3D printed firearms

Posted by KosherGuy 11 years ago to Technology
42 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I find it interesting that the ATF&E is concerned about the ability to get past X-Ray or Magnetometers with firearms printed out of non metallic materials. My question is how do you get metallic bullets and cartridge cases past the same X-ray and magnetometer equipment. A gun without ammunition is simply a paper weight. In addition to airports, you will find metal detection devices at courthouses, city halls, and various other venues. Until someone comes up with non-metallic ammunition, this is a threat that simply does not exist.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by strugatsky 11 years ago
    It is not difficult to make non-metallic ammunition. There are case-less cartridges, currently made by several manufactures and designed for specific guns types. The bullet itself can easily be made non-metallic - ceramic or from other hard materials. Such a bullet will have poor ballistics, but that is irrelevant for short distances. Commercial primers are enclosed in a cupper "cup," but it is so small that it will not be picked up by a standard metal detector. So, yes, ammunition can easily be made undetectable using standard methods. Most likely such a weapon will be capable of firing only a single shot (or 2 if it has two barrels). Given all that, the purpose of the law is clearly not to protect the citizens from terrorists, but to protect the terrorist government from the citizens.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RD43 11 years ago
    Opinion/mine: The objective in all this is NOT to protect Americans ... but to DISARM us. Totally. And when you become fearful of speaking out against overbearing, intrusive government, you have become a slave.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
    See if I can find it again, but I came across a youtube video of a comparison of various pistol rounds being fired at a target vs a slingshot using a 1" round bullet.

    They went from a 22 through 38, 9mm, 45 and 44 magnum. Only the 44 magnum transferred more force to the target, although all the pistol ammunition had more penetration than the slingshot ball.

    Point being, someone can sneak the components for a non-ferrous slingshot aboard a flight a lot more easily than a 3D printed firearm, and when your audience is unarmed... it's good enough.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 11 years ago
    You are absolutely correct. There are Electronic "noses' for example that can detect trace amounts of explosives and chemicals used as smokeless propellants in modern firearms. Perhaps you have seen your or another person's luggage wiped with a chemically treated cloth or paper that is presented to a machine at the airport that can recognize these chemicals.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by BambiB 11 years ago
      Actually, I doubt that the "sniffers" would detect modern gun powders. They're basically a plastic UIM. What most of the chem tests are looking for is nitrates, which are a common component of many basic explosives.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 11 years ago
    BATFE is interested in one thing only: stopping a trend that could have inexpensive firearms available to large numbers of people on the ground. You wouldn't even have to "run" those guns on any flight. Just shoot the file to anyone having one of those additive factories ("3D printers") hooked up to his computer, and that person instantly can become his own gunsmith.

    So the threat is not to aircraft, paassenger or freight. It's to the "jackbooted thugs" on the ground when the John Galt-style collapse comes. And by some accounts, that collapse will come WITHOUT John Galt's help.

    What would John Galt, or Ragnar Danneskjöld, have thought of this development? Just imagine the sort of militia Ragnar Danneskjöld, or any of his black-market customers, could have raised.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
      Ben Heck Youtube videos on how to build your own 3D printer for a few hundred dollars...

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJndXebTG...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0h2Uf6XG...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj-x4oT3c...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DaveM49 11 years ago
        I just discovered that there's no real need to resort to a 3D printer (yet?). One can purchase an "80% finished" polymer/plastic AR-15 receiver from any number of online sources without showing an ID, without any sort of license, and without any restrictions on shipping (and it has no serial number). One can purchase an entire AR-15 or M-16, less the lower receiver, the same way. The total cost is around half of what complete AR-15s sell for.

        "Semi-finished" AR-15 receivers have been around for some time, as have jigs to assist in finishing them. These essentially require a machine shop to complete them. The polymer receivers can be "finished" using basic hand tools and the jig is supposedly not required.

        In other words, with a bit of time, basic skills, and an assortment of "gun parts", you can build your own AR-15 without having to let anyone know you bought it, or that you possess it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DaveM49 11 years ago
      Has anyone else ever had trouble with the "electronic sniffers"? They wipe your shoes or what have you and put the cloth in the device. As I understand it, the unit tests for nitrates, which are certainly present in explosives, but also in all sorts of harmless items.

      I once got a "positive" and ended up being thoroughly gone over before being allowed to go about my business. The only thing I can think of that might have caused this was that I had walked across a recently-fertilized lawn earlier in the day.

      The last time I went anywhere by air, my gate was at the far end of the concourse, as far as possible from any security checkpoint. There's a buffet-style steak place out there where you collect your silverware from bins after you check out. Including steak knives. Rounded tips, but they do have a pretty good edge. Meanwhile, the TSA confiscated my toothpaste because it was one ounce larger than permitted.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 11 years ago
        Uh, nitrates are the main composite in fertilizer and they can be concentrated and used to make bombs, so it is not surprising that the detector went off. A quick wipe of even a damp paper towel in the restroom should be enough to get rid of any residue.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by DaveM49 11 years ago
          There are nitrates in plenty of other innocuous locations, including barnyard dirt and most likely any agricultural land that has been fertilized or and body of water that receives agricultural run-off.

          There are also nitrates present in a number of household products. One oddball that comes to mind is "instant cold packs".
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
          Why should he have to?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 12 months ago
            Just read a very interesting article by an Israeli security expert. Apparently, they don't bother much with the intrusive scans used by the TSA and have passengers from disembarkment to curbside in <15 minutes. They instead focus on training their agents on body language and asking a few key questions of the passengers as they come through. No profiling necessary. And they face a whole lot more and constant threats than any terminal in the US.

            Just an idea which would of course get shot down by the idiots in government...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 11 years ago
            He doesn't have to at all, but the detectors are going to pick up on trace chemicals. That's what they do.

            I think the bigger gripe is why everyone is subject to TSA inspections for this nonsense when it is a very clear minority - easily visually identified - that perpetrate the vast majority of the problems with air transport in the first place. If your ire has a legitimate target, that would be it.

            I mean good grief. Mothers can't take infants onto a plane with baby formula or milk to feed them, so the other customers get to listen to a screaming child for their flight. People have to wait to get to their hotels for basic toiletries such as toothpaste, etc. because the TSA won't let you carry them on.

            I am in full agreement with the annoyances of "security" in air travel, I'm just pointing out that the detectors are just inanimate objects - it is the policies that dictate their use that are the obstacles here.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ stargeezer 11 years ago
        I'm a avid shooter and reload all my own ammo. Add to that my power wheelchair and the end result is that I just don't fly anywhere.

        Every time I go to the VA hospital I have to clean my wheelchair since spent brass can collect in the little nooks on it's base. Not only are firearms a big no-no in those facilities, but spent brass is too. Large calibers are pretty easy to find, but 22's are a pain in the butt. Picking up a person in the airport if you have spent brass in a pocket will also gain you a trip to the back room. How do I know? I was inline at the concession stand and reach into a pocket of my chair that I keep change in and pulled out a handful of change and two spent 22 brass with a TSA bum standing in line behind me. You would have though I was Ali Achbir or something. THAT FOOL made a entire day exciting. Some people need to be kept from breeding.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by xthinker88 11 years ago
        glass ashtray, skilled flintknapper, 10 minutes in the lavatory - instant knife.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by DaveM49 11 years ago
          A small glass bottle, holding no more than the TSA-permitted amount of liquid, medicine, or what have you, could undoubtedly be turned into a nasty gadget by simply banging it against a hard surface in the lavatory.

          The thing is: if we can think up stuff like this with such ease, just imagine what people who make a full time job out of making horrid plots must come up with.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chadcall2012 11 years ago
    What about people highly trained in combat? A terrorist highly trained enough to take out an Air Marshal could VERY easily take over an airliner. Id be way more afraid of a guy with a mean round-kick and powerful right hook than a skinny guy with a few plastic knives
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 11 years ago
      That is Hollywood more than reality. In close confines against overwhelming numbers they'll drop you in little time no matter how good you are.

      How do terrorists really take over planes at all? Fear. There is no substitute. They MUST cow the passengers into submission using fear in order to succeed. Remember Flight 93 on 9/11? Those passengers fought back and overwhelmed their attackers.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years ago
      Reminds me of a scene in a movie whose title escapes me... actually a couple of movies.

      A stereotypical Cuban revolutionary stands up in a plane, pulls out a gun and says, "Thees plane is goink to Coobah!"
      At which point a little old lady pulls out a 44 magnum bigger than herself, points it at him and says, "This plane is going to Miami Beach!"

      In the other movie, a would-be skyjacker stands up, pulls out a weapon, proclaims his intent of redirecting the flight... and everyone around him is now pointing a variety of guns right at his head.


      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 7 months ago
    I haven't made any 3D printed firearms yet, but I am making 3D printed rocket propellant. If you're interested in 3D printed firearms and nonmetallic ammunition, I recommend you e-mail me at jbrenner@fit.edu about my university's 3D printing camps this summer. I won't print the firearms or the ammunition, but I have no problem teaching you how to do so.

    I am starting work on 3D printing of metals now, but once again not for firearms.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eyecu2 10 years, 12 months ago
    To your point about non-metallic ammunition, speaking as an IT person programming a 3-D printer to create non-metallic ammunition if far easier to do than programming that same machine to create the weapon in the first place. What about the projectile, you might ask? Remember that in the past many times the projectiles were rock. Someone with the skills to operate a 3-D printer would easily be able to create pieces of rock the correct size and shape. True those rocks would not have the exact same ballistic properties as a nice lead or copper jacketed bullet but at close range the differences would be minimal. I am envisioning a bullet mold and thinset or grout but am certain that cement mix would work just as well. Of course someone out there probably has access to an easy method of shaping granite. The point is I see no requirement for ANY metal in this weapon.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years ago
    I think the plastic guns canard is much-ado-about-nothing.

    If you want to take down an airliner, there are lots of ways to do it. One of the easiest is probably to bribe someone for ramp access and slap a bomb on the OUTSIDE of the aircraft.

    Most non-nitrate explosives would probably pass through "security theater". Ceramic knives are largely undetectable.

    But keep in mind that TSA misses weapons/explosives in 50% of all tests and from what I've read, the bombs look like something Wile E. Coyote would order from Acme to kill the Road Runner.

    Someone published the "how to beat the strip-o-scanner" manual. Basically, you strap stuff on your sides where it shows up black - as it would if nothing were there.

    The weak point in airport security begins with a 5-mile perimeter fence and many thousands of people going through the airport. Contrast that with a prison where the perimeter may be less than a mile, everyone coming or going is tightly controlled and rigorously searched, and people still are able to smuggle contraband.

    TSA is a joke. Not a funny joke, but a joke just the same. The hullabaloo about plastic guns is just part of the entertainment and more proof that if Schumer ever had a brain, he doesn't now.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 11 years ago
    Let's not forget that following 9-11 all commercial flight cockpit doors were "hardened" and locked to prevent a takeover of the cockpit by bad guys. the only route open to potential terrorists would be to smuggle explosives on board with which to blow up the plane. No real need than to enter the cockpit and commandeer the aircraft.

    A bit of background; Prior to retiring on Maui I served with law enforcement for 16 years in South Florida and was invited by the Dept of Homeland Security to take two training classes in New Mexico on Terrorist bombing in 2007. Incredibly interesting and a bit scary as well - blowing up stuff in the desert for ten days.

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 11 years ago
    Aside from the ammunition thing, the other thing that most people fail to realize is that these cheap guns you can manufacture out of the resin plastic are literally one-shot weapons. The explosive pressure generated by firing usually cracks the chamber after first use, so firing it a second time usually results in the whole gun exploding in the face of the user! The ATF did some testing on a variety of these and found that not only were these guns horribly inaccurate past about ten feet, they had such a short useable lifespan that to consider them a legitimate tool in a firefight would be absurd.

    To me, I think the idea is cool, but that the materials will have to seriously improve before this is a big deal. Second, I still get hung up on the idea of "shall not be infringed" as the Gold Standard. To me, I should be able to carry anywhere and everywhere and so should everyone else.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Eyecu2 10 years, 12 months ago
      Check this link and you may change your mind about 3-D guns durability.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 12 months ago
        I missed the link in your post, but would be very interested in seeing the information. My information came from the video released by the ATF study using the common materials available. Better materials obviously are going to change the matter (as I mentioned).

        Would also be interested in the cost of the materials in your link, as the common resin plastic in current use means that a printed gun can be manufactured for about $400.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Eyecu2 10 years, 11 months ago
          Sorry that I left the link out last time. Would swear that I put it in there.
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DconsfGsX...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 11 months ago
            Liked the documentary, but the subject admitted that he is still having problems with the durability of the lower (receiver). I love the concept, I'm just still thinking this isn't going to take off without better materials.

            Thanks again for the link!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by Eyecu2 10 years, 11 months ago
              Yes but my point is that they are much more than 1 shot weapons now. If you do a bit of searching you can most likely find one that I read about 6 months ago about a guy who is getting around 250 shots or so out of an AR-15 version he is making. Honestly any gun that can handle more than 50 rounds can last long enough to wreck total havoc.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 11 months ago
                I agree.

                Do you have any information on the costs and which materials are being used?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by Eyecu2 10 years, 11 months ago
                  Not to speak with any authority but I did hear things mentioned specifically in a few of the videos that I watched. Some of the more durable ones were printing with metal powders so definitely not something that could pass a metal detector.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DaveM49 11 years ago
    From what I have seen of Defense Distributed's "plastic gun", it's more or less designed along the lines of the World War II "Liberator", which was made almost entirely of sheet metal (and I believe in part by toy factories, as were Sten guns). They were air-dropped in boxes with pictorial instructions in occupied countries with resistance elements. The idea was that one would locate a German soldier or guard, shoot him, and "liberate" whatever weapons he was carrying. They came with either five or seven rounds of .45 ammunition, but my guess is that the possessor was expected to only need one (as it was a single shot pistol with a wooden dowel as an "ejector", I doubt that most would have the chance to fire more in any sort of fight.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dpesec 11 years ago
    I'll see if I can find this. I guy built a miniblunderbuss with material that you could find past the security checkpoints in an airport. It uses change in your pocket as the shot and lithium batteries and red-bull to make the propellant. the thing is, you can't stop a person who is smart and willing to do what it takes. We all know security promised by is nothing more than a placebo to the masses.
    Interesting aside on the "plastic gun" issue. Ohio's ex-Senator Metzenbaum was the driving force because he was afraid that when Glock made its polymer pistol it would be able to pass the screeners. The only non-metal on any polymer pistol is the receiver (the bottom part) the rest is metal. I know I carry Glocks.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo