I am completely disinterested in any of the fearmongering about this weapon. There is no way to hold back technology to prevent violence, we just need to accept that and deal with not being asshats to each other that causes the violence.
Gun violence is caused, first and foremost, by the presence of a gun. A sufficient cause? Often yes, given appropriate context.
There are plenty of very successful ways to "hold back" this technology. It's called law.
Anyway I don't think anybody is worried about this 3d printed deal other than the press trying to get page views. The scrawny middle class kid who made it is an uninteresting attention whore, and the gun itself is a massive piece of shit. As others have pointed out, self-made ballistic weapons have been possible for years. This doesn't lower the convenience factor.
But violence is caused, first and foremost, by people being asshats to each other. A gun is just a tool a violent person may use to be violent. In the absence of a gun, they may use a knife, a baseball bat, a crowbar, a fist, a pencil, a screwdriver, a laptop, a bucket full of sardines, etc.
No. Violence is caused, first and foremost, by people being violent. Give them means or tools to be more violent and they'll use them. Thus guns existence are a factor in the violence scale.
Guns aren't tools like the other ones just like the nuclear bomb isn't like any V2.
Moreover many quiet people who aren't asshats have been the victims of asshats, and sometimes only because they precisely aren't asshats.
[1] True story.
There may be complicated motivations or factors involved, but without at least one person being an "asshat" in any interaction between multiple human beings, you don't get violence.
Gun violence is caused by people.
Surely?
"Gun violence" isn't "caused" by guns any more than "knife violence" is caused by knives or "fist violence" is caused by hands.
Here, let me restate your main theme: Violence is caused first and foremost by the presence of two or more people. As Disney says, it's a "song as old as time".
This is actually terrorism. I see someone creating guns and killing people to be no different than boston bombers.
Terrorism: The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Until someone uses this to cause terror it isn't terrorism.
>> "I see someone creating guns and killing people to be no different than boston bombers."
For a start no one has been killed with this gun. People are killed with guns every day - that does not constitue terrorism. The Boston bombers committed mass murder of innocent people and caused 'terror' in Boston - that is terrorism.
This is even better than bombs for terrorism.
Additionally, mass murders with guns kill more people in US than terrorism. Why shouldn't we classify New Town and Aurora shooting as terrorism?
Terrorism is not only about politics. Moreover, guns are probably the most political thing in US. Thanks to NRA.
How is creating a low quality gun at home some kind of godsend? A high quality gun can be acquired quite simply anywhere in the USA. Even if you have some kind of problem with your criminal background you can acquire one at the right price. Or get someone else to acquire it for you. And you don't have to worry about detection with a small gun because it is easily concealable. You're free to walk out of the house and head to times square if you so choose.
I'm not sure why you'd think it is better than a bomb. Those are also easily made at home and can be made to look like pretty much any non-threatening object.
You're not making any sense. Why are you so scared of guns?
Remember, gun control means hitting your target.
Your comment adds no value to this discussion whatsoever.