Smoking Barrels - LTT's Unnofficial Gun Club!

[Guest]

This is bordering political discussion, so I'll ask a very specific question.

 

Do you think 3D printed guns are anything other than a statement?

If it's just a statement, let's leave it at that. No need to say whether it's good or bad or what the statement is.

 

If it's not just a statement (avoiding politics & morality) what are your thoughts on it?

 

Spoiler

I found some interesting videos with the tagline "You Can't Stop The Signal." Interesting content, but not for this forum.

 

[Jito463]

7 hours ago, fpo said:

Do you think 3D printed guns are anything other than a statement?

They're an interesting idea, but not practical with the state of modern 3D printers.  At best you can get a few shots before they fall apart.  There are printers that can make them with metal, but even those aren't something I'd rely on long term.  Besides that, they're far too cost prohibitive to justify anything other than testing of new designs.

[Real_PhillBert]

13 hours ago, fpo said:

This is bordering political discussion, so I'll ask a very specific question.

 

Do you think 3D printed guns are anything other than a statement?

If it's just a statement, let's leave it at that. No need to say whether it's good or bad or what the statement is.

 

If it's not just a statement (avoiding politics & morality) what are your thoughts on it?

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I found some interesting videos with the tagline "You Can't Stop The Signal." Interesting content, but not for this forum.

 

It has always been perfectly legal to produce your own firearms, but historically it's been cost prohibitive for the majority of the population. Recently, however 3D printers have become cheap enough and accurate enough to start building certain firearms, most notably AR-15 receivers as they're relatively low stress components.

 

I have seen some attempts at a 3D printed lower, but as of now, they're more novelties than anything. There are some reliable polymer AR lowers on the market, but you really need some fiber re-enforcement at the receiver extension to make it strong enough, which right now (as far as I know) isn't really "Printable" material. 

 

IMHO the more practical option is the unfinished 80% receivers which are legally not a firearm, but with some basic tools can be made into a perfectly functional receiver in only a few hours. 

[LordVetinari]

13 hours ago, fpo said:

 

Do you think 3D printed guns are anything other than a statement?

 

 

IMO at the moment they are a statement - probably and realistically more so on the patent/sharing of information and 'open source' product side of things and its clash with localised legalities than necessarily anything else.  (being careful here....) 

 

I think they will be a catalyst for change in the above laws and not just relevant to guns. 

 

As products - pretty poor and nothing to write home about, even the revised designs I have seen with milled barrels and receivers. 

 

Guns as manufactured items are not complex - various designs have cropped up post WW1 based on simple stamped metal and about 3 welds (See - British STEN for example). They were designed to be produced large scale, with simple equipment in a shed in 1940. The 'engineering' for these is well within reach of anyone willing to purchase mediocre hobbiest equipment and I imagine plans for these have been in the public domain for a few years. 

 

Yet you don't see people running around with Stens or similar very often. 

 

QED - Statement. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Jito463 said:

They're an interesting idea, but not practical with the state of modern 3D printers.  At best you can get a few shots before they fall apart. 

I saw a few videos. The Glock 17  has been made by a few. And with the metal inserts of the real one, it has survived a few “first 100 shots“ videos. Same with this new design called FGC-9. It uses almost no real parts. 

 

30 minutes ago, Real_PhillBert said:

It has always been perfectly legal to produce your own firearms, but historically it's been cost prohibitive for the majority of the population.

I was not aware. I always thought you needed special federal government Licensing. 

 

I looked up my state’s. Specific laws & unfortunately we’re one of the ones that says no. 

30 minutes ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I have seen some attempts at a 3D printed lower, but as of now, they're more novelties than anything. There are some reliable polymer AR lowers on the market, but you really need some fiber re-enforcement at the receiver extension to make it strong enough, which right now (as far as I know) isn't really "Printable" material. 

 

IMHO the more practical option is the unfinished 80% receivers which are legally not a firearm, but with some basic tools can be made into a perfectly functional receiver in only a few hours. 

I remember hearing of 80% receivers. 

 

However ive seen some newer 3D lowers & they’re really funky looking. All kinds of extra materials and stuff. At least 4 or 5 parts. 

6 minutes ago, LordVetinari said:

Guns as manufactured items are not complex - various designs have cropped up post WW1 based on simple stamped metal and about 3 welds (See - British STEN for example). They were designed to be produced large scale, with simple equipment in a shed in 1940. The 'engineering' for these is well within reach of anyone willing to purchase mediocre hobbiest equipment and I imagine plans for these have been in the public domain for a few years. 

 

Yet you don't see people running around with Stens or similar very often. 

 

QED - Statement. 

Oh yeah, some guy named lutty made an SMG without any real gun parts in England. I also saw some really angry guy on YouTube manufacture & shoot a Mac 10/11. It is possible to just make things the old fashioned way haha. 

[Guest]

This is a really cool bullet. This is a French or English bullet from WW1. It was recovered by a German Soldier that was working his way through France at the time. 

 

Powder is removed by that hole but still cool. 

[Jito463]

On 10/12/2020 at 8:22 AM, fpo said:

I was not aware. I always thought you needed special federal government Licensing. 

Only if you manufacture them for sale or redistribution.  Making them for yourself is completely legal, though there are certain stipulations.  And as you've already noted, some states restrict them completely, or - in the case of Commiefornia - require them to be registered with the state.  One such stipulation, is that a homemade firearm must contain sufficient metal components to be detectable by a metal detector.

Quote

18 USC § 922

 

(p)

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm—

• (A) that, after removal of grips, stocks, and magazines, is not as detectable as the Security Exemplar, by walk-through metal detectors calibrated and operated to detect the Security Exemplar; or
• (B) any major component of which, when subjected to inspection by the types of x-ray machines commonly used at airports, does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of the component. Barium sulfate or other compounds may be used in the fabrication of the component.

 

[whm1974]

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

Only if you manufacture them for sale or redistribution.  Making them for yourself is completely legal, though there are certain stipulations.  And as you've already noted, some states restrict them completely, or - in the case of Commiefornia - require them to be registered with the state.  One such stipulation, is that a homemade firearm must contain sufficient metal components to be detectable by a metal detector.

 

I'm not sure if any State in the US actually completely restricts Manufactur of personal firearms. However they likely require a Serial Number to be added among other things.

[Jito463]

On 10/14/2020 at 1:07 PM, whm1974 said:

I'm not sure if any State in the US actually completely restricts Manufactur of personal firearms. However they likely require a Serial Number to be added among other things.

Fair enough, though some are certainly trying to.

[whm1974]

9 hours ago, Jito463 said:

Fair enough, though some are certainly trying to.

I do wonder if this is due to the Media basically squawking about some random "Issue" they made up due to being a slow news day.

 

I have a friend who is well, best described as Bat Shit Crazy who called me up when the News Media was squawking about "Ghost Guns". I had to set him straight that buying a Parts Kit is not the same thing as Manufacturing Personal Firearms. He thought this was a way to legally obtain guns by those who can't get a IL FOID Card...

 

I quickly informed him that "all Federal and States apply"....

[Jito463]

16 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

I do wonder if this is due to the Media basically squawking about some random "Issue" they made up due to being a slow news day.

 

I have a friend who is well, best described as Bat S*** Crazy who called me up when the News Media was squawking about "Ghost Guns". I had to set him straight that buying a Parts Kit is not the same thing as Manufacturing Personal Firearms. He thought this was a way to legally obtain guns by those who can't get a IL FOID Card...

 

I quickly informed him that "all Federal and States apply"....

There are places, like NY or NJ for example, that are either working to ban 80% lowers, or have completely banned them already.  While that doesn't preclude building your own firearm, it does hinder the ability to do so.

 

https://www.80percentarms.com/blog/new-york-80-percent-lower-laws/

 

Quote

ARE 80 LOWERS LEGAL IN NEW YORK?

 

New York still allows 80% lowers, but they do restrict how you can legally build an AR-15 with your lower. They are, however, actively trying to ban the sale and building of AR-15 lowers within their state, so make sure you actively research all applicable laws to your situation. They recently sent out a "Cease and Desist" letter, and you can be sure legislation is to follow shortly. We are, unfortunately, unable to ship AR-Style lowers to New York, however, we are still able to ship 80% Glock style lowers, and 80% Lower Jigs.

 

Quote

ARE 80 LOWERS LEGAL IN NEW JERSEY?

 

Unless you are a licensed manufacturer in New Jersey, you cannot legally build out an 80% lower. So unless you want to run into problems with the ATF, do your research and buy or build an AR-15 legally. Unfortunately, this is the one state that we cannot ship to.

 

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/09/ny-state-sends-cease-and-desist-orders-to-sites-selling-80-lower-receivers/

[whm1974]

1 hour ago, Jito463 said:

There are places, like NY or NJ for example, that are either working to ban 80% lowers, or have completely banned them already.  While that doesn't preclude building your own firearm, it does hinder the ability to do so.

 

https://www.80percentarms.com/blog/new-york-80-percent-lower-laws/

 

 

 

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/09/ny-state-sends-cease-and-desist-orders-to-sites-selling-80-lower-receivers/

And what is the purpose of these laws to begin with? To my knowledge, criminals wanting a gun, simply steal whatever they can. Or buy it off the black market.

 

Ghost Guns? Are there really since a thing? If the firearm(s) Law Enforcement trying to trace is old enough not be sold by a FFL holder, and the first owner who brought it from one, did a private sell a long time ago, haven't been inside a Gun Shop since then, wouldn't this be in effect untraceable?

 

Note to criminals or those otherwise prohibited from having a firearm who are reading this: Don't get any ideas. Law Enforcement is smarter then you are. OBEY THE LAW.

 

 Now that disclaimer out of the way. I'm pointing out how silly these laws are since Criminals don't follow them, and Legal Gun Owners as a rule don't engage in illegal behavior to begin with.

 

[Jito463]

6 hours ago, whm1974 said:

Now that disclaimer out of the way. I'm pointing out how silly these laws are since Criminals don't follow them, and Legal Gun Owners as a rule don't engage in illegal behavior to begin with.

Without getting too political, the thing about "gun control" is that it's never been about guns, it's all about control.

[Guest]

@whm1974 police have told me that criminals don’t actually make guns. They just buy them in different states & drive home with them. That or their friends buy them & drive them home. 

 

Well, some do make guns but many find it easier to do this method. 

[whm1974]

26 minutes ago, fpo said:

@whm1974 police have told me that criminals don’t actually make guns. They just buy them in different states & drive home with them. That or their friends buy them & drive them home. 

 

Well, some do make guns but many find it easier to do this method. 

Other then the so call Zip Gun or a simplerfed Sten, I'm sure the vast majority of Criminals don't have skills or tools to make even the most basic of modern firearms.

 

I wonder if some Felon(s) well after he or she served their Term made muzzle-loading fowling pieces which would be legal under Federal Law and the Media caught wind of it?

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

Other then the so call Zip Gun or a simplerfed Sten, I'm sure the vast majority of Criminals don't have skills or tools to make even the most basic of modern firearms.

 

I wonder if some Felon(s) well after he or she served their Term made muzzle-loading fowling pieces which would be legal under Federal Law and the Media caught wind of it?

It’d be funny to see the media say old technology is just as dangerous as new technology. 

 

It is as dangerous, but to convince the masses, idk. 

[Rybo]

@whm1974

 

I'm just glad we're making it more difficult for criminals to get guns.  I'd much rather be stabbed, blown up, or savagely beaten than shot.  

 

One axiom that I think applies here is that you can't completely harden a system against a threat.  There is no water proof, for example; just water resistant.  Nothing is fireproof; only fire resistant.   This applies to the security world as well.  A lockpicker's version of this axiom is that locks only serve to keep honest people honest.  Pretty much any consumer grade lock on the market represents a 15 second barrier to a talented lockpicker or a several minute barrier to a novice.  And those are the BEST locks.  The cheaper locks can be opened by a novice as fast or faster than the key.  

 

As it pertains to guns, all gun restrictions do is make sure honest people don't have those guns.  That used to have a limit -- decent guns are really hard to make, so if you restricted them, your average person wouldn't be able to get one even if they were willing to break the law to get it.  But with so called ghost guns, gun manufacturing has, in a sense, been democratized: now you can take perfectly innocuous ingredients, stir them together, and wham!  You've got a working gun.  This puts us firmly in the realm of this axiom.  It will be increasingly easy for criminals to get access to increasingly powerful weaponry, whereas law abiding people won't do it for fear of, well, breaking the law.  

[whm1974]

14 minutes ago, Rybo said:

@whm1974

 

I'm just glad we're making it more difficult for criminals to get guns.  I'd much rather be stabbed, blown up, or savagely beaten than shot.  

 

One axiom that I think applies here is that you can't completely harden a system against a threat.  There is no water proof, for example; just water resistant.  Nothing is fireproof; only fire resistant.   This applies to the security world as well.  A lockpicker's version of this axiom is that locks only serve to keep honest people honest.  Pretty much any consumer grade lock on the market represents a 15 second barrier to a talented lockpicker or a several minute barrier to a novice.  And those are the BEST locks.  The cheaper locks can be opened by a novice as fast or faster than the key.  

 

As it pertains to guns, all gun restrictions do is make sure honest people don't have those guns.  That used to have a limit -- decent guns are really hard to make, so if you restricted them, your average person wouldn't be able to get one even if they were willing to break the law to get it.  But with so called ghost guns, gun manufacturing has, in a sense, been democratized: now you can take perfectly innocuous ingredients, stir them together, and wham!  You've got a working gun.  This puts us firmly in the realm of this axiom.  It will be increasingly easy for criminals to get access to increasingly powerful weaponry, whereas law abiding people won't do it for fear of, well, breaking the law.  

Criminals have always had the ability to make their own firearms using both hand tools and whatever "parts" that wouldn't occur to most people that you could produce a serviceable "gun" out of. Granted the item usually doesn't last very long.

 

And what do you consider to be "Powerful Weaponry"? 5.56x45mm? Less powerful then 7.62x51mm...

 

And why would you rather be beaten or stabbed vs getting shot? That really makes no sense.

[Guest]

I took a shooting class and well... I actually learned how to shoot. My gun wasn’t inaccurate. I was haha. 

 

Even shooting the Beretta M9, it didn’t feel so front heavy as I once thought it was. 

 

Stance also helped me a ton! I could nail them. I was shooting better than some of the soldiers that were there. The course was about M4s/ M16s but I also brought my AK and shot both. 

 

It was interesting... the P or П setting on the AK47/akm... When shooting at close range (5~ metres) the AK was dead accurate, where as the M16 has the significant sight to barrel ratio. 

 

Im going to have to measure it. I was expecting to hit low at that close range with my AK like when I shot the M4. 

[vf1000ride]

On 10/16/2020 at 10:06 AM, fpo said:

It’d be funny to see the media say old technology is just as dangerous as new technology. 

 

It is as dangerous, but to convince the masses, idk. 

Thats an argument I have had with some anti-gun friends.  Why they think modern guns are more deadly.  Here's a perfect example.  I have two different old German Luger pistols, 1921 and 1916 dated manufacture so they bracket that 100 year old range nicely.  Certainly not new or modern by any standard.  They chamber the same 9mm Parabellum cartridge that any modern 9mm pistol is chambered in and holds 8+1.  You look at a brand new M+P Shield that is a very popular self defense gun and in the same 9mm cartridge is an 8+1 capacity.  You can't tell me that the shield is that much more deadly than a 100 year old Luger when they both shoot the same ammo and have the same capacity yet the anti-gun friends of mine will insist that the modern gun is worst because it is black plastic and painted steel and is somehow more evil than my Lugers made of wood and blued steel.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

Thats an argument I have had with some anti-gun friends.  Why they think modern guns are more deadly.  Here's a perfect example.  I have two different old German Luger pistols, 1921 and 1916 dated manufacture so they bracket that 100 year old range nicely.  Certainly not new or modern by any standard.  They chamber the same 9mm Parabellum cartridge that any modern 9mm pistol is chambered in and holds 8+1.  You look at a brand new M+P Shield that is a very popular self defense gun and in the same 9mm cartridge is an 8+1 capacity.  You can't tell me that the shield is that much more deadly than a 100 year old Luger when they both shoot the same ammo and have the same capacity yet the anti-gun friends of mine will insist that the modern gun is worst because it is black plastic and painted steel and is somehow more evil than my Lugers made of wood and blued steel.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to go with your friends on this one.
Black plastic is very dangerous... Where as the wood is biodegradable, plastic is not. It's gunna kill the turtles. haha

/s

 

How is it to shoot those Lugers? I've handled (not shot) replicas like airsoft & BB that would blowback just like the real one. I've only shot semi-autos (glock, M9 so on) and revolvers.

 

EDIT:
I was more so talking about muskets & ball & cap stuff. I know that old guns are as deadly as modern guns to varying degrees. But I think it'd be a conception that old guns (antique firearms by FTC/NFA regulation) are not harmful.

[vf1000ride]

16 minutes ago, fpo said:

How is it to shoot those Lugers? I've handled (not shot) replicas like airsoft & BB that would blowback just like the real one. I've only shot semi-autos (glock, M9 so on) and revolvers.

 

EDIT:
I was more so talking about muskets & ball & cap stuff. I know that old guns are as deadly as modern guns to varying degrees. But I think it'd be a conception that old guns (antique firearms by FTC/NFA regulation) are not harmful.

They are great shooting for their age.  Just as accurate as any modern gun.  They can be a bit ammo sensitive but you gotta give them a break being they were designed in 1908, 9mm hollowpoints hadn't been invented yet.    Recoil is actually a little softer than a modern gun due to the fact that they don't have a big slide moving around.  Trigger would be considered mushy by modern standards but still a fairly short pull, they are a striker fired setup like a modern pistol.

 

If you meant really old I have a Colt/Walker replica.  44 caliber 6 shot black powder cap and ball revolver.  It has roughly the same ballistics as a modern .40S&W pistol.  I run a 140gr round ball at about 1000fps or I have 180gr cast round nose bullets that I push to around 900fps.  For those first 6 shots you are not at a disadvantage with a modern revolver if you had to use it.  The reloads though are what gets you, doing things safely and while not being shot at, it is a 7-8 minute operation to reload the gun.  You are better off using it as a club and running away once it goes empty. 

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

They are great shooting for their age.  Just as accurate as any modern gun.  They can be a bit ammo sensitive but you gotta give them a break being they were designed in 1908, 9mm hollowpoints hadn't been invented yet.    Recoil is actually a little softer than a modern gun due to the fact that they don't have a big slide moving around. 

That’s cool! I thought they would have more cuz of that upward recoil. 

32 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

If you meant really old I have a Colt/Walker replica.  44 caliber 6 shot black powder cap and ball revolver. 

Yeah I meant like this kind of stuff. 

 

37 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

You are better off using it as a club and running away once it goes empty. 

 

 

[XGoodGuyFitz]

Hey guys! This weekend i just shot my first revolver. I also shot a .22 cal smith and wesson, that looks almost identical to an ar15. It was really fun, we shot at paint cans. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, xXFitzXx said:

Hey guys! This weekend i just shot my first revolver. I also shot a .22 cal smith and wesson, that looks almost identical to an ar15. It was really fun, we shot at paint cans.