Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Hammers and guns and Jim and Michael

I've seen a few but from what I've read the current state of 'printed'
lower receivers is they survive maybe half a dozen rounds before
failure.

For many applications, that's more than enough.
Zip guns are already rather easy to make but printing would certainly
be even easier.

Next will be banning ammunition.

Not hard to make, either.
The problem for law abiding citizens is that defending yourself will
instantly make you a criminal.

....and there's the whole point of the exercise.
 
I've seen a few but from what I've read the current state of 'printed'

lower receivers is they survive maybe half a dozen rounds before

failure.












Zip guns are already rather easy to make but printing would certainly

be even easier.



Next will be banning ammunition.




















The problem for law abiding citizens is that defending yourself will

instantly make you a criminal.


I think what you mean is that if there is a ban certain "tools" won't be a legal option. But then for HD an AR type weapons wouldn't be my first weapon of choice.

Some of my stuff sat out the last ban, they can do it again.
 
I think what you mean is that if there is a ban certain "tools" won't be a legal option. But then for HD an AR type weapons wouldn't be my first weapon of choice.

Who cares what your first choice would be. Does an ugly gun make one
any deader?
Some of my stuff sat out the last ban, they can do it again.

Huh? "Sat out?". The NY ban includes *ALL* high capacity magazines,
where "high capacity" is now defined as "greater than seven rounds",
where it was "greater than ten" yesterday. Neither make definitions
make any sense. ...but they don't have to. Leftists never do.
 
Who cares what your first choice would be. Does an ugly gun make one

any deader?

Huh?? What are you trying to say? Trying to follow your logic.

Fact is, some weapons are better suited in certain situations.

What's your point?
 
Huh?? What are you trying to say? Trying to follow your logic.

I usually do have to slow down for lefties. An "assault weapon",
according to the government, is measured by how ugly it is. A
semi-automatic rifle is a semi-automatic rifle.
Fact is, some weapons are better suited in certain situations.

....and an ugly weapon has its place.
What's your point?

Maybe I'll try to slow down some more when I have time to explain what
should be obvious to all.
 
No, we were going beyond the current hysteria.


That might depend on where your home or business was and what kind of
threat you faced.


It wouldn't be a 'personal' problem for me either but when you look at
the numbers involved with what they want to 'ban' you have to wonder
what the point is.

That's easy; the first step down the slippery slope. JDC is all for
it, since it doesn't affect him[*]. "First they came for..."


[*] Though Obama will try for a NY style limit, which probably will.
 
J

Jon Kirwan

Jan 1, 1970
0
<snip>
The links I provided in a way-too-long post show that there
are both organized groups of individuals and individuals
working hard to develop practical 3D printing capabilities
bent towards this aim. Particularly, a lot of time on the
idea of the lower receivers, which are what is the controlled
part of an auto weapon in the US.
<snip>

This article just appeared:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygre...ll-propose-ban-on-3d-printable-gun-magazines/

....with the idea of banning 3D printing of ammunition
magazines.

(Just "skip ad" when you get to the link.)

I _knew_ someone would recognize what 3D printing means to
this.

See this youtube video for the making of such a magazine:


Jon
 
C

Charles

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Jim Thompson" wrote in message

You know someone is firmly entrenched in lying when they have to snip
all previous text in an attempt to obfuscate it.

The issue, at least what the President 'claims' to be the issue, is so
called 'assault weapons' (a fabricated non term), aka 'scary looking'
semi-automatic rifles, and 'large capacity magazines', not "firearms,"
and the post you keep claiming was a 'lie' explicitly, and 100%
accurately, compared murders by rifle, at 323, to murders by "blunt
objects" (including 'hammers') at 496 (both taken from the 2011 FBI
crime statistics).

The 'point' was that if 323 murders, by rifle, are 'sufficient' to
'ban' that category of weapon (actually only a portion of them because
the President swears he's not out to take away your hunting rifles,
like the one used to kill President Kennedy) then why isn't 50% more
murders 'sufficient' to ban 'blunt instruments'?

Or, even worse at 726 murders, over twice an many as by rifles,
shouldn't we 'do something' about cutting down on the number of hands,
fists, and feet?

The argument is that since, it is presumed, most people would consider
'bans' in the latter two categories 'absurd' then perhaps the same
logic should apply to the first.

flipper, You're providing Schuler with a podium. Shun him and shut
him down.

Shun the truth. Be well.
 
I usually do have to slow down for lefties. An "assault weapon",

according to the government, is measured by how ugly it is. A

semi-automatic rifle is a semi-automatic rifle.






...and an ugly weapon has its place.






Maybe I'll try to slow down some more when I have time to explain what

should be obvious to all.

ugly weapon??? wtf are you talking about?

obviously, more than likely you don't appreciate or own any of these weapons.

you sound like a raving loon ... more than likely just an old dried up bastard with nothing better to do than bitch about a subject you know nothing about.

i doubt that you could explain anything given a million years.
 
It's too late for Congress to worry about large magazines.
I'm already 3D printing them to arbitrary size and am
experimenting with ABS plastic springs for tension, too. If I
can do it.... anyone can.

Jon

In my eyes, you're defending freedom. My hat's off to you sir.

I mentioned my area reports defensive uses routinely. Lo, we just
another heard in the news--yet another someone in my neck of the woods
just used a gun defensively to save his life.

If you're in trouble (esp. in a remote area), when seconds count the
police are just minutes away.
 
ugly weapon??? wtf are you talking about?

Obviously I do have to sllloooowwwwww doooowwwwwnnnnnn eeevveennnnn
mmmoooorrrreeee ffffoooooorrrrr yooooouuuuu.

That's the leftist's definition of an "assault weapon". It's
functionally *IDENTICAL* to an unassault weapon but they don't like
the *LOOK*. You really are a clueless moron.
obviously, more than likely you don't appreciate or own any of these weapons.

Obviously you're an idiot.
you sound like a raving loon ... more than likely just an old dried up bastard with nothing better to do than bitch about a subject you know nothing about.

Obviously you're an idiot.
i doubt that you could explain anything given a million years.

I doubt that would be enough time for anyone to explain anything to
you. You are demonstrating how absolutely stupid you are, though.
 
<...>




No, we were going beyond the current hysteria.


That might depend on where your home or business was and what kind of
threat you faced.


It wouldn't be a 'personal' problem for me either but when you look at
the numbers involved with what they want to 'ban' you have to wonder
what the point is.



That's easy; the first step down the slippery slope. JDC is all for

it, since it doesn't affect him[*]. "First they came for..."





[*] Though Obama will try for a NY style limit, which probably will.


you appear to be one fucking loony toon ... how do you know what i care about???

wtf ever give you the opinion i don't care about a ban on arms????

i maybe flippant, but i'm also pragmatic.

you just seem to be full of assumptions.
 
Obviously I do have to sllloooowwwwww doooowwwwwnnnnnn eeevveennnnn

mmmoooorrrreeee ffffoooooorrrrr yooooouuuuu.



That's the leftist's definition of an "assault weapon". It's

functionally *IDENTICAL* to an unassault weapon but they don't like

the *LOOK*. You really are a clueless moron.






Obviously you're an idiot.






Obviously you're an idiot.






I doubt that would be enough time for anyone to explain anything to

you. You are demonstrating how absolutely stupid you are, though.


I will grant you this, you are consistant about calling people "stupid" and "idiot" when you have nothing better to say.

later man ...
 
I've seen a few but from what I've read the current state of 'printed'
lower receivers is they survive maybe half a dozen rounds before
failure.


Zip guns are already rather easy to make but printing would certainly
be even easier.

Next will be banning ammunition.

No, they've already said: the next step is requiring background checks
to purchase ammunition, background checks for grandfathered arms, BGC
for gifts and private xfers.

Defacto registration. They're making a list, and checking it thrice.


James Arthur
 
I will grant you this, you are consistant about calling people "stupid" and "idiot" when you have nothing better to say.

I say "you're an idiot" when *you* are an idiot. Spades and shovels.
later man ...

I certainly hope not. Talking to the terminally stupid is depressing.
 
On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:49:54 -0800, Jon Kirwan


<...>




I think what you mean is that if there is a ban certain "tools" won't be a legal option.

No, we were going beyond the current hysteria.

But then for HD an AR type weapons wouldn't be my first weapon of choice.

That might depend on where your home or business was and what kind of
threat you faced.

Some of my stuff sat out the last ban, they can do it again.

It wouldn't be a 'personal' problem for me either but when you look at
the numbers involved with what they want to 'ban' you have to wonder
what the point is.



That's easy; the first step down the slippery slope. JDC is all for

it, since it doesn't affect him[*]. "First they came for..."





[*] Though Obama will try for a NY style limit, which probably will.


you appear to be one fucking loony toon ... how do you know what i care about???

Because *you* said it, stupid. Or are you lying? When was the lie?
wtf ever give you the opinion i don't care about a ban on arms????

You said it, dummy.
i maybe flippant, but i'm also pragmatic.

"Pragmatic"? Nonsense. You're *dense*. You have no clue what the
end game is and are happy to see it unfold in front of you. *STUPID!*
you just seem to be full of assumptions.

Nope. You said it, idiot.
 
J

Jon Kirwan

Jan 1, 1970
0
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:35:54 -0800 (PST),
In my eyes, you're defending freedom. My hat's off to you sir.

I really don't deserve that. I have merely lucked out and am
enjoying the results of getting involved with 3D printers.
I'm learning, is all. Most of the path had already been
bushwhacked down by a lot of really good folks before me.

It only takes rather low technology items (nothing in what I
have is expensive or difficult to come by) to make a 3D
printer. What's interesting to me is just many different uses
I've already discovered that have made a difference -- and
I'm only just starting.

I mostly use the 3D printer for other things -- not ammo
magazines. You know, project boxes and the like. Two days
ago, our microwave's door opener broke. Turns out they use
two plastic standoffs molded as a single unit as part of a
faceplate. The standoffs have holes in them for another
plastic part that sits between them and "flips" the latch
when pressed. Since only one side actually presses against
the latching mechanism of the door itself, that is the side
put under regular tension and it eventually breaks. The other
side, built just as well (or just as poorly) isn't under the
same stress.. so it survives easily. They should have beefed
up the stressed side differenly. Dumb, but there it is. So it
broke. I used the 3D printer to print out a special piece I
used to rebuild and reinforce that side and repaired the oven
using that and CA glue, rather than go buy another oven.

I also used it to repair a broken electric window of a car.
The unit uses an ABS plastic gear of sorts (not sure of the
right technical term) around which a string of contained ABS
beads are driven. A wire through those beeds was also broken.
Replacement is offered only by buying the entire unit at $200
each, after waiting some time because it's not a common item.

Cost me about $2 in parts (aluminum crimps and some new
braided wire at $1 each) and the rest was made in the 3D
printer. Total repair cost is probably about $3-4.

Of course, there are the shockingly good ammo magazines you
can also make. Takes about two hours to print something for
15 rounds. And I just sit by and watch, mostly. They work
right out of the printer, though it helps to do just a tiny
amount of clean up afterwards.

I'm increasingly surprised by just how many different uses I
can find, though. Once you have the tool around, you realize
how easy it is to fashion some unique part that when added to
other common parts makes a result that does unusual things.
It's opened up my imagination more and very much enhanced my
life, already. And if the part doesn't do exactly what I
wanted, I just sit down, edit a little, and reprint and try.
Very easy to get something really nice.

I'm designing a custom controller for a 240VAC kitchen stove
(30A). I am still exploring the sensor details, but right now
am experimenting with a 40kHz distance sensor (under $2
shipped from China) and a keypad. Purpose is to make certain
that it takes a code to enable the stove for use and that if
the person using it walks away from the immediate vacinity,
the stove automatically shuts off. (My daughter is autistic
and we cannot trust her around it alone.) I've been having
lots of fun designing pieces for it. The circuit boards
literally snap into the ABS fixtures and I've designed fun
locking mechanisms that work beautifully. I needed holes in
different places -- no need for special tools... just include
the holes into the design. Hole for micro USB connector?
Easy. Holes for 40kHz emitter and receiver? Easy. Holes for
DF13 connectors? Easy and perfect fit! Etc.
I mentioned my area reports defensive uses routinely. Lo, we just
another heard in the news--yet another someone in my neck of the woods
just used a gun defensively to save his life.

If you're in trouble (esp. in a remote area), when seconds count the
police are just minutes away.

I live in an area that has a minimum 5 acre lot size, but
many properties (like mine) are very much larger. I own a
hillside that is mostly deep woods (approximates a national
rainforest in appearance) and not close to law enforcement. I
have a VERY well designed, long driveway with steep cliffs on
both sides of it that rises 150' from above the entry road
and winds around two hairpin curves with a 300' stretch of
road about a 40' rising cliff directly below my house that
overlooks the stretch. NO ONE can easily come up here without
being fully observed over quite a stretch. Steel gate on
tracks at the bottom.

Funny thing is that a few months ago a car stopped right at
the bottom and a man in casual military dress was just
staring up at my driveway. I happened to be coming down at
the time and asked why he was just standing there.

He said, "There is no way anyone is going to be able to
approach you on anything but the road because of the steep
cliffs on either side. I was just admiring the defensible
design of your home access."

In actual fact, our property was designed and built in 1970
by an MJ drug dealer (property later seized) who wanted to
complicate the idea of a surprise raid by police and federal
officers. The forest canopy is 80' to 100', close knit, and
the hillside relatively difficult to traverse upwards towards
the (very large) home, which overlooks the entire hillside.
It really is an interesting design when you look at it that
way.

But being where we are, in some cases it could be hours or
even days before others could arrive to help. Luckily I have
the kind of property and area where the family and I can keep
in practice without going anywhere. (Without practice and
drill regarding what each of us expects from another, we
would expose each other to additional avoidable risks.)

All that said, I don't expect trouble and will do everything
I can to avoid it. I'd rather run away from confrontation, if
safe to do, than sit pat and duke it out protecting my turf.
Things I can replace. Family I cannot. Cover is better than
concealment. But not being there at all is even better than
good cover.

Jon
 
Top