to have new parts made in the machine shop where he worked. I was actually amazed when I ruined the rear end in the lawn tractor trying to do burnouts and wheelies: the next night my dad came home from work with all the parts required to fix it; that were machined at his job.

The point of all this is that we always could make guns, and 99% of the people who could, didn't. It has never been a problem and probably never will be a problem. I also believe that the people capable of printing a gun arn't going to commit crimes with them. This guy is making a statement. That's all.

HarcyPervin
May 9, 2013, 03:52 PM
Just saw this on Twitter from Forbes - http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/05/09/state-department-demands-takedown-of-3d-printable-gun-for-possible-export-control-violation/?utm_campaign=forbestwittersf&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

Apparently the state department is demanding the plans be taken offline due to possible export violations...

CoRoMo
May 9, 2013, 04:01 PM
...possible export violations...
Obviously a reinterpretation on their part.

Reminds me of the way the ATF was trying to interpret the income of Kyle Myers as being subject to the code that defines being engaged in the firearms/explosives business, and doing so without a license.

Nickel Plated
May 9, 2013, 09:50 PM
The point of all this is that we always could make guns, and 99% of the people who could, didn't. It has never been a problem and probably never will be a problem. I also believe that the people capable of printing a gun arn't going to commit crimes with them. This guy is making a statement. That's all.

The thing is not to commit crimes with them but to show the government that regardless of what laws or regulations they impose, we WILL have guns. (So OK, I guess that will involve committing "crimes")
The reason people by and large haven't made firearms despite many of them having the means and ability to do so is just because factory made guns have always been readily available in this country. So most don't bother when it's cheaper and easier to just got to the store and buy a gun that will in all likelyhood be considerably better than whatever you manage to make.
However if laws make commercially buying firearms impractical. Then I can see DIY weapons becoming popular if there is technology in place that allows it to be easily done.
People used to always got to the Kodak shop to have their photos developed and printed...until technology made it convenient and easy enough to just do yourself at home with a printer and Photoshop. Now when was the last time you went to a professional photo shop?

junyo
May 9, 2013, 10:04 PM
3D Guns Advocate Cody Wilson is About More Than Weapons and That's What Most Frightens People About Him (http://reason.com/blog/2013/05/08/3d-guns-advocate-cody-wilson-is-about-mo)
Like the rest of the world (see J.D. Tuccille's copious coverage), the New Yorker is pretty alarmed by the possibilities of 3D weapon printing, but writer Jacob Silverman in expressing his confusion and fear is at least more perspicacious than most about the ideas and goals of leading 3D weapon printing spokes-gadfly, Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed....

Silverman gets it: Wilson is a full service provocateur for what liberty really means, even if that means being initially a snake-oil salesman of sorts, hyping possibilities beyond their apparent reality at the moment. It's not what a 3D gun can do right now that matters. It's the idea that anyone can make anything they want at home, beyond most of the obvious points where they are interacting publicly with others where they can be most easily obstructed, licensed, regulated, taxed--that's the important part.

Silverman's alarm continues:

Wilson...and his collaborators hope that new technologies like bitcoin and 3-D printing will do nothing less than abrogate government, returning power to individuals and small sovereign communities. To him, 3-D printing presents “a world where you can have a firearm if you want. This is a world of equality.”Emphasis mine. This is what scares them shtlss.

barnbwt
May 9, 2013, 10:09 PM
Obviously a reinterpretation on their part.

It must be so nice to run the ATF, where you can both write and enforce the laws as you see fit :rolleyes:. I'm surprised Congress has never gotten jealous (though they actually seem to relish relinquishing their job duties to other branches, these days)

Among their creations of whole-cloth:
"Readily Convertible" (an open-bolt is a MG, but a hack-saw isn't a SBS?)
"Constructive Possession" (even if you aren't in possession, if we can make the charges stick we'll nail you)
"Engaged in the Business of" (one would think the IRS would make this determination :scrutiny:)

The reason people by and large haven't made firearms despite many of them having the means and ability to do so is just because factory made guns have always been readily available in this country
X A billion. People who've never built guns have no idea how difficult and expensive in time and equipment it is, and people who say it's cheap and easy are full of it. Easy--for an expert machinist who's made 15 rifles after screwing up the first 5.

I think Cody's dream is to represent someone who printed one of his pistols in NYC before the Supreme Court ;) --good luck with that

TCB

MagnumWill
May 9, 2013, 11:18 PM
jerkface11 How many would you have to turn in at gun buybacks to pay for the printer and supplies?


Now THAT's what I'm talking about. $12 of material for a $50 gift card to the grocery store? Baby- you had better get a big truck, because I jus brought a U-Haul full of "no-questions-asked" firearms. Suddenly gun buybacks would be a Hee-UGE money pit for police departments. :D

And there's no way they can regulate material. It's like now- do we need a background check to buy aluminum? Steel? Wood for 2X4's with a nail in it?

justice06rr
May 10, 2013, 12:29 AM
History is full of people who thought a lot of technology was useless or "just a stunt". Trust me - 3D printing is revolutionary. Not just for guns (that's just a the on-topic part of the tech for this board), but just in general. Being able to replicate plastic objects (and other materials as the tech matures) at home with the click of the mouse is HUGE.

I'd wager that within the next 10-15 years, you'll find a 3D printer in almost every household, and the ones that you'll be buying for your home in 15 years will make today's uberexpensive ones look like toys.

Its not the 3D technology we're not impressed with. its the product and the guy who is doing it.

Now if 3D printers can make me a reliable metal/polymer gun that is repeatable and holds more than one round, then that would be much better.

Before we can get on board or even spend hundreds or thousands of $$ on a 3D equipment and materials, we need to know it can produce a good solid product that will not break easily. So does that mean we need to wait another 10-15yrs to be able to produce a reliable gun and afford a good 3d printer? That doesn't really help our problems now

It seems DD is still in its infancy with the 3D gun. When he comes out with a real pistol like a Glock then that would be enormous. Right now you can probably make a shotgun with basic metals and some tools you can buy at Home Depot and build it in your garage...

Not crapping on the guy, but he's attitude and presentation is way off. Put this in the hands of a reputable person or manufacturer and it will be a different story.

S.W.G.
May 10, 2013, 12:31 AM
IMO: He should be flying under the radar until he comes up with something worthwhile that really works.

This gun has been tested and functioned just fine.

We shouldn't be disparaging someone who is trying to further firearms technology and metaphorically 'flip the bird' to the feds at the same time.

mgmorden
May 10, 2013, 10:43 AM
Before we can get on board or even spend hundreds or thousands of $$ on a 3D equipment and materials, we need to know it can produce a good solid product that will not break easily. So does that mean we need to wait another 10-15yrs to be able to produce a reliable gun and afford a good 3d printer? That doesn't really help our problems now

You do realize that technology is incremental right? Without people tinkering with the inbetween stages, you never just magically arrive at the "Hey, it works now" stage.

Your sentiment would be akin to saying we shouldn't bother with smoothbore flintlocks because they aren't that accurate and can only fire once. While those limitations are true, without them as a step along the way, we don't just magically invent repeating cartridge-fed firearms one day.

I get the idea - sit back and wait for someone else to do the legwork - that's fine (we're not all engineers, and the very idea of this project is that we shouldn't have to be), but don't demean those who are actually doing that work.

Old Fuff
May 10, 2013, 11:15 AM
The Old Fuff would point out that the history of firearms development is one where baby steps were taken that altimately supported a major development such as the percussion cap, metallic cartridges and smokeless powder Then came a big leap.

And to help push the gun control advocate's panic even more, consider that all of this discussion going on will likely inspire alternative methods of making home-built guns. :evil:

What if I could put an AR15 rifle or .45 1911 pistol together in my basement?? Impossible of course, but what if..... :eek: :uhoh: :rolleyes:

NormB
May 10, 2013, 11:27 AM
"Liberator?" In .22 caliber? Are car antennas - for zip guns - becoming THAT rare?

velodog
May 10, 2013, 11:58 AM
I think many of you are missing a fundamental point here.

Governments around the world aren't going to try to ban 3D printers. They're going to try to ban distribution of the design files used to make weapons with 3D printers.

They are going to try to ban information -- 1's and 0's.

And they will fail, just like they failed to stop music from being pirated on the internet.

Governments can't successfully ban weapons without also banning the knowledge needed to make those weapons. At the end of the day, the only way for governments to take away our right to keep and bear arms is to take away our freedom of speech, too.

berettaprofessor
May 10, 2013, 12:07 PM
Just read an article about how 3D printers will be impractical because of everyone needing to know CAD to design anything. Stupid author overlooks the fact that designs will be made and distributed......I don't know iPhone programming, but I've bought lots of apps!

FitGunner
May 10, 2013, 12:18 PM
Interesting CNET article:
Why fear of 3D-printed guns is overblown
Despite worries about the dangers of 3D printed firearms, there's little chance of anyone with a MakerBot device gunning people down. Even gun-control advocates think the hype is too much.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57583823-76/why-fear-of-3d-printed-guns-is-overblown/

mrvco
May 10, 2013, 12:24 PM
They won't "ban" 3D printers, but the will regulate them... there will at least be some sort of "printer steganography" (A technology already implemented in consumer color printers to track copyright infringement and counterfeiters) incorporated into 3D printers so the federales can track a printed object back to a specific 3D printer.

Ian
May 10, 2013, 12:31 PM
That's a fine plan, except for the open-source printers (no way to hide steganography in open-source code) and the coming-soon printers that can manufacture more printers.

M-Cameron
May 10, 2013, 12:39 PM
They won't "ban" 3D printers, but the will regulate them... there will at least be some sort of "printer steganography" (A technology already implemented in consumer color printers to track copyright infringement and counterfeiters) incorporated into 3D printers so the federales can track a printed object back to a specific 3D printer.



That's easy to do with money because money has a known and specific look to it.......

......what does a gun look like?

barnbwt
May 10, 2013, 11:57 PM
Yeah, I'm not sure the Feds have ever tried to censor an entire class of technology before :uhoh:. Are they gonna cry "ITAR" every time someone puts up a printable AR grip? Or only if they do so with cameras rolling ;)


"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY57ErBkFFE)

When he comes out with a real pistol like a Glock then that would be enormous
Yes, when he comes out with a game-changing product that completely alters the landscape of the industry for decades to come, all over the world, then yes, that would be "enormous." I guess we have to settle for the fact that this technology merely threatens to accomplish just that.

Does anyone think we don't already have non-metallic firearms in service?

TCB

Deus Machina
May 12, 2013, 04:30 AM
Yeah, the point here isn't really about the gun. Or just about the gun, I should say.
1) You can't really punish someone for making information available. Not justifiably. I mean, I can get on Google and learn how to make crystal meth as fast as I can read, but I don't hear about the DEA kicking down doors over that. It's what someone that takes the information does with it.
2) You can't ban information. Not without the people wising--and rising--up. This is the American sensibility. Banning information is declaring war on the rights of citizens and turning them into subjects.
3) You can't outright ban 3D printers. A: There are plenty of open-source plans out there, and see 1 and 2 above. B: Banning a manufacturing method isn't going to fly with anyone interested. Banning something because I could make a short-lived single-shot gun? I could do the same with my mill and lathe. Or a Dremel and a hammer.
Banning any method of manufacturing anything puts that method under direct government control, and how well has that gone over in America?

No, the point of this isn't the gun. The point of this is to show limits. Make people take notice, and the government to either settle on where their limits lie or play their hand and make the people draw a line in the sand, and either will work only in American citizens' favor.

wacki
May 13, 2013, 01:34 AM
I'd wager that within the next 10-15 years, you'll find a 3D printer in almost every household, and the ones that you'll be buying for your home in 15 years will make today's uberexpensive ones look like toys.

They already have ones that do just that. I saw a printer that was printing in D2 tool steel. Anyone that knows anything about knives knows that's some pretty tough stuff. The second those guys start to get cheap is the second gun companies will have to radically rethink their business... and the ATF will be flooded with form 1's.

Deus Machina
May 13, 2013, 05:42 AM
I saw a printer that was printing in D2 tool steel.

Can I just say that I think you must be mistaken on that? A CNC grinder or mill, yes. a 3D printer, doubtful.

Tool steels are usually forced, then ground. 3D printers work by either melting and applying a material or, more rarely now, applying a dry material and then catalyzing it.

I seriously doubt there's any printer that could turn d2 steel molten, keep it metallurgy consistent, and cost any less than just buying three tons of the stuff and a CNC grinder.

3D printers are getting pretty good, but reliable knife blades are still beyond them.

barnbwt
May 13, 2013, 02:53 PM
There's "printers" out there that work by laser-sintering metal. I've only heard of it used in Titantium, but I'm not surprised other metals are done as well. They've repaired turbine blades this way for years.

However, simple thermodynamics dictates that such a process will require a ton of energy (and Argon) and will therefore always be crazily expensive, until we invent stove-top fusion, or something. Just like how the big 5-axis CNCs will always be expensive, but they use kilowatts of energy and massive amounts of metal/carbide; expensive.

I'd like to see a desktop "silk spinner" which prints in carbon strand and epoxy like the huge contraption used to layup 787 fuselages now. 3D print a form or mandrel, and lay fiber over in a very precise, controlled pattern to reinforce it as needed. If that little "chamber" piece in the Liberator were a .25" thick section of dense carbon-fiber, it could probably hold back .357 (though you'd have a hard time getting the expanded case back out :D)

The best use for 3D printing in manufacture has always been the rapid development of prototypes (as opposed to production) and tooling to make the real items. While 3D printing isn't as strong as cast metal, it's certainly strong enough to create moulds for lost-wax casting. It's strong enough to make dies for stamping soft, thin metal in a press (SLA plastics could probably handle even tougher jobs). It's strong enough to make moulds for casting polyurethane or other epoxies. It's dimensionally stable enough to work as a form for making fiber-reinforced shapes.

TCB

Cosmoline
May 13, 2013, 03:36 PM
I was a skeptic, but this "liberator" has already put far more fear into the hearts of tyrants than the originals ever did. They're scrambling to try to shut down the information. That alone should be all the evidence we need of the importance of the design. As a firearm it is something of a joke, and inherently unsafe to use. But as an idea it's bottled lightning.

Remember that firearms were at the cutting edge of the previous industrial revolutions. It was the Hall Rifle that paved the way towards interchangeable parts. Now it may be another failed gun design that ends up revolutionizing industry again. We shall see. It's sure scaring the bejesus out of our lords and masters.

ldsgeek
May 13, 2013, 06:08 PM
I recall reading recently about a man who had had a large portion of his skull replaced with a printed part derived from the intact opposite portion. Was said to be about as tough as a helmet that would have been needed to protect the soft spot, but obviously less obtrusive.

I hadn't heard about the ear; I still think that ear they grew on the mouse was the coolest/freakiest medical experiment ever, though :D


The printers aren't (and never will be, by physical limitations) as consistent unit-to-unit as the internals of a video game system. The stepper motors, limit switches, fusers, and other bits have too many degrees of freedom for a one size fits all solution. Just like how no one would ever do something foolish like blindly run a downloaded AR-lower toolpath on their CNC machine. What works for one, may not work for some, so you have to verify. I will say that printing is easier than CNC simply because you're less likely to break something while tuning it, and because it's so much cheaper to mess around with :D.

I can't believe no one with a printer has chimed in on any of these threads so far. I guess they aren't as common as the media would like us to believe ;)


Not that I have (in case any FBI are listening) but a great many of those cracks are either buggy, junk, viruses, or perfect. On a computer I can always re-image, that's not a huge risk. On something containing high pressure inches from my face, well...:eek:. Talk about a case study in how laws have been ineffective at stopping the distribution of easily copied material, though. The game developers eventually figure out ways to make it more difficult to crack the game; I'm not sure how a firearms designer could do something similar to prevent duplication of a physical object, especially since 3D laser scanners are coming out :D. I guess they'll start incorporating pieces that can only be made by fancy trade-secret processes like MIM or drop-forging :rolleyes:

TCB

To answer two of your posts at the same time.

First you mentioned that SLA is the strongest technology, stronger than FDM. You have that backwards, the resins used in SLA machines is far weaker than even the weakest ABS used in FDM, not dimensionally stable when exposed to UV and break down when exposed to UV, making that technology unsuitable for this task. You may have meant SLS (selective laser sintering) which can work in stronger materials including some metals. Those machines are an order of magnitude more expensive and require industrial power rather than 110VAC.

As a user of FDM and Polyjet (Stratasys and Objet, I'm a certified tech for both) I have built the AR lower on both. The first model the DefCad tried that failed was built on a Polyjet machine of some type, it failed in 6 rounds. The One that has (so far) fired over 600 rounds was built on an FDM machine, something from the 768 class, either an sst768 or an Elite. These designs are, for the most part, proof of concept and will be improved rapidly. The choice of .380 was pure genius as in many countries citizens are prohibited from owning military and police caliber firearms, the .380 is allowed in most of these. In ComBlock countries and China, this design will likely be modified to use 9x18, some of which will probably be "found" after an officer gets a bribe to lose it.

The company I work for services around 200 of the commercial grade FDM systems in New England. To give some idea of how many have been built, the serial numbers, starting from 1, have reached over 15000 on just one line of printers from one manufacturer. Factor in the reprap based machines and other smaller makers (which are far more affordable, although not as accurate) and we will soon see 100,000 in the field. For access to them, you can send a file and check or credit card to any of dozens of service bureaus to have parts made, or in some cities pay for access to a club/maker space that has one and build what you want. This technology is out there and is maturing rapidly, more rapidly than the PC in fact. As has been pointed out, the first, small LCD monitors were upwards of $1000 only 10-12 years ago, now you can buy a 27" for less than $200. How long do you think it will be before we can buy a 3d printer at Best Buy for under $500?

JRH6856
May 13, 2013, 09:39 PM
Back around 1958 , This Week Magazine (came in the Sunday paper) had a story about zip guns with pictures including a cutaway of one made from a Ronson lighter. Fired a .22 short. Being a normal 10yr old, I immediately made one. It was a lot cheaper than using an $8000 printer.

Bruno2
May 13, 2013, 11:29 PM
I heard a figure of at least 100,000 copies of the program downloaded from their site alone. There must be millions of them out in circulation now.

What does gov do now?

jerkface11
May 14, 2013, 12:37 AM
What does gov do now

Probably audit us.

If you enjoyed reading about "3D Printed Liberator Pistol: Video, more angles, loading detail" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!