Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Regulators to target 3D printers?

Some months ago, the world was rocked by the news that a gun had been made using a regular 3D printer.

The rocking pretty much stopped when it was revealed that -- well it wasn't really a *whole* gun that had been printed. In fact, the critical parts were actually made of steel and it was really only the support components that had been printed.

No, you couldn't simply download the plans for a gun and have your MakerBot device start spitting out weapons for your own private arsenal -- until this week that is.

Now they really have built a gun entirely from 3D-printed components and it's all plastic except for a metal firing pin.

Is this a game changer? Will this send legislators in to a huddle as they try to come up with ways to counter the potential risks such weapons may now pose?

Well I guess that depends on the levels of paranoia being felt by politicians - but I strongly suspect there will now be extra laws and restrictions imposed in the rapidly improving area of domestic 3D printers.

Here in NZ one could argue that since ammunition is as heavily regulated as firearms, the ability to print an actual working gun from nothing more than some ABS cord and a nail doesn't really change the game much. A gun without ammo is like a bow without arrows.

Never the less, this won't stop some of our attention-seeking MPs from jumping up and down and demanding that controls be implemented (after all, if they're not printing illegal drugs, these devices will now almost certainly be printing illegal guns).

It is interesting to look at the gun itself -- which is pretty beefy and obviously they've gone for a very thick-walled, short barrel to contain the firing pressures -- to good effect.

Here is a video from the BBC news showing the gun being fired and giving a reasonable look at its design/construction: Worlds first 3D gun fired in US.

What is not revealed is that this is probably a single-shot weapon in the strongest sense of the word. The amount of throat/barrel erosion caused by firing even a single shot would likely preclude re-use of the weapon without replacing the barrel itself. In fact, I would bet that even removing the spent casing would be a bit of a task, as it will probably have melted the plastic in which it sits.

No indication was given as to the accuracy of the gun either -- but, given that the barrel would not be rifled and the "fit" of the bullet to the barrel would be "variable" at best, I would not expect to be able to reliably hit a man-sized target beyond a few metres.

Of course many of these issues could be eliminated by making the barrel portion from steel and I would not be surprised to see "metal replacement parts" popping up on eBay for just a few dollars -- if this thing took off. Perhaps they'd be sold as something else such as "Metal paperweight" so as to sidestep any firearms restrictions and after al, who's to say that a short length of steel with a flange on one end and a .22 inch hole through the middle isn't a paperweight?

So, with legislators becoming increasingly worried about the potential for creating weapons with 3D printers and intellectual property owners concerned that eventually people will be able to pirate their physical products -- I really do think we're going to start seeing some rather draconian laws introduced in respect to these things.

Although, to be fair, I'm sure they probably said the same thing about photocopiers and tape recorders when they were introduced and ultimately, IP owners managed to survive those challenges to their property rights.

What do readers think?

Should/will government start imposing its control on 3D printers in the near future?

Please visit the sponsor!

Have your say on this...

PERMALINK to this column

Oh, and don't forget today's sci/tech news headlines

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font