Are 3D-printed guns okay?
One of the most controversial topics when it comes to 3D printing are laws on undetectable firearms. And the debate gets even more controversial when we talk about digital arms control and free speech. Should Americans be allowed to say and share whatever they want online? What if that speech is a blueprint for a gun? The State Department says no.
In two recently issued statements, the State Department confirmed it plans to act as a “gatekeeper” for what data Americans can legally publish online regarding the digital fabrication of guns. Any technical data (which is vaguely defined) that would allow for the creation of weapons would require prior approval for online publication. And if you’re unsure what’s “technical data” the State Department says you should review the United State Munitions List, and if there’s still any doubt, you may request a commodity jurisdiction determination from the Department.
But who’s really going to do that?
The Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act seeks to set forth regulations requiring that any firearm have at least one major component that is detectable by typical metal detectors. This would make it much more difficult to either remove the metal components to make the gun undetectable, while still being operable.
Are you a firearms collector? Why not take a look at some of these weapon storage solutions designed to show off your collection of guns.
This legislation is (arguably) believed to have been inspired by recent security issues. Earlier this month, the US Department of Homeland Security conducted a series of tests, working with undercovers to sneak weapons, including 3D-printed guns, that could possibly be in the form of a glock 19 with iwb glock holsters, through TSA security checkpoints. The results? Pretty alarming. 67 out of 70 tests agents were successfully able to sneak banned items through checkpoints.
But the results are not that shocking. Conventional metal detectors would be useless against 3D-printed plastic guns, should they ever really materialize. These weapons would pose a real security concern, which is why Congress is fighting to make the weapons easier to trace. At this moment in time, it is unknown whether they would require some sort of new ammo in order to function properly.
The filing isn’t yet final, and the restrictions wouldn’t limit the publication, discussion or illustrations of guns, only “technical data” for fabricating arms. So, with that being said, let’s discuss the issue. Are 3D printed guns okay? Is the Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act really a violation of free speech? Comment below.
Add a Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Wow I can’t believe that is even being considered, even if you could get a 3D printed AR lower through a metal detector, it’s not like it does you much good without the metal upper (including barrel which will need to be metal), or lead ammunition for that matter. There is never going to be a way to get a dangerous projectile weapon through because they all require the projectile (usually a heavy metal) to be effective. A carbon fiber knife would be a far greater threat behind security at an airport than a single shot .22 pistol and one round that may have gotten through without detection.
I really like your enthusiasm for 3D printing and design of firearm accessories, but it is these recent attempts at regulating free speech that deter me from posting on the front lines, at least while I am a broke student and cannot afford a bunch of potential legal fees.
I think its totally ridiculous. Who would make a gun out of PURE PLASTIC, shooting rounds larger than .22. I mean seriously shoot a 5.56 through a plastic upper and see what happens. If your face is still there and your able to talk, then we can move to the next issue.
Secondly Its things like this, that will make the government now BAN 3d printers for those of us who are using them for hobbies, or to make replacement parts, you have people doing malicious things and now, with Obama and the other liberals, this is just another way for them to take away our ability to CREATE, BE CREATIVE.
The other issue is, What are you going to use as a projectile? Brass casing with a plastic slug? The brass alone is enough to setoff detectors, not to mention the steel lined barrel and bolt/firing pin.
Again, my concern is NOT about printed guns, its about the fact that people are using 3d printers to push the law to the edge to where they will take away 3d printing. Next you will need an FFL to get a mill and a lathe, CNC’s or hell a drill press for that matter.
Just another way to get what the CREATIVE people enjoy taken away.
If someone ELSE drives their car drunk and kills people, do they take YOUR car away and ban your license? NO, Why should they take YOUR gun, because SOMEONE ELSE cant control themselves???? Its those very people who are crying ‘take their guns’ that the SECOND they get robbed at gun point, they call the POLICE WHO COME WITH GUNS BLAZING.
And the “Technical Data” Doesn’t say a word. All you have to do is have a brain, common sense, and you can create your OWN mechanism without the technical data. How do you think all the gun manufacturers did it? Does the government think everyone is stupid, that they need “technical data” to do this? I was 8 and saw a dumb ass take a 12 gauge shell, put it in a pipe and hit it with a hammer with a stud on the hammer. Needless to say the shell fired, but he had parts of metal in is face. He was 15. FIFTEEN. God knows what this idiot is doing now if he is still alive.