Hacker News Reader

Comment by yaacov | Hacker News Reader

> Finally, the idea of "banning" guns -- which every basically qualified engineer or physicist should be capable to building from readily available materials and tools -- makes them even more interesting. If for no other reason than to illuminate preposterous and insulting nature of the idea.

By this logic, almost nothing should be banned, do you endorse that position?

View on HN

Trivial counterexample: I can't make an Apple M1 chip in my garage. I can't make (good?) LSD in my garage. I can put a metal pipe on a board with a nail and have a simple, reliable 12ga shotgun. I can 3d print a 22LR pistol, or even a 9mm subgun (just add pipe for barrel, weight for bolt, and some common springs).

I assume your response was probably born out of some political frustration, and I respect that. Happy to discuss specifics of the this position on the practicality and effectiveness of gun bans.

You can 3D print a gun you can use once.

Where are you going to get the bullets from? Or for a shotgun, where is the powder from, the pellets etc.

I live in the UK, I quite like clay pigeon shooting, would it be a shock to you that American mass shootings basically aren't news worthy anymore unless they are more than 2 dozen people now?

That's not correct, if you want a rifled barrel, you do need to electro-machine it, and you might want some airsoft parts, but everything else is bolts and printed parts.

What? Unless things have improved a lot since I last checked all the designs for fully 3D printed guns I could find were one used affairs.

3D printed firearms have drastically improved in the last couple years. Here is a 3D printed glock https://ctrlpew.com/freemans-g26-3d-printable-glock-frame-di..., there are also 3D printed ar/ak lowers.

I don’t think my response was born of political frustration. I think most existing gun control legislation does nothing but annoy legal gun owners. Though I would support things like universal background checks, cool down periods, and price floors to make it harder to get the cheap handguns that are used for most gun crimes. I’m not super informed on gun issues though, and I’d be interested in learning more.

I just think “an expert can make this in their garage” is a really bad reason to legalize something. I don’t think IEDs or street meth should be legal. (Apple M1s and LSD are probably fine though.)

Something to note is that most physical things that are banned are one-time-use (drugs, organs, etc), whereas the shelf life and resale value of the gun are much longer. Also the classification of "gun" is much wider than classifications of most other illegal things

The issue is "banning" something which those versed in the art know is impossible to ban -- thereby only removing it from the law abiding, and not from the abusers of said item. (proof: Research how cartels get weapons produced under such a "ban". TL;DR: Trivially, by contract engineers w/ basic modern milling machinery.)

Frightened, ignorant (of the state of the art) people are led to believe "banning" is helping them "making them safe", when instead it is harming them: nobody law-abiding remains to come to their aid, while abusers and thugs wield powerful weapons, unopposed. Instead, benighted government officials ban common farmer livestock varmint rifles by the hundreds of thousands (see: Canada, just now).

So, no -- if someone wants to ban something, then they should darn well consult with anyone who knows something about that item, to see if A) it makes sense, and B) if it will actually prevent the violent from obtaining/using it.

This is one of those questions people often ask 2A people as if the answer isn't going to be yeschad.jpg

Reply on news.ycombinator.com