The only vital metal component? A nail, used as a firing pin.
Defense Distributed
California State Senator Leland Yee (who represents the western part of San Francisco) announced that he will pursue outlawing 3-D-printed weaponry, in the wake of the first 3-D-printed gun to be successfully fired.
This weekend, a Texas group called Defense Distributed created the plans for a 3-D-printed gun made almost entirely of plastic--the only metal part is a very small firing pin. (For more on that, check out this article.) Federal law restricts the purchase of guns--barely--but places no restrictions on the creation of weaponry.
That hasn't been much of a problem in the past; while it's certainly possible to use various metalworking machines to create a working firearm, it's expensive and difficult, requiring quite a bit of expertise, and when it's easy and cheap to buy a professionally made gun (legally or illegally), homemade guns haven't caught on.
But 3-D printers are a bit different. They're rapidly decreasing in price; the machinery needed to craft a metal gun would cost tens of thousands of dollars, while you can buy a 3-D printer online for a thousand dollars or so. The price, too, will only drop from there; companies like Makerbot and Solidoodle are dedicated to pushing that price as far south as possible, down past the $500 mark. Those printers aren't capable of printing a gun yet--but they will be.
The other major advantage is ease. It takes considerable skill to craft a metal gun, and none at all to download a CAD file and press "print." In fact, this particular file has been downloaded over 100,000 times already, according to Forbes.
It's unclear how Yee's bill would actually ban this technology; it's virtually impossible to stop digital files from distributing, as any member of the Record Industry Association of America could tell you. A spokesman said the bill was being drafted at the moment, so the details are still being hammered out. Perhaps a blanket federal law against creating one's own firearms would be in order?
[via the Telegraph]
     |