I suspect in most cases these things are far more dangerous for the shooter than the target. There's a reason that firearms have been made of metal since forever...
In all seriousness, it's not good. But - as Shirty rightly says, it's more likely to damage the operator than the target!
I dare say bullets are just as hard to come by in the UK as guns are. Chances are if they can get the bullets they have access to firearms anyway. Also there's nothing stopping someone making a crude gun, crossbow etc without a 3D printer
It looks liek the story was hyped. The Police found a 3D printer and someone trying to make a gun with it. Not a gun, and not a gun that worked. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/techno...304/the-police-havent-found-a-3d-printed-gun/
I'm not sure why these 3D printer stories are getting such prominence. 3D printing is being heralded as the most significant development since 2D printing, so maybe it's just the industry pushing these stories to the top of the agenda for publicity. If someone was using them to produce some never-before-conceived killing devices then it might be interesting, but guns have been around a long time, they're regulated, and these plastic ones are likely to be less effective anyways. So where's the beef?
Because people get bored of reading about actual, metal gun killings in our inner cities and sink estates, so a hyped up story about a non-problem becomes front page news.
The reason is actually that metals cannot be easily disposed of, guns need to have traceability, for that they have serials. If you had a plastic gun its easy to remove the serial or dispose of the weapon whereas metal is much harder to modify or dispose of. There are some non metal materials and plastics that are as strong (or almost) as the steel used today. In fact you can burn a 3d printed gun and all you would have left is a firing pin (Or nail) hence why the authorities are cacking themselves...
We've been over this so many times in other threads... People need to wise up and stop trying to print guns from polymer because the simple fact is that they won't be reliable. They all fire at best 1 or 2 shots, then self destruct. The investigating Detective Inspector is quoted to have said; "If what we have seized is proven to be viable components capable of constructing a genuine firearm, then it demonstrates that organised crime groups are acquiring technology that can be bought on the high street to produce the next generation of weapons." ...but the fact is it's extremely unlikely that any crime gang are going to be capable of successfully printing a viable firearm. If 3D printing experts all over the world have been unsuccessful so far, it's unlikely that some amateurs in their garage are going to get it right and produce something which fires straight, fires more than one round and doesn't kill the shooter in the process. I think they still need to be more concerned about the acquisition and activation of replica firearms which criminals have been doing for years.
Although as in this article it is possible to print a working gun http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22421185
In Australia they were worried about the potential dangers of 3d printed guns... so they made some... Then showed the results of their test...
Shock! 3D Printers can be used to print parts for other 3D printers. Double shock: 3D Printer parts cannot be used to fire bullets. Treble shock: Manchester police are muppets. Even though they know the parts have nothing to do with guns they are still saying: The 'Gun part' they found: Extruder Part of 3D Printer The 'Gun magazine' they found (Ignoring the small detail that the liberator 3D printable gun is single shot without a magazine): Filament holder for 3D Printer:
this bugs the crap out of me big time. Ok, so a few are developing designs of firearms in order to use the technology of 3D printer. Now using the FDM technology is just full of fail, plus their not compensating for the "head space" required for the round. With an alloy breech you can have a super tight head space that sends most the gases down the barrel allowing for high velocity rounds. With a polymer breech you need to increase the headspace to de-stress the breech upon firing, this reduces the potential velocity of the round. And this isn't taking into account the weaknesses of the FDM build process. Alloy breech = High pressure Polymer breech = Low pressure It would be a big enough challenge to get a working polymer gun using machining techniques, or SLS Nylon discounting the fact that firing of the round super heats the breech expanding and deforming the polymer. Hell POM would struggle, or TEEK. Glock know all of this, hence why ceramic composites are used, and if you're seriously wanting an illegal firearm, buy a hobbyist lathe, spend a few weekends learning and then convert a 8mm blank firer or a de-activated firearm. Even cut and shuts are possible to re-machine with a little time. So too those who are trying to make weapons with 3D printers, please stop because you're going to make the life of industrial designers/engineers a lot harder if such devices get banned. I really want a desktop SLS machine, sadly they don't really exist just yet but in time I can only hope! /RANT from an Industrial Designer.
Tbh the argument that something should be banned because it could and indeed will be used by a few to hurt or kill someone is stupid, I could kill a person just as easily with a pencil or any number of every day items should we ban pencils then?
This. In general. I can take a metal pen on an aeroplane, which I could use to blind somebody or really hurt them. Of course, I wouldn't ever do that, but I'm always amazed when ladies can't take tweezers or metal nail files on, but I swan through with my nice Cross pen in my bag. Daft.
