this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2026
354 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

86110 readers
3244 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

This is so stupid.

My understanding is that you can’t make a gun from 100% 3D printed plastic parts. Why don’t you just regulate those final parts makers?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

You can if you want to blow your hand off. A 3D printer is just a tool of gun smithing. This is like banning circular saws or nail guns.

[–] Zetta@mander.xyz 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You can make single shot weapons from pretty much 100% plastic with just like a nail as the firing pin. But those aren't really effective weapons at all, and you can make a better shotgun with some pipes from the hardware store.

Even if you could make fully functional firearms with 3D printers, this is still stupid. 3D printers for hobbyists were originally all hand built with common electronic parts and if more states pass regulations like this, DIY is going to be the new trend again where everybody builds their own printers instead of buying one and it'll just get easier and easier and the government won't be able to regulate that at all.

And, honestly, I'm all for that future, and sort of excited for it. The regulations are moronic and dumb, but just like digital surveillance and information suppression laws like age verification, it's just going to make the darknet and none regulatable things more popular, which is great, in my opinion. I yearn for the day where the commoner gets online and Tor or I2P is their first choice of connection. Where the government has no control over the citizen and what they think, do, or say online or in their own private life.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Try buying indoor plant lights in bulk, the DEA will come to your door.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

Because it’s isn’t about guns

[–] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

While 100% is currently impractical, you can actually print 95% of a gun for 22lr. You need a nail for a fireing pin a barrel insert, and spings you can get from a nerf gun. That said, you could use the same to convert a nerf gun.

I'm also not talking about the single shot proto gun you've seen, I'm talking about a scaled model of a 1911. Guns are so fucking simple and regulation is like trying to prevent lock picking.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, you cannot have a firing chamber made of plastic, unless you use engineering grade plastics, in which case, it's cheaper to just buy a gun, not like they are expensive or difficult to get.

[–] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

You just bore out the barrel insert to receive the casing then reinforce it with 100% infill in petg or nylon. It's not a perfect solution but my experiments last about 100 rounds before things get loose. I'm eyeballing injecting epoxy into low infill models next.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 2 days ago

Its a silly strawman.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

For the same reason that it would be better to regulate polluters than to expect individuals to recycle their waste en masse. Regulating this at an individual level is demonstrably less effective, given that the recovery of self-created guns used in crimes has increased significantly in recent years.

Whether anti-gun 3D-printing algorithms will even work isn't certain yet, but I'm all for giving it a try and forcing people to risk acquiring said weapons via legit manufacturers and shops which may be more traceable or risk the black market.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

My printer is not connected, its firmware is opensource, and use a VPN. I'm pretty sure whoever has bad intents will have no issue figuring out how to get a model and print it.

I believe this regulation would mostly impact casual 3D-printing enthusiasts who minds their privacy, and set a precedent to regulate what can be printed. I wouldn't be surprised if some people were watching this closely, thinking about banning spare parts models to repair appliances under an "IP" excuse.

There are so many precedent where freedom restrictions passed under the excuse of "terrorism", "protect the children", now "prevent murders" and later there is almost never a review of their efficiency, because when there is… the conclusion is appalling.

We're just slowly moving towards more control and less freedom.