3D-printable gun designed, files taken down the US gov't

[Dazureus]

I found out about this via Reddit: linky-link.

On the surface it seems outrageous (to me at least), but after a little consideration I just found the whole situation quite complex and interesting. It's a milestone for 3D-printing, brings up the state of the US government again which as we all know is always fun to talk about, gets a bit of discussion going about the idea of freedom and how it relates to technology, and reminds us all that people are still weird and complicated.

I don't know how many of HC's users are into these kinds of things, but I felt like sharing. What's your take on this?

 

[Dazureus]

Additionally, am I still able to change the title of my thread? Used to be able to I believe, can't find it now.
It oughta read, "3D-printable gun designed, files taken down by the US gov't".
This will bother me for days.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

I believe that gun ownership rights are a very good thing, however I think it makes sense to have better background checks / gun registration policies. Having the ability to 3D print a gun (that's made entirely of plastic! think metal detectors!) seems like we're going in the wrong direction.

 

[Kainzo]

It's not anything to do with guns.
It's about control.

Going to make you register baseball bats and swords next

 

[Jack_Reacher]

In some cases, it is appropriate for the government to step in and regulate things. We can't own weapons of mass destruction at all, let alone own them if they're registered. No one seems to be bothered by this.

Guns are useful for keeping peace and for self defense, but they are dangerous at the same time. I think it is appropriate to allow responsible citizens to own guns, but to also have the government require them to be registered.

 

[Colonel Rick]

I have no problems registering my weapons. I don't mind the government telling me I cannot own bombs and rockets. As long as I am allowed some sort of protection, even if I never have to use it, I will be happy with this aspect of US.

 

[Dielan9999]

I have no problems registering my weapons. I don't mind the government telling me I cannot own bombs and rockets. As long as I am allowed some sort of protection, even if I never have to use it, I will be happy with this aspect of US.

That's pretty much how I feel. I'd rather register my guns and pass, and have my shady neighbors try to do the same and fail, since my neighbors are scumbags and shouldn't have guns. Apply this to the whole US and it's a pretty good idea. The only problem is the illegal possession of guns, which only serves to extend sentences on criminals getting caught, it doesn't prevent them from getting them and harming people.

Gun control shouldn't even be a big deal. I think it should exist, but I don't think it should be as extreme as it's headed towards. So in that aspect I disagree with it like many other Americans, but I only disagree because it can be done better.

 

[Drastikos]

If the states want better gun control they should have a look at Canada's. It's not perfect by any stretch but it's not bad either.
It's kinda PITA to get a gun here (registered), which is kinda a good thing and a bad thing..

 

[Psychokhaos]

Aww, how cute. The US government is thinking it has control over stuff on the Internet again.

Additionally, am I still able to change the title of my thread? Used to be able to I believe, can't find it now.
It oughta read, "3D-printable gun designed, files taken down by the US gov't".
This will bother me for days.

Nope, you can't edit threads anymore.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

Aww, how cute. The US government is thinking it has control over stuff on the Internet again.

Hath not the potter power over the clay?

 

[Psychokhaos]

Hath not the potter power over the clay?

Much of the more frequented Internet being from America =/= US Government has control. Your analogy depend on the US Gov. to be the ones forming, shaping, and controlling the Internet. They don't, however. The Internet is beyond any political boundaries, it is information. And information is free, and should not be limited by any form of power.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

I was just being facetious. "Murika invented the internets!"

 

[Dazureus]

Hath not the potter power over the clay?

The government doesn't own the internet, and hasn't since shortly after it's invention if I'm not wrong. It's kind of a frontier still, although we're certainly urbanizing.

EDIT: whoops, responses were made. Disregard basically.

 

[Psychokhaos]

I was just being facetious. "Murika invented the internets!"

Dangit, I need sleep again.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

Dangit, I need sleep again.

Haha - people don't know I'm joking IRL sometimes, so I guess it's even worse in text.

 

[Ostadar]

Much of the more frequented Internet being from America =/= US Government has control. Your analogy depend on the US Gov. to be the ones forming, shaping, and controlling the Internet. They don't, however. The Internet is beyond any political boundaries, it is information. And information is free, and should not be limited by any form of power.

Correct, in a way. While no individual governing body may own the Internet they do work together in the U.N. to try to control it. Individual corporations also control large central server hubs which a good deal of the Internet communications go through.

Then there is the idea that while a governing body might not own the information itself, they could take control of the server the data is on if it is within their country's border. Also add in the fact that the information is stored as electronic signal which a corporation or government do own and can do with it as they will.

Next is the idea that information is free. Information is not free. Information takes work to discover, to learn, and to retain. There is a payment in time and energy. The Internet just decreased that cost significantly for those who can use it. Sadly its also made some people smarter and a lot of people dumber because of that ease of access since they just stop trying to retain the information.

Also, as a side note; People during the renaissance and medieval age often carried daggers or clubs for protection without the need to register them with a governing body. I have no qualm with people having firearms, and I can understand why the files for the plastic gun were removed. I mean if someone really wanted to have protection against an attacker it has been proven a knife is just as effective if not more so in close range anyways, definitely more so than a plastic gun. I believe people need to go through gun registration and background checks. The only reason you wouldn't want to go through that is if you're worried that you won't pass, which means you probably shouldn't have one anyways.

 

[Kainzo]

You can't stop information. They can try all they want.

 

[Ostadar]

History is written by the winner. Information is clearly biased, constantly lost, and then re-obtained. Human beings(according to Science) have been around for about 200 thousand years. There have been entire civilizations of information that have collected and been entirely obliterated and we may never know what that information is. If current society collapses the evidence of what we have achieved and the information we have obtained could all but disappear in around 10,000 years (Extreme case, very few humans would have to be left or none at all). Human civilization would revert and then rebuild. Might have happened before; many times.

So one or two governing bodies deleting files on the Internet? Honestly I can believe it. It happens constantly it is just normally between other countries or corporations.

 

[Dazureus]

Correct, in a way. While no individual governing body may own the Internet they do work together in the U.N. to try to control it. Individual corporations also control large central server hubs which a good deal of the Internet communications go through.

Then there is the idea that while a governing body might not own the information itself, they could take control of the server the data is on if it is within their country's border. Also add in the fact that the information is stored as electronic signal which a corporation or government do own and can do with it as they will.

Well, yes and no. They *can* do whatever they like with it, but there are laws and regulations and promises to keep. When they start breaching those, that's cause for worry.

Then there is the misguided idea that information is free. Information is not free. Information takes work to discover, to learn, and to retain. There is a payment in time and energy. The Internet just decreased that cost significantly for those who can use it. Sadly its also made some people smarter and a lot of people dumber because of that ease of access since they just stop trying to retain the information.

Information isn't without cost, but open dissemination of information gives individuals the opportunity to improve their own lives as they see fit. That's how, as is often repeated, information wants to be free. When people imply that it should always cost nothing, that is when it's misguided.

Also, as a side note; People during the renaissance and medieval age often carried daggers or clubs for protection without the need to register them with a governing body. I have no qualm with people having firearms, and I can understand why the files for the plastic gun were removed. I mean if someone really wanted to have protection against an attacker it has been proven a knife is just as effective if not more so in close range anyways, definitely more so than a plastic gun. I believe people need to go through gun registration and background checks. The only reason you wouldn't want to go through that is if you're worried that you won't pass, which means you probably shouldn't have one anyways.

This is a bit of a conundrum. I have no qualms about background checks or weapon registration as far as I'm concerned, but I'm worried that it sets a certain precedent for (and may in fact come packaged with) more invasive, freedom-infringing policies later on. Especially when we're talking about US politics, our politicians have proven that they just can't leave well enough alone.

Can you provide a source on the knife thing? I'd like a look at it.

 

[Ostadar]

Well, yes and no. They *can* do whatever they like with it, but there are laws and regulations and promises to keep. When they start breaching those, that's cause for worry.


Information isn't without cost, but open dissemination of information gives individuals the opportunity to improve their own lives as they see fit. That's how, as is often repeated, information wants to be free. When people imply that it should always cost nothing, that is when it's misguided.


This is a bit of a conundrum. I have no qualms about background checks or weapon registration as far as I'm concerned, but I'm worried that it sets a certain precedent for (and may in fact come packaged with) more invasive, freedom-infringing policies later on. Especially when we're talking about US politics, our politicians have proven that they just can't leave well enough alone.

Can you provide a source on the knife thing? I'd like a look at it.

Yeah, there is the Tueller Drill which covers defending against knifes and then the Mythbusters covered the subject.

Edit: If you want to watch the documentary I got the information about the peasants carrying daggers, it's this I believe. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2395312/

Spoiler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill