ATF grants “crypto-anarchist” license for 3-D printing of guns
The U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has issued a license to a group that wants to manufacture a 3-D printed gun.
Defense Distributed, a loosely organized group that wants to create weapons mostly using 3-D printed parts — and provide the files for anyone else to to do so online — shared the news on its Facebook and Tumblr pages over the weekend, exclaiming, “Look who has a license to manufacture firearms.”
Creating a printable gun is the project of Defense Distributed, an effort headed by Cody Wilson, who on his public Facebook page is described as an “American crypto-anarchist,” a law student at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin and founder and director of Defense Distributed. (He pretty much IS the group.) The organization, he says, “develops and publishes open source gun designs, so-called “Wiki Weapons,” suitable for 3-D printing.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Ummmmm…wow.
squint on March 19, 2013 at 6:16 PM
Cool.
blog commenter starts saving up for a 3-D printer.
rbj on March 19, 2013 at 6:26 PM
You don’t need a license to print or make guns as long as you don’t sale it. The gun your made can be serial free.
He got a license to sell the printable firearms he create. Basically the receiver/frame. The entire gun can’t be made into plastic tho. It’s against the law and not strong enough for continuous use.
jdun on March 19, 2013 at 6:31 PM
Well this gets the heat off him while he perfects his designs. Also allows him to get investors and really rocket this idea into reality.
HondaV65 on March 19, 2013 at 6:31 PM
Printable guns is inefficient. Printable guns are done by hobbyist. As a manufacture you’re better of making a mole and mass produce them in minutes.
jdun on March 19, 2013 at 6:34 PM
I think it may also let him manufacture full auto without any worries. You can make a gun for your own use, but not a full auto one. They were testing full auto in one of their vids iirc.
TexasDan on March 19, 2013 at 6:36 PM
You can’t make full auto gun for sell to the general public. The 1986 gun control law prevent any new full automatic gun to be made for general public consumption.
The 1986 Gun control laws IMO is illegal and I believe never got the vote to pass it by congress.
Full auto is pretty much overrated. You can run semi-auto faster than full auto and with greater control. I’m not sure what the human limitation is but it is at least over 600rmp.
jdun on March 19, 2013 at 6:43 PM
But his license doesn’t limit him to sell to the public. I think he could make full-auto models and sell them to LEO.
The point is he can’t make and test them, to prove his design in the more demanding role of full-auto, without the license. Unless I’m mistaken.
TexasDan on March 19, 2013 at 6:59 PM
I just recently found that out.
You can make a gun for yourself and you are good. But make a silencer for the same and you have to register it.
Supressor, in case any idiots happen upon this post.
Lanceman on March 19, 2013 at 7:08 PM
You can’t sell full auto guns that is made after 1986 law to the general public. He can sell it to the government but that’s it.
People been making plastic receiver and frames for a long long time. Over 40 years now. He doesn’t need to test them. It’s been done and proven to work.
You can’t make a entire firearm out of plastic. It’s against the law. Second a pure plastic isn’t strong enough to contain the super heated gas/pressure. In other world the gun will go KABOOM.
I haven’t been keeping with the firearm prices lately because it skyrocketed to unaffordable area. Before the mess started AR15 forged receiver cost around $50. Their counterpart cost more and no where as strong as their forged counterpart.
jdun on March 19, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Suppressors are NFA items. You can build or buy a suppressor but you must pay a $200 tax stamp to be legal. IMO the tax stamp is constitutional illegal. There are effort on the way to take suppressor off the NFA list.
jdun on March 19, 2013 at 7:22 PM
Yeah, I know. Didn’t know the tariff was 200 clams, though.
Would like to have had one the other night – had to shoot a raccoon through the sliding screen. Even the .22 subsonics are kinda loud and I didn’t want to give the neighbors an excuse to call the fuzz.
Lanceman on March 19, 2013 at 7:40 PM
I have a few suppressor. It’s fun but heavy. I went back to unsuppressed firearms tho. The extra weight was slowing me down.
The current NFA wait time is over 7 months. It been over 6 months now since I sent my NFA forms to the ATF for my Ruger 10/22 Short Barrel Rifle.
jdun on March 19, 2013 at 7:51 PM
I suppose I could make a disposable, one-time use one. For just such an occasion. Flash hider prolly would have been more useful, actually, as I didn’t want the neighbor over the back fence to think I shot the ol’ lady.
Lanceman on March 19, 2013 at 8:00 PM