- cross-posted to:
- mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/69760899
So much for the constitution
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/69760899
So much for the constitution
This so broad and vague as to be unconstitutional. It’s like mandating that computers have to have technology that prevents hate speech. A 3d printer, like a computer, a hammer, a pencil, or the myriad of other tools humans use is just a general tool that can be put to good or bad uses. It would be insane to require anti-skull bashing technology for hammers and it is crazy to burden 3d printer manufacturers to develop technology to try to do this. Moreover, 3d printers are just one way to make ghost guns. A better way may be just home CNC. Instead of additive technology laying down layers of plastic one by one, with home CNC you can take a block of metal and machine it out, subtractive technology. The bill does not impact home CNC. So dumb!
And with machining metal, you might make something that can shoot more than one bullet that probably won’t explode in your face.
What a brilliant idea, let’s get on it immediately. 🤣
Joking aside, you are 100% right.
Except I think the idea of printing a gun is to avoid detection in metal detectors.
The vast majority of these 3d printed guns use the fact that the registered “gun” is only a small part of the actual whole gun. You can buy barrels, magazines, slides, firing pins, etc, all mail order without any fuss — it’s the part with the serial number that is actually the firearm and restricted. So if you print that part (which is often basically just a shell to hold the metal components in place) you have an unserialized gun that’s basically just as good as one from a gun store.
OK, maybe that would be possible to prevent, but I doubt it.