If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
When the 3d printing technology is available for guns, will I need a license to print whatever I want? Will that drive gun manufactory out of business?
a. it is available
b. doubt it
c. Intellectual Property Law is going to get curiouser and curiouser until we find a better way to handle it
d. Why would you assume you need a license? Perhaps you should work to ensure that your rights are not stripped away instead of asking? You need a license presently to manufacture for commercial purposes (sale), but private property is private.
You can already 3D print lower receivers, as well as complete rudimentary guns (see the Liberator, not to be confused with the WWII era gun).
Currently, on the Federal level you do not need a license to make guns for your own personal use. Manufacturing with intent to sell/distribute requires an FFL, regardless of manufacturing process. Of course, the law could change in the future, but that's the way it is now.
Currently 3D printed guns are not that great compared to ones made by an actual manufacturer. It is possible that in the future, the technology will advance to the point where 3D printed guns are as good as or better than traditionally manufactured ones, but I doubt it will happen any time soon.
Maybe the 3D blue print designer will be the best career in the future. People will download designs like we download app from store.
No different than turning a chunk of Aluminum in (aka 80% lower) to an AR lower. same requirements to build and manufacture the firearm.
- - - Updated - - -
No way to sell a digital blueprint/ 3D build. Once one person has it, the world has it. there is no way to stop piracy unless you have extreme DRM on the file.
In most states, there is nothing stopping you from printing or manufacturing for personal use. The reason for this is the nature of private property being stringently Constitutionally protected. Federal and most state governments were not willing to test how poorly our Courts were performing at any given moment by regulating truly private behaviour.All my assumption is based on current MA gun regulation. I would love to print without a license
3D will move forward independent of firearms. They will not determine its success or failure one way or another.Someone has to figure out a way to earn money other wise there will be no motivation to push 3d printing tech any further though
Scanning will only get better rending this even more problematic - hence my comment on "we need a better way to handle Intellectual Property", but I have no idea what that is other than "don't be a douche", but then that's the foundation of civilization.No way to sell a digital blueprint/ 3D build. Once one person has it, the world has it. there is no way to stop piracy unless you have extreme DRM on the file.
No, far from it. They will and are being used to justify ever more invasive regulation of gun ownership.Maybe a gun smith license...just feel like all the gun control regulations will go away if 3D printing became reliable
In most states, there is nothing stopping you from printing or manufacturing for personal use. The reason for this is the nature of private property being stringently Constitutionally protected. Federal and most state governments were not willing to test how poorly our Courts were performing at any given moment by regulating truly private behaviour.
There are some wonky Federal (and likely some state) laws on undetectable firearms that I honestly don't bother following too closely because I'm not trying to build anything that way. I know there are some hard limits on FFL07's, but I have no idea if those laws apply to individuals.
At a minimum MA requires an FA10 when you make a firearm.
I am not a lawyer of course, so all I can say is that there is no state-level license for manufacturing. There is a "gunsmithing" license and of course a Federal license for firearms manufacture (FFL07 or 10), but there again, those licenses apply to commercial activity and sale of things that are made or modified.
- - - Updated - - -
3D will move forward independent of firearms. They will not determine its success or failure one way or another.
They may weigh heavily on Big Brother style regulations... [sad2]
No, far from it. They will and are being used to justify ever more invasive regulation of gun ownership.Maybe a gun smith license...just feel like all the gun control regulations will go away if 3D printing became reliable
Someone has to figure out a way to earn money other wise there will be no motivation to push 3d printing tech any further though
Indeed, but the line moves around based on perception of the consumer and his incremental manufacturing cost.The argument is the same for all the goods isn't it? Why would you spent time to design a car if you can benefit from your work ?
Few of them continue coding "fo free" indefinitely. Many use free software development to build skill, credential and credibility to "get paid". They may not admit it until later, but, QED: they have jobs now.3d printer tech is not driven by ghost gun industry, there are many areas where they are used.
to develop 3d printed designs ... look at Open Software movement. There are a lot of people who are not making money coding and loving it. There are companies that make some money providing support and commercial companies that incorporate open source into their products.
Few of them continue coding "fo free" indefinitely. Many use free software development to build skill, credential and credibility to "get paid". They may not admit it until later, but, QED: they have jobs now.
Many companies fund large portions of "free" software devel as a loss-leader to their products. Nokia and QT for example.
There is no "free" software, it is only a question of who is funding it and why. On the long timeline, the Stahlman's of the world are few and far between and he's still getting paid for his knowledge.
Oh, I've been working with, producing and consuming OSS for my entire career and since the first days of Linux. I think I still have some slackware floppies on a shelf above me here...there are many developers who coded in free time and donated their software to the world as a gift. It doesn't mean that they do that 100%, but it's a model that worked for generations. Younger people have more time. I used to do this kind of shit a lot more when I was younger, along with shitton of hours in volunteering. It's harder to do having a family, but no, I didn't get paid and I did not wanted to. This is the same deal as volunteering, but projects are open to global public.
Many companies are doing fusion of free and commercial version with more bells or provided hosting. You can def make money with OSS and many companies do.
No different than turning a chunk of Aluminum in (aka 80% lower) to an AR lower. same requirements to build and manufacture the firearm.
- - - Updated - - -
No way to sell a digital blueprint/ 3D build. Once one person has it, the world has it. there is no way to stop piracy unless you have extreme DRM on the file.
There is no "free" software, it is only a question of who is funding it and why.
HAH!When the bad guys can print their own guns (remember zip guns?), gun control laws will become useless (as if they aren't already).
This may make people realize that restrictions on ownership and carry by the good guys should be relaxed, if not eliminated entirely.
CDC said:http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.
CDC said:http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/
“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”
...
“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year…in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.”
...
“Whether gun restrictions reduce firearm-related violence is an unresolved issue.” The report could not conclude whether “passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violence crime.”
Anyone making a gun with the intention of selling it needs a federal license - FFL07.Just when do need a manufactuers lic?
ggboy