jesus fucking christ the kind of person who has a machine dialled in enough to print a functional weapon that will actually work and not come apart in their hands or blow off their face is the sort of person who will also have the means and wherewithal to obtain a conventional weapon. And they will most likely turn to the latter if they want to do harm.
It wont stop anyone looking to print a silencer. It will just make it closed source and pay per print. Its a idiots solution.
Is California just gone fucking mad after newscum? What is up with all these fucked up legislations against private freedom?
Its really, really big and populous, and also ethnically, culturally, and socially diverse. I think those combined factors lead to California passing more volume and variety of laws than any of the other American states.
Many of the laws they pass are regulation on business and consumer protection in excess of those provided by the federal government, but the socially progressive side of politics has its villains, too. Their villainy comes in the form of forced trading of freedom for security–outlawing activities that are dangerous to you, or banning objects and knowledge that have the potential to harm you or others even if they have other practical uses.
Its the main reason why it is risky to fight for the victory of one’s own political “team” without further consideration. It is easy for people interested in the public good to be overzealous in enforcement of public safety.
It’s hard to get broad agreement on where to draw that line. For example, I tend to lean in the “natural law” direction, where I think you should be allowed to have and do almost anything you want, so long as it doesn’t materially harm anyone else, even indirectly. Most other people, even on the left, find that relatively extreme and believe in more personal regulation in the name of increased public safety. For example, most Democrats support moderate to strict restrictions on personal firearm, chemical, and encryption ownership, rather than banning the illegal uses of those things themselves. It is more dangerous for people to be able to be able to get dangerous stuff, so it makes sense people would have a lot of differing opinions on where to settle between “Mad Max” and “Minority Report”.
they specifically only became supportive of restrictions on personal firearms after minorities started carrying them for protection from law enforcement overreach. It was a whole thing with then-governor Ronald Reagan
Correct. They only care about this stuff because they don’t want anyone to use it on them.
If you don’t believe me, just note how basically every single weapons ban written in the US magically has an exception for law enforcement carved into it. So… We (not me, but all you Californian people) can’t have, say, a butterfly knife but for some reason the cops can? What do they need it for that we don’t, exactly?
I don’t know who newscum is but this state loves inventing new and exciting types of red tape
Gavin (fucking) Newscum.
Is the last one you’re referring to the age verification one? If so, you should know that was good legislation that makes it easy to block federal attempts at something far worse.
Wtf are you talking about? It only blockw the private user. Litterally much more control over the devices inside the USA. Lot more survailance, how is this acceptable?
Do nothing about school shootings. Destroy hobbies and manufacturing instead. America is rotting from the inside.
America has been rotting from the inside since WW2 (MIC, FBI and CIA terrorism, etc), then supercharged with Reagan. Frankly, it’s surprising it took this long.
California gave us Reagan.
Ironically wasn’t America’s most “prosperous” era after WW2.
Flush with cash from the military industrial complex, repurposing factories built for the war, and with its largest economic rivals lying in ruin. Yes.
And this is fucking progressive ass Cali.
The left and the right can’t stop fucking with their bases long enough to fix real problem.
Cali was never that progressive as I mentioned in another comment the motive for their gun control was pure unadulterated racism. They were always center right neoliberal at best. Newsom fits in well with his predecessors.
From who are these awful ideas in California governing coming from
The tech bros.
Who are owned by private equity for sovereign wealth funds pushing for nothing but returns. Hence they don’t care if they sign on the line with Goebbels or enshittify their product into uselessness.
The lobbying power of tech companies that profit from proprietary technology and feel threatened by open source. The same people who are behind DRM on everything from ebooks and music to printer inks, and legal restrictions on repairing the devices you own.
This but it’s not just tech companies, it’s all companies and a feature of our lovely system 🙃
Anti-gun/gun control lobby would be my first guess. You can basically print all the serialized parts (the part required for registration) for most any gun then get the rest of the parts and assemble it yourself. The gun parts don’t necessarily even need to be based on an actual manufactured gun, there are designs for completely homemade guns down to the barrel using parts you can easily pick up at any hardware store. Then there are also people who are printing parts that can turn some semi-automatic guns into selectable fully automatic.
Problem is the plans are already in the wild for printing gun parts and for open source printers. I don’t know what good would accomplish to deter people from printing when the person targeted is already motivated enough to print one to begin with.
Making a gun is already illegal in California and Washington. This stupid law won’t make any difference. If someone is willing to break the law to make a gun, they probably are not going to follow this law either. 3D printed guns are rarely used to commit crimes anyways. It takes a lot of time and effort to get one to work well.
This is probably about companies like Bamboo Labs wanting an excuse to lock down printers even more. It will also make it difficult or impossible for smaller companies to sell 3D printers in California to get rid of competition.
Yeah, kinda reminds me of when Sony music put a rootkit virus on their music CDs except this time it’s going through the state governments to encrypted things. This also feels as dumb as making math illegal in terms of outlawing encryption or making some numbers illegal because when arranged in a certain way they are an .stl file for a copyrighted character or an .mp3 file for a song.
This is just making something that is already illegal more illegal and opening a massive hole for government and corpo spying.
And probably an attempt to get licensing fees from printing STL file, so you can’t print any Disney figurine without paying them.
Unlike laws against making guns, this law applies to printer sellers, not to their users.
Nope. This is actually an anti right to repair bill. The gun narrative is just the trojan horse, just like they’re doing with ID verification.
I just remember the earliest opposition to 3D printing becoming readily available to the mass public at cheap prices was the gun control lobby. They’re an “old” enemy to the hobby. I think this is more of an anti-privacy issue than anti-ownership/right to repair, but it is certainly both.
The problem with 3D printers is people are repairing things with parts made on them. We can’t have that.
Could you also just make these same parts out steel or aluminum? Seems like a weird arbitrary line to essentially say what material you can make them out of and what equipment you can use. Or are benchtop CNCs gonna be banned next?
Not sure about the California bill, but the similar shit out of Washington state does have language for subtractive manufacturing as well as additive. They basically are targeting any computer controlled manufacturing.
It all feels so obviously stupid when there are people on the internet selling partially complete metal parts with instructions for how to finish them completely unrestricted. They obviously aren’t worried about stopping the “ghost gun problem”, they are worried about people having the means of production and the right to repair things they own.
Ok so aluminum casting is still OK.
This is the sad state of the US I guess.
Two States, California and Washington, are not “The US” any more than France and Germany are the European Union. They are important no doubt but they do not themselves represent the entire entity.
I see this constantly on the internet. “Some backwater Podunk state puts the 10 commandments in classrooms” becomes “The US puts the 10 commandments in classrooms”. It’s like people don’t understand how this country is architected.
Yep it’s tiring but comment aged link milk because the very next day a bill was introduced to Congress.
Yes to your entire comment
Washington State. They have a identical (or at least similar) bill I heard about last month.
Back when 3D printers were brand-new, I was at a college event where the Engineering Club had one on display. I stopped to watch it, and spoke with the kid who had built it. He was a Freshman, and had built it during the previous summer, because he wanted to come to college and make an instant splash in the Engineering Department.
He certainly succeeded, because he was the one in the booth that everybody wanted to talk to, while the upperclassmen that hadn’t accomplished anything, sat in the back of the booth and glowered at the Freshman upstart.
So anyway, if they ban them, we’ll just build them.
I believe the entire goal of RepRap was to build a machine that could build all the parts needed to build another machine. Most of the parts for a lot of machines are either 3d printable or bog-standard off-the-shelf parts that could be used for millions of other things. I have a feeling the really scary target would be software, something similar to the draconian age-verification BS being run around.
I don’t see how they could realistically target Marlin firmware. It’s incredibly straightforward software/firmware that could easily be forked and duplicated. Even the old driver boards (Ramps) were originally hand-made pcb’s designed by fellow hobbyists.
They make it illegal to distribute, install, use, etc. They make it illegal to sell, distribute, build, etc. any printer that can run on Marlin (hoping to force manufacturers to block anyone installing non-oem firmware on the machines at all).
I’m not saying it’s reasonable or feasible, but the people making the laws clearly don’t know or care about any of that.
Edit - If they make enough stuff illegal, they don’t need to catch you breaking the law when they decide to arrest you. They just arrest you and then figure out which crimes you were committing.
Targetting commercial offers would not cut it though. They would have to make octoprint, open source firmware etc a crime. A lot of printer run exclusively on non-commercial software and on Chinese control boards, with or without raspberry pi.
That’s kind of what they already want to do, or are trying to do with this legislation. And the age verification stuff has no exception for open-source. The people behind this stuff absolutely want to kill any and all open source, both hardware and software.
This is called the proliferation of technology, its useless to fight it, and also one of humanities greatest existential threats.
Sooner or later building a nuke in your backyard is going to be just as easy.
Just FYI, I am full pro 3d printer, love mine. Looking into a second one now.
Sooner or later building a nuke in your backyard is going to be just as easy.
No. Even if you would get your hands of enough base material (impossible and would also be bigger than your backyard in volume). The energy you need for sorting the isotopes would be more than you could pull out of your power wires.
This isnt a question about technology but physics and energy, no matter how good consumer tech gets. NO you wont build a nuke in your backyard.
The same way as you will never build a moon rocket in your backyard, some things just require a fixed amount of energy, and putting that amount of energy in your backyard just wont happen.
“Get in good trouble, necessary trouble…”
Just wait till they hear about my old Bridgeport!
But like… are they going to prohibit all forms of melding materials into a shape? You can make a shank out of a stick rubbed on a rock ffs.
Or just use the rock.
they took the fucking dragon slinky
This is just madness. What the hell is Newsom thinking/drinking?
So try and ban 3D printing guns, because that’s too dangerous. But still sell guns at wallmarkt to be bought without background checks? I have the feeling something is a little off here…
FFS, you still need a bg check to buy from Walmart. There’s plenty of things to point out to fight for sane gun laws without making shit up.
Fair, however, the point remains, that the whole 3D printers are dangerous weapon manufacturing sources is BS. 3D printers, at least those affordable to hobbyists are a damn poor choice for creating fire weapons. Yes, you can print some non-critical parts but that’s about it. How many people died due to 3d printed guns in the US and how many to legally/illegally owned?
Maybe spend 5 minutes looking into it before commenting on something you know nothing about.
If it is so obvious, you could easily show me a source with the number of victims of 3d printed fire weapons, legally owned commercial fire weapons and illegally owned commercial fire weapons, in California or the US as a whole.
Or were you commenting on the suitability of FDM or resin printers for producing critical function parts of fire weapons? Which of the parts one could produce via FDM or resin, that couldn’t be produced with subtractive manufacturing methods? Please elaborate with actual arguments.
Well, you asked for it lol.
you could easily show me a source with the number of victims of 3d printed fire weapons, legally owned commercial fire weapons and illegally owned commercial fire weapons, in California or the US as a whole.
For starters, no one in the US is doing this. There is no source for the number of victims of 3D printed firearms anywhere, the best you’re going to get is from the limited places where authorities are tracking the number of crimes involving “ghost guns”, which could be a 3D printed firearm, a home manufactured firearm by other means, or (most commonly) a legally purchased firearm which has had the serial number removed. Everytown (puke) has some statistics claiming 208 murders or shootings linked to a ghost gun and 134 “recoveries” of ghost guns, nationally since 2013. As you can see, that’s not a lot. My point is, you’re right that ghost guns aren’t really a big problem, but that’s not because they aren’t viable as firearms. I think this is a moot point anyway, there are over 400 million guns in the US and millions more every year. The cat is so far out of the bag that it returned with a litter of kittens which are also out of the bag. Trying to control gun crime in the US by limiting supply is futile, but it looks good on a political platform so it’s gonna keep happening.
But that’s not even really what I was commenting on. The idea that FDM printing is not viable for home manufacturing firearms is at least 10 years out of date. First, it’s important to understand that in the US, the “critical” part is the one that’s legally considered the firearm. Every design has a serialized part which is legally “the gun” and which you (generally) must pass a background check to obtain. Everything else to construct a firearm is available online shipped directly to your door or over the counter without any kind of background check, at least in the vast majority of states. Even in the places where that’s not legal (like California has recently done), it’s very easy to for anyone trying to dodge that law to do so.
As an example, one of the most commonly 3D printed firearms is a Glock. With glocks, the frame is the serialized part. It’s already made of polymer. So most people 3D print a frame, generally from PLA, and buy the rest of the parts to assemble the firearm. This is what Luigi (allegedly) popped a CEO with. In his case, he also 3D printed a suppressor which rendered his gun no longer semi auto, which would happen with a factory glock too, but generally these 3D printed glocks are nearly as viable as a “real” one for at least a few thousand rounds. I’m not gonna bother linking directly to anything here because again, most commonly 3D printed gun. Put “3D printed glock” into youtube.
For a more “real” scenario, you can take a look at Myanmar, where rebel forces have been 3D printing firearms to fight the Junta directly, in combat. They’ve mostly used the FGC-9, which, while not 100% 3D printed, does not require any “real” firearm parts to produce. Everything you need can either be 3D printed or acquired at a hardware store. You can even produce a rifled barrel at home (PDF warning) using a 3D printed jig and ECM.These 3D printed guns have mostly been a means to acquire actual military firearms from the Junta itself, but it worked, so these guns have been successfully employed by teenagers against a state military force.
For some other examples, here is the Orca (3D printed AR-15), the Plastikov (3D printed AKM), the mac n cheese (3D printed mac 10) This one is extra fun because you can get a set of “wind chimes” to complete your build. There’s also the NylAUG, a surplus AUG parts kit which can be purchased over the counter with a receiver 3D printed in Nylon. Hell, the US army 3D printed a 40MM grenade launcher nearly a decade ago, and there are DYI versions too. There are many, many more designs. I think I’ve made my point.
Interesting read. I did not know about the honestly horribly ineffective (if not outgright dysfunctional) legislation in much of the US in this regard. I was however having functional arguments in mind though. The functional core components of a Glock are not made from organic polymers, for a reason.
Yes, printing the frame of a firearm is perfectly feasible. But if you don’t know your tool and its materials, you are putting yourself at risk. It is really like with all those other tools that can produce such a frame just as well. But then, if you say most people print it with PLA you might have a strong point that most people 3d printing that don’t know what they are doing or don’t care about PLA’s serious limitations for that application, and do it anyway.
PS: I wouldn’t consider using a 3D printed jig … and ECM as a part being produced by 3d printing. A helper part is for producing it by other means is 3d printed. Again, plenty of alternative methods to do so. Are they all going to be restricted?
The functional core components of a Glock are not made from organic polymers, for a reason.
Neither are the core functional parts on a 3D printed glock. They use the exact same pressure bearing components, because those components are easily available. What’s less available is a frame, and 3D printing solves that problem.
It is really like with all those other tools that can produce such a frame just as well.
What other tools? What other tools are available that can produce a glock frame of similar quality and with similar ease as a decent quality 3D printer for a similar price? (~$300)
But then, if you say most people print it with PLA you might have a strong point that most people 3d printing that don’t know what they are doing or don’t care about PLA’s serious limitations for that application, and do it anyway.
They know perfectly well what they doing and that PLA is a perfectly viable material for the application. Glock frames are not pressure bearing parts, and PLA is plenty strong. I’m saying this with confidence because it is not a hypothetical. People have built these guns and shot thousands of rounds through them without issue.
I wouldn’t consider using a 3D printed jig … and ECM as a part being produced by 3d printing. A helper part is for producing it by other means is 3d printed. Again, plenty of alternative methods to do so.
You don’t have to consider it, it’s been done and it works. Making rifled barrels is not trivial. This method is certainly possible without 3D printing but is made much easier with 3D printing. What is another method of producing a rifled 9x19 barrel at home that’s easier than 3D printing a jig, and running some chemicals through hydraulic tubing with a fishtank pump in a bucket? Please link an example.
Are they all going to be restricted?
I don’t know. I’m not advocating for restrictions. People have been making guns at home in the United States since before the founding of the country and they will continue to do so whether it’s legal or not, regardless of the availability of 3D printers. Even trying to regulate the printers themselves is assinine, there’s too many open source designs and software. Anyone sufficient motivated will get one. Trying to regulate printers in the name of gun violence is a none solution to problem that barely exists.
All I’m saying is that 3D printing has absolutely made the home manufacturing of firearms more accessible than it has ever been, and those firearms are perfectly viable weapons.
You can’t buy guns at Walmart in California.
How the fuck is this getting upvoted when it isn’t remotely based in reality?
Because you can buy guns at Walmart, maybe not in California, but they sell guns in approximately half of their stores in the US.
You can also go to gun shows and buy guns without a background check.
But of course you’re correct, he was wrong, It’s not as easy as going to Walmart to get a gun without a background check. It’s actually MUCH EASIER than that in more than half the US. You can just go online and pay for someone to send you a gun without any background check, site unseen, from the comfort of your own home.I’m not sure how buying a gun at a gun show sans background check is easier than if Walmart didn’t require a background check, but regardless, the premise of their statement (that Walmart doesn’t require background checks) is factually incorrect. You’re moving the goalpost. And no, you can’t just pay for a gun online and have it shipped to you. That’s not how that works, not legally at least.
Wow, talk about moving goal posts… You were all enraged with his conflating Walmart and private sales, but have no problems making up stuff that I didn’t say.
As for online sales: “According to the ATF, any unlicensed person -meaning not a Federal Firearms Licensee- may transfer a firearm to another unlicensed person residing in the same state as long as that person is not barred from owning a gun. This means it’s perfectly legal under federal law to transfer your gun to another person without any extra steps as long as they are allowed to own a firearm. There is no federal requirement for having a license to do so, and you don’t need to fill out any paperwork. As long as you’re both residents of the same state, your transaction is essentially unrestricted.”So how about state laws you ask?
“Private Transfers of Firearms Wyoming does not regulate private sales and transfers of firearms”.I didn’t make anything up, but it looks like misread your comment. My bad, but when you start throwing out shit that didn’t have anything to do with the comment I replied to, that can easily happen. Regardless, neither of those links say you can purchase a gun online and have it shipped directly to you. I’m not aware of that happening anywhere or any mechanisms to facilitate that anywhere. That’s not a thing that happens.
deleted by creator
Because guns are bad, mmmkay?
/s
That’s one way do deal with the traffic: just make your state so shitty place to live that everyone moves elsewhere.
