Some are kinda, yeah. The AR-15 is for sure, and most 3d printed lowers would be, and iirc gen 3 glocks (I think, because that’s what all the 80% and 3d print glock lowers are), and I think colt SAA by now, but many designs are still owned by the original company.
Well everyone here loves piracy so ride this goalpost with me, it’s sustainable mass transit
I’m not an expert in 3D designing, but it seems to me that the AR-15 is a popular 3D print rifle from a practical perspective more than anything else.
The lower isn’t under extreme stresses, it can be thickened and reenforced without impeding function, and it snaps in modularly to factory made uppers. It helps a lot that the AR-15 parts market is diverse and easily accessed.
There’s a reason that I listed ARs and 3d printed lowers separately. ARs themselves are basically open source, nobody “owns” the design, so say Hodge, Noveske, Colt, SOLGW, Radian, etc, can all produce lowers etc, MIM industries can produce all the lpk bits, but so can NBS etc, cerro forge and Brass Aluminum Forge Co can both make identical “milspec” uppers, the only thing that is really “trademarked” on any of it is the branding, or an advancement like Geissele’s maritime bolt catch (which similar knock offs were produced immediately, anyway.) If you started making and selling say a2 parts (except lowers, but that’s just because you need a licence to manufacture for sale) tomorrow nobody could stop you.
I was just thinking out loud more about why you don’t see printed AKs or at least not nearly as much. The AR-15 layout just seems practical for printing.
Yeah the Plastikov does exist but is definitely less popular and a bit more involved. They also have printable CETMEs now though too lol. Basically any cheap parts kit someone is probably working on a solution if one doesn’t exist, and they’re doing cool shit like the 3011.
ARs and Glocks are also some of the most popular purchased firearms (like through an FFL), so I’m not surprised they’d be the most printed, they’re basically the Toyota Camry of guns, easy to work on, dependable, and last long.
A printed CETME is too adventurous for my blood.
Understandable lol, they do work though! Ivan made the file.
Interestingly, Glock is another one that there’s strong 3D printed support for. It’s likely because Glock was designed to be polymer, and there’s very strong aftermarket support for them, so you can print the serialized part and make it work as a firearm with no real problems.
US-americans got the crazy
deleted by creator
This is really bad advice. DEFCAD is a paid service that requires a fucking FFL to download files, but this is not made clear at the time of purchase. The gatalog is a much better resource for anyone new to the scene. Can’t stop the signal.
forget defcad, cant even use it outside of 'murica, all designs are pretty much uploaded to odysee
DEFCAD
That’s an interesting guitar tuning
I want to share software and ideas, not bullets and death. Hard pass.
i would argue that you probably lean more on the side of sharing user rights and freedoms generically. Rather than the more specific “software and ideas”
You can certainly have different opinions relating to guns. But they do have a fundamental overlap of underlying concepts. Rights are rights at the end of the day. Either you have them. And they’re justified, or you don’t, and none of them are.
Please just stop
Rights are what a community agrees on that they should have. I’m happy my community has agreed that owning guns is a priviledge, not a right. There is no sufficient reason owning guns should be a right, so I can be completely in favour of rights and freedoms without including any right to own guns.
i mean, technically if we’re arguing that it’s a privilege more than a right. That wouldn’t really change the point being made here, considering that legally, the government does have the ability to prevent you from owning a gun. Minor semantic shenanigan though so meh.
Well, that’s hard to do when your government are the only ones with guns and power.
@lemmylem @Railcar8095 oh i love the fantasy ‘we’re going to overthrow the government with our rifles’ trope, please tell us more
Can confirm, no FOSS at all in Europe
Innocent lives lost due to “law abiding citizens” mishandling guns: a metric shit ton
Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0
The thought of how many people might be stocking ammo and thinking to use out if their favorite politician loses makes me happy for having an ocean between me and them.
Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0
i mean, in a sense. That is why the US exists today. The british are well known gun fanatics.
What about the innocent lives lost because they didn’t have a gun? You think everyone can fight with their bare hands or a knife?
Owning a gun makes you more likely to die by gun accident or by that gun being used against you. You logic is completely wrong.
You think these people care about logic? Wait until you hear who they are voting for and their reasoning for it.
Who do you even need to fight bro? If I was say getting mugged I would give them all my valuables save a 10 % tip that I could give them when I was allowed to run the hell away from there. Do not be a stupid macho idiot. Be a smart coward without neither a wallet, gun nor a fatal wound.
Jokes aside, the main uptick is the smaller chance of someone less mentally stable than you with less to lose also having a gun.
So what about when you are getting raped? What about when someone doesn’t want to let you go? Do you know what its like to almost be murdered?
If you want to say “Why do you even need to fight bro” you’re basically just saying good luck to all the people who can’t defend themselves and just letting them die. And do you not understand how regimes come to light? Just take a look at Russia, Putin just got to serve for another 6 years. Do you wonder how somebody stays in power for 24 years? Because nobody can fight back.
deleted by creator
Russia has pretty high gun ownership… comparable to Europe/Australia and not far from Canada. The US has like 4x the guns per capita as the next highest countries, and it’s far from the most free.
If a country like the US had a lower violent dead per capita than other first world countries like France or Germany, I would agree with you. But given that the numbers are 3 to 6 times those of EU countries, it doesn’t seem to be working.
Still, if you want to quantify how many lives were saved in any given year I can give you how many innocent ones were lost. Hard to measure, you say? Then it’s a weak arguments based on feelings not facts.
If a country like the US had a lower violent dead per capita than other first world countries like France or Germany, I would agree with you.
It doesn’t have as high of a gun ownership rate as the US (no one does), but Czechia has some of the laxest gun laws in Europe, including allowing the concealed carry of a handgun like the US (at least 1 million Czechs have permits to own a firearm, a large portion of which conceal carry them for self defense) and they have a lower homicide rate than Germany or France (Source: World Bank)
Even as a supporter of gun rights, I don’t think that definitively proves that guns, on a societal level, prevent deaths. I don’t believe that in general. I do believe, however, that on a personal level, a well trained individual who sees the need to defend themself or people they love can prevent harm by owning a firearm. I do also believe that in a society (America) with a broken policing system, and an increasingly authoritarian Republican party that wants to crack down on my rights and the rights of people I love, I’d like the option to protect myself and my friends/family.
The more knives people use, the more people get cut.
More guns = more gun violence.
How fucking hard is that to comprehend?
You don’t understand. They mean they want to topple democratic societies in favor of theocratic fascism.
Peace is the enemy.
These fuckers never stopped waging the civil war, that’s what this is about and was ever all about.
deleted by creator
Ahh, the typical Reddit old tradition of vague statement of knowledge with no meat to not be rebutted. Had hoped that didn’t reach Lemmy.
Lightning round. Russia? Ha! China? Ha! North Korea? Japan? Ha! Netherlands? Hahahaha
USA…? Hahahahahahhahahhaha
The US might prove true if you include gun nuts toppling their own government by voting for fascist scum.
It’s better when it’s the government with guns against criminals, randos, and children with guns.
More guns is always the solution. If it only causes more violence and bloodshed like a tribal civil war in the jungle then you clearly did not get enough guns.
Plus, they’re FUN! People forget that it’s FUN to shoot guns. Isn’t that worth a dysfunctional society crippled by violence and murder?
Im pretty sure Japan is sharing software and ideas all the time
I struggle to see Japan as a bastion of freedom lol. Fun place to visit for sure, but between the archaic drug laws and suicide forests I’m not sure they are a society others should be modeling themselves after.
this is moving goalposts, they specified sharing software and ideas. But check out this list of suicide rates if you think our gun culture is beneficial at all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
Not sure if the countries with more gun rights are either more free or have a society with modeling after.
yeah I’m not watching him anymore, not like I did before, but…
having been around the block pretty recently with shit related to this. And my personal opinions coinciding quite nicely, i’ll leave this food for thought. Have a stroll down in the comments section, see whats going on down there :)
There are problems in the gun community. That much i’ll say.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
i’ll leave this food for thought
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I dont think I’m American enough to understand this. How does wanting people to have freedom to use their systems as they please correlate with everyone being able to own and freely carry weapons that can kill instantly?
Yeah it’s like saying if you support free software, you support companies to not pay taxes or companies putting nicotine in products.
to put it blatantly. Pro 2A people (they should, on paper at least, in practice a significant portion of them are cunts and shouldn’t be allowed in the community but that’s a different rant all together) support the idea that people have rights. specifically to do with guns.
There is a very fundamental overlap in the whole “i believe i should be able to run whatever software i want, with no restrictions” and “i believe i should be allowed to own guns with minimal restrictions” crowds. It’s that simple, doesn’t matter whether you agree with it or not. If you’re a linux user, and you support open source software, and believe users should have rights. You automatically have a pretty significant moral overlap with pro 2A people. (on paper, again, fuck it, im ranting about it)
Also, minor nitpick, they don’t kill instantly, they certainly can. But if i shoot you in the toe, you probably won’t keel over and die immediately. That’s a gross mischaracterization of them.
The following is a tangential rant, feel free to ignore, it’s about gun owners being cunts. There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to liberals (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.
Now i feel like i don’t have to explain why this is maybe a very bad thing. But to put it bluntly, there are two good solutions here. Ban guns forever, permanently (which i disagree with, but that’s just my opinion on it) or, make it accessible to everybody, and give everyone access to them, and the materials required to be safe and responsible with them. Because after all, gun safety, is what keeps us safe when using them. While im sure the latter would make some amount of gun owning republicans uneasy, i propose they get a taste of their own fucking medicine.
Gun people and Open Source people both can appreciate the right to repair, although Americans, particularly southerners, have a certain tendency to have more gunowners across the land than people who can libreboot a chromebook. Both groups of people can use their devices for good or bad, and I think that was the original message the oop failed to relay; I don’t really know what they think they’re saying.
I see what you’re saying… I’m picking up what you’re putting down…
There’s an overlap of free rights to freedom and free rights to guns, but I think that they’re on different fields.
I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.
For the sake of conversation, I’m mixed. I have guns myself but I treat them with respect. My kids know how to handle them and can cite the rules of gun ownership. The guns are locked up at all times. My family does the same. I can’t imagine that everyone is doing the same thing.
Jordan Klepper noted that a firm overlap on both sides is stricter regulatory control of deeper background checks, but the NRA makes this impossible. Jordan Klepper Solves Guns.
I know this is about to sound stupid but I promise it isn’t as dumb as it sounds.
Guns are not designed to kill, nothing is designed to kill. Guns were designed to propel a projectile at incredible velocities, they were INVENTED to kill. What you do with the gun is what makes the difference.
i’ve never really found that argument compelling tbh. Guns are designed to kill.
So are knives, and machetes. And daggers, swords, etc… Nobody ever complains about those. Mostly because they have other uses, and aren’t in particularly heavy use.
I mean hell, you could argue a car is designed to kill people. F150s are a big contender there.
So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?
Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?
Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.
Guns have uses besides killing, the very presence of a firearm is a deterrant, that alone is a purpose that is given besides killing. I don’t agree with it, and I don’t even think everyone should just have easy access to firearms, but they definitely work for that purpose. Mentally unstable folks, it won’t work on those, but is that really the fault of guns themselves, or our country’s lackluster healthcare system, especially with the stigma around seeking mental help? A lack of access to guns is not going to stop someone from trying to kill someone, I am telling you that it is not. At the end of the day, external factors like economical reasons, mental health problems, stress related factors such as family issues, social issues, or work related issues, that’s what even drives people to do crimes like mass shootings in the first place.
Honestly, I could give less of a shit if guns even got taken away, but at the end of the day, there is still a problem to be dealt with and that is people who need help are not getting it, and as a result, are suffering.
So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?
Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?
Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.
this is exactly my point. It’s such a broad and wide reaching statement, that it completely excludes sport, and hunting. As well as defense, from what guns were designed to do. It’s just frankly a stupid statement to make.
Guns were not designed to defend, they were designed to, once again, fire a projectile.
That is the controversy about them. Essentially they’re super fast slingshots.
Again, I agree. It comes down to rights though.
Guns, to me, could maybe be paired with cars. You don’t need cars. Nobody needs to go that fast. Cars kill people. Cars ruin the environment. Etc.
Pretty much lol. At the end of the day, an object that you use with a purpose is a tool, what you use that tool to accomplish, i.e. running someone over with a car, bashing someone’s head in with a hammer, or shooting someone with a gun, that’s what is important. I won’t comment on the gun rights thing because I honestly think I’ve spent too much time in my life talking about it, but I think something that gets overlooked that could help alleviate the problem is widespread mental healthcare and awareness!
Unfortunately, that will probably never happen though.
Guns are designed to kill that is why they are inherently political.
If I don’t like what you do, say, or are I can kill you. That is what guns do. That is what everyone wants.
If you don’t like that guess what you need guns too. That’s why arms dealers always win.
It’s why both sides are opposed to gun control. Gun Control means authoritarian governance, Your kids are sacrificed on the alter of incumbent Control (assuming Global Dominance 2011+).
Gods we aren’t even into the drift wars.
I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.
like wise you could argue that censorship resistant platforms, self hosting, and e2e encryption can cause acts of violence to be carried out against people. I don’t see anybody complaining about that though, that’s just an understood cause and effect of having freedom in regards to censorship. Shitty people exist, they will proceed to be shitty. You can censor them, but if you want to maintain truly uncensored speech, you must allow them to speak, unfortunately.
There is always a benefit, and a negative to any action taken. Guns can indeed kill people, you can argue they were made to kill, but you can also argue that the vast majority of guns in existence have never once killed a person. And therefore, statistically, are probably safer than a lot of other things. Like eating junk food.
Like you said, you treat guns with respect, because they can be dangerous, much like someone who interacts with powertools on the regular, understands the dangers of powertools, and how they can be used to hurt people, intentionally or otherwise. Just like when creating open source software, or using it, you have to respect it’s licensing, and use it appropriately.
The lack of respect is certainly a problem, but it is drastically upset when republicans, who disproportionately, understand gun safety, and utilize it to their benefit (as they should) don’t want to educate people they don’t find very appealing on how to be safe with them. Which not only leads to potential self inflicted dangers and injuries, but also potentially to others as well. If we want everyone to be safe and respectful of guns, we can’t simply ignore an entire segment of the population, it just doesn’t matter. You can’t justify that.
putting them on different fields is certainly understandable, they are different things after all, but i think it’s important to consider the underlying structures and mechanisms behind something, and seeing how those can be effectively applied elsewhere, if for no other reason than to prevent bias and hypocrisy. As well as ensuring consistent beliefs. Seeing as a non-insignificant portion of gun owning republicans seem to be experiencing this issue right now. I would say that’s fair.
it has fuck all to do with " people they don’t like owning guns." it has fucking everything to do with people unqualified and unsafe to own guns being able to obtain guns - whether through gun show loopholes, straw buyers, no yellow/red flag laws, etc.
fuck outa here with liberals getting antsy bullshit. if you weren’t paying attention, there’s a fucking gun violence epidemic going on, every fucking week there’s another mass shooting.
if that’s liberals getting antsy, maybe you should fucking wake up and realize this bullshit only happens here. bellend.
It’s written in a messy way but I actually read it the opposite way.
There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to liberals (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.
I think what @[email protected] meant was that the 2A people don’t seem to be very interested in defending gun rights for people outside their circles. I don’t know if I’d use liberals as the example here. I think Black people would be far more salient.
Did the NRA Support a 1967 ‘Open Carry’ Ban in California? | Snopes.com
While 1967 was a long time ago, the “antsiness” has remained. How often do you hear of these people doing anything to defend the people who are the primary targets of anti gun laws? Which is, by a large margin, Black and other racialized people.
I heard an interview with some Public Defenders who had submitted an amicus brief in relation to a guns rights case on the basis that even though the actual case was stupid, changing the law would materially improve the lives of overincarcerted communities. I thought it was on 5-4 podcast in follow up to the first ep that covered the case in a less friendly way: New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. I don’t find the subsequent ep where they had the PDs on for an interview… maybe it was taken down.
Reagan and the NRA were all about gun control when it was Black Panthers.
I just want sane controls preventing nutbags from acquiring arsenals. I’m not anti-gun, I’m a prior service gun loving person who’s watching the idiots ruin it for the rest of us.
i wish it was less about posturing, and more about the underlying fundamental reasons.
You’re a republican that owns a gun, that’s cool, i didn’t ask, lets go do something that we can enjoy together instead.
posturing, and more about the underlying fundamental reasons.
this is why we fail: you assume it’s posturing. it’s not fucking posturing.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-violence-claimed-lives-5000-people-2024/story?id=107262776
that article is cool and all, but please try to explain to me how the intrinsic and very explicit link, between republican politics, and 2A, isn’t political posturing in some manner.
You may not be. But there is a very clear tie between the conservative rhetoric, and 2A. If it weren’t political posturing the issues that i was talking about, which do exist (go have a look at some of the comments on this video), would not be happening. As it wouldn’t fucking matter.
Bzzzt, nope, I am not a republican.
why are you so afraid to address the issue?
Upvoted for the last sentence. Gun and weapon ownership represents the counterbalance of incumbent control. Current control should always be nervous of new powers and new powers should always have the ability to intrude. The lac will introduce a reproductive drift to the detriment of intelligence.
Because we live in a society where the criminally insane can get ahold of ILLEGAL firearms as they please. If the bad guys have guns and are willing to break any law put in place to prevent them from getting them, how is it fair to not let upstanding citizens get them the right way?
In an ideal world, no one would need guns for self defense. We do not live in an ideal world. Welcome to North America.
“If you are in favor of free software, you are also in favor of computer viruses”
just ask your fellow yarr friends whether there are “open source” gun designs. I’m sure they’ll give you a bit of a rough time for the question, and then immediately point you to the materials required to make illegal guns.
Legal mostly, a few states ban them but not many. Just can’t sell em, that one is federal. The “illegal” part comes in if the person themselves isn’t legally allowed to own them because of age or criminal history.
that’s interesting, i figured due to serialization that there would be some legal basis to owning a 3d printed gun, unless that applies here.
The rest checks out though.
They don’t have to be serialized unless you sell them (for a living, and have a manufacturer’s license, hobbyists kinda just can’t sell guns they make.) Or if you take them into a gun shop to be worked on, then they have to serialize it.
There’s like 6 states that have harsher laws than federal on them, I think in those states they have to be serialized, I don’t think they can stop you from making one though, but all other laws apply too so it kinda ends up being a “you can but really not” type thing.
But even then, even in states where it has to be serialized, the only way they’d ever know someone had an unserialized one is if someone was caught in a crime with one or defended themselves with one, and imo crime is already illegal but defense being criminalized because of the lack of a few letters stamped on is dumb, and it really just gives the police another excuse to “crack down” on minorities (as if they need another reason for what seems to be their occupational pastime.)
interesting, i suppose that makes sense. One would think they would be more heavily restricted, but i suppose that’s expecting too much from governmental bureaucracy lol.
I mean tbh technology has exploded in the last like, 15yr, it didn’t used to be this easy to make em this good. Always been able to make pipe shotguns easily though, but better guns required a bit more skill and it was more niche/rare.
Also they kinda can’t stop it, both due to the second amendment binding them and physical impossibility, for instance the guy who invented the LutySMG, P. A. Luty, is (was?) a british citizen. Sure they got him, because he published two books on how to make his guns in protest of the UK gun laws, but his designs live on, and could be reproduced by anyone so inclined over there.
I watched the video. He says that if you support FOSS you should support guns, but never once advocates for guns to be free.
He says the problem is that politics are tribal, and people are simply in their corner, cheering for their teams - without acknowledging that there are Americans that want different levels of gun control, and there are reasons that people want gun control outside of tribal politics, and there are Republicans/conservatives/gun enthusiasts that have nuanced opinions, and support things like red flag laws and certain gun control policies.
He’s a troll trump supporter, which is all anyone needs to know. If there are 9 regular people at a table and a nazi sits down, and all that.
You do know there are left wing people out there who own guns and go to the range, right? Because when them nationalists show up in their leather boots, knocking on doors, they won’t give a damn if you’re a pacificist. They gonna go pop-pop-pop.
Learn from the black panthers. If proliferation of guns is the standard, abstaining will only make you - and your children - a juicier target.
But, even if you’re anti-guns, there’s one more thing.
One talking point you could use with pro-gun people though, even if you’re anti-gun…
“So let me get this straight… you’re against the government taking away your guns, but for the government taking away your encryption?”
Say it with me now:
THE RIGHT TO ENCRYPT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
US is a great example that guns dont stop guns. they just turn escalations into dice rolls for who gets to die
You obviously need a gun with the same caliber bullet to stop an incoming gun shot. Have you not even read Newton’s laws of motion?
You can’t install Arch by good sharpshooting skills.
A bullet tends to destroy the drive.
Um acktsually you could manipulate the keyboard with a low-powered pellet gun
Upgrade to hardened steel key caps so you can use a .22 for extra range.
Having the right to have a mass killing device is never required.
When everyone else lays down there arms too I’ll lay down mine too.
okay meal team 6, going to Walmart isn’t a war zone so no need to roleplay
Funny, the time I almost got stabbed was in a walmart parking lot, it’s at least a little warzoney depending on locale. Glad you live in a nice neighborhood though!
(Before you don’t look at unames I’m a different guy)
That’s pretty standard in retail. Some get smoke breaks, some get stab breaks. Walmart just goes above and beyond and loves to help their customers even on their breaks!
Unfortunately I was better equipped to help him, he seemed to agree when he saw what I had under my coat, he decided to go help someone else instead.
To prepare for peace one must prepare for war. I have no delusions that I am some secret spec ops action hero, its more that me and other citizens be8ng armed changed the calculus for people that would want to oppress us.
This is a weird fantasy gun people like to imagine. There will never be a war like that, nor do they need to confiscate anything to control you. They already do through laws and your bank account. There’s zero chances that gun nuts will suddenly rise up and start fighting the government.
I won’t, so keep em. Even if we had impossibly utopian world peace, I still want to go to the range and IDPA.
And sane gun laws.
His arguments are so disingenuous, lol.
