Cool community. New member. Yep I’m well aware it’s completely legal in the US for the most part (there are a handful of states where it’s illegal so be careful) perusing this community I see 2 things that go against your claims. Not very many people specify the type of plastic, PLA and PLA+ won’t last for very long, definitely not thousands and thousands of rounds (most barrels are only rated for 10,000-20,000 rounds anyway, there’s a mill-std that military weapon accessories like scopes only need to be certified to 50,000 rounds which isn’t a lot for a machine gun, civilian standards were even lower). Happy to be wrong but I see no one claiming survivability of thousands of rounds. It’s very tough to tell what plastic is in pictures with only a few exceptions but I expect much of that is PETG. Also looking at the raw print quality I’m certain some of them are from something like an ender but a basic ender doesn’t print nice enough to just work. Those printers are going to be well upgraded and the raw prints carefully cleaned and sanded after. (Again I said specialized like the guy who did an SLS nylon ar lower in the last few days on that Reddit, or well tuned which is still not a trivial task). Basically what I’m saying in my original comment is it’s not buy printer download gun go shoot things. Without a good understanding of printers AND guns you ain’t making something effective which is why I say it’s a fools errand because if you possess both those things AND mal intent, you’re smart enough and resourceful enough to go do something else besides print a gun and use it. I found some data to back this up too claiming 44 3d printed weapon crimes in 2022 (check one of the other comments for the source). Seems governments are waisting a lot of resources on targeting dangerous 3d printers when truthfully this isn’t actually a widespread problem like so many articles are claiming

You’re right I should have been more clear. It’s a lower in a rifle, and a frame on a pistol. Functionally they serve a similar purpose and neither of them have the equipment that makes a gun go bang (just trigger, mag well, some pins maybe springs). Regardless, per ATF 27 CFR 478.92 the serial number must be conspicuously marked on the frame or lower receiver of the firearm (US only not sure for rest of the world). What you’re seeing on the M&P 2.0 might be the rest of the required markings which can go on the slide but there is still a serial number on a metal piece which is embedded in the frame on the right side of the gun just below the slide! If you take the slide off that piece will stay behind

Now THAT is a very hard thing to do, and also an area of interest for me and my friends. Check out a guy named Joe Barnard at BPS space on YouTube if you want to see exactly that in action. Requires a wicked amount of electronics and coding experience thought. To make it dangerous you also need to know how to mix explosives which is already a common watch item anyway. Restricting printers won’t fix that though because anyone smart enough to do what you are saying can make a printer from scratch

Now I think that goes down a very different path here than the article describes of restricting engineering software or 3d printers as a whole. And that’s at least attempting to restrict the availability of the files themselves because you’re right that’s certainly a risk. The article did mention the FGC-9 which is fundamentally exactly that. (As a weapons guy I’m interested in giving it a shot since I’m in a place where that would be completely legal, see if it’s actually any good).

I think that’s where a lot of people get stuck, someone with the right understanding and experience in materials is usually required even if they do get the files. Now I’m not saying no one out there with mal intent has that, what I am saying is it’s not exactly common so it goes back to the risk profile. Go after the 44 cases of 3d printed weapon arrests in the world in 2022 (according to 3dprint.com no idea how legit that number is so take it with a grain of salt but I suspect it’s quite small) or go after the 10’s of thousands of weapon crimes that are happening with illegally acquired firearms. That’s really why I think it’s a fools errand. Besides I suspect if you were to serialize barrels, the one piece that could not be 3d printed and can barely be machined by an expert machinist, the problem of 3d printed firearms goes away entirely.

Print them sure, print them with enough accuracy to actually work with a firearm no. Enough sanding might get the job done but it won’t work reliably for long if at all

Edit: little more explanation, the holes and alignments need to be just right for the trigger group and the slide rails are the hardest parts. They’re fairly small but need to be very smooth and induce very little friction (for a pistol) on a rifle it’s a little different since the moving parts are in the upper sans the trigger group. Even then the threads have to come out pretty darn nice for the buffer tube and accuracy on the mag well especially where the hammer goes is really important. Can it be done? Sure, are you going to have to be a pretty darn good understanding of mechanics to get it done? Absolutely. Now we’re back to someone who has the skill to 3d print a weapon with the current state of technology probably has the skill to do it other more effective ways

That could potentially be used in cad for sure. Not a bad idea. I think it still leaves the risk open for 3d printed lowers or other components. Most of the time the firing pin and chamber will be acquired by other means. They’re not tracked in any way currently so why design it when you can buy it from anywhere. Not totally sure how much benefit having an AI look for a firing pin assembly or chamber assembly

That’s fair however I will say it would be extremely difficult to do from a software perspective. The reason photo copiers refuse to print money is because all money looks the same. Pretty easy to say ‘is this money?’ Issue is with CAD, or even at the lower level, a slicer, you would need a ridiculously powerful AI of some sort to confidently say yeah this isn’t a weapon. The only reasonable way to achieve this would be by requiring all softwares to be cloud based (which many companies can’t easily do if they’re working with sensitive information IE ITAR rockets) so that the AI’s on the cloud can keep an eye on all models. But then a manual review process would be necessary when it inevitably flags a false positive (see googles AI that deletes shit from people’s Google drive all the time). It also completely demolishes the opportunity for prop weapons since they would get flagged as well and that would totally suck. (Me as a guy who cosplays in a full suit of halo Spartan armor and 3d prints prop weapons). I will say as it stands now (at least in the United States) it’s significantly easier to illegally source a weapon than print one. (It’s also completely legal to print one and register it as the gun laws currently stand anyway in many states)

“Software that allows for the production of these weapons….banned from the market”

Soooo CAD? Rip literally every single engineer ever

Okay so I’m a senior level engineer in aerospace, an expert 3d printer with a decade of experience, and have been working with and around firearms for nearly 20 years so I’m poised to talk about this. Furthermore I also have a black belt in martial arts so weapons defense and use is something I am also very experienced with.

Long story short, yes you can 3d print a very inaccurate firearm that will shoot once before it destroys itself. Not much more effective than a knife to be frank. At least a knife works more than once.

The other Avenue is the infamous ‘ghost gun’. As it stands in the United States (and much of the rest of the world as I understand it) the lower receiver (holds the trigger and is basically the handle and the frame of the weapon) is the only piece that needs to be serialized and tracked. It is possible to 3d print a lower receiver and have it work. This often requires a specialized or at least very well tuned machine though. It’s easier to make a pistol lower than a rifle as well. The amount of G’s a rifle imparts on the weapon system is immense. On a rifle it will not work for long unless it’s printed out of a material like glass or CF nylon. (Again back to expensive specialized machine). The interesting thing here is all the rest of the firearm pieces can’t be printed ESPECIALLY the barrel. The barrel is an extremely precise marvel of engineering that is hardened to obscene levels and machined to ridiculous tolerances. Plastic will blow up, and even if you have access to a metal printer good luck getting the tolerances acceptable to not cause a host of other issues including but not limited to blowing the weapon up in your hand.

This is mostly a fools errand being pursued by people who have little to know engineering knowledge, 3d printing knowledge, and especially firearms knowledge. At the point someone is 3d printing a firearm that actually works well, they have sank thousands of dollars into the project, and have incredible engineering skills. So much so that they are likely skilled enough to make a metal one on cheap desktop CNC machine. Or buy an ‘80% lower’ which just needs a drill and some patience to turn into a ‘ghost gun’. Or go to the coke dealer on the corner of the bad part of town and buy a firearm with the serial number sanded off.

Anyway if you have questions feel free to ask and I’ll answer them to the best of my ability. But key takeaway, this isn’t nearly as big of an issue as people think

ADHD be like bitch you thought