PrintableGun.com has printer seized
Seems the company, Stratasys, didn’t like their product being used to make a 3D printable firearm and pulled their lease of the printer. Not sure but, depending on lease terms, there could be a breach of contract. The wiki-weapon project has had other snags, such as fundraising cut off because the site they used for it doesn’t like guns much. Amazing to me how companies will poop their pants because things are gun related.
October 2nd, 2012 at 9:59 am
I hadn’t even thought of the ramifications of the Undetectable Firearms Act (AKA the Glock 7 act).
October 2nd, 2012 at 10:08 am
The only Federal law he is likely to have even run afoul of was the plastic gun ban.
Of course, to violate that, you have to show that the finished subject gun can sneak past a properly calibrated and operated X-Ray scanner. Even sliding a steel pipe over the plastic barrel as a barrel shroud (and for safety) would make the gun readily detectable.
I don’t think that would even violate the intent of the Wikigun project, provided you used an OTS pipe available at any corner hardware store.
I think the company would get their ass handed to them in court, unless the signed lease agreement states they can unilaterally CANCEL (not reject — they already agreed when they took his money, accepted his signature on the lease agreement, and shipped the printer TO him) a legal lease early simply because they do not want to follow it.
In which case, if I were him I would (being an evil, vengeful, SOB) request that if the judge rules against me in the lease lawsuit, that the court order that a clear statement, not buried in fine print, be sent by the company to ALL current or future leaseholders stating that, from the company’s POV, the lease is meaningless — they can yank your lease for any or no reason, and the customer who has been defaulted on has NO legal recourse.
Honestly, if the lease agreement states that the company can reneg for no reason, solely because they elect to, I WOULD NOT bother getting the machine for my business — God knows when they are going to unilaterally just come get the machine, right when I am relying on it to meet a deadline. Nope — safer to outsource any rapid prototyping to a major firm that OWNS their machines outright, if the lease agreement is only low-grade used toilet paper. No point in leasing a desktop machine if your ability to use it is subject to the day-to-day whims of the manufacturer.
October 2nd, 2012 at 11:54 am
I say if the BATF wants to enforce a Plastic Gun ban let them find an Agent to fire one in 500 S&W!!
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Too late. The idea is out there.
The idea is the dangerous element in a 3D printed receiver for a gun, not the hardware used.
October 2nd, 2012 at 12:46 pm
I quit my job at Remington when I found out I was no longer making typewriters. It turns out that I had been tricked into making parts that would become part of….. guns……. I hate even typing the word. So icky.
October 2nd, 2012 at 1:56 pm
Geo has the right idea. Spread the word through all the gun websites. I notice a good number of are engineering types and those that are somewhat mechanically inclined.
In other words, a target market for 3D printing.
Make it known that they just shot themselves in the ass. Then let it be known that a competitor would do well to cater to this market and not have asinine policies like Stratasys.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:23 pm
>Make it known that they just shot themselves in the ass.
Unfortunately, there are only two or three high-rez 3-D printer companies out there (depending on what you want to call high-rez). I guess he can soldier on with a lower-rez and open source 3-D printer (or MakeBot).
Maybe they want to talk to ZCorp? Not sure if they’ll be as gun-shy
In the end it doesn’t matter regardless. You just can’t make a gun out of plastic unless you somehow get very clever within the current limitations of plastic. Some parts can be plastic, some parts just need to be steel (or other exotic stuff that’s not yet printable)
OTOH, http://defensedistributed.com has a crapload of “start-up” money to burn through and zero shareholders, so why not go get a professional 3D printer right off the bat? The startup money was gifted and if they produce zero they don’t have to worry about being sued.
Anyway, if I was designing a downloadable design for a weapon to be included in the holocaust education and avoidance pod I’d start with a shotgun design (no rifling needed) using off-the-shelf metal water pipe. Then I’d mill the receiver out of foam on one of many open-source 3d milling machines out there. Take the foam core, some ordinary playground sand and a ladle of molten metal (from an open source charcoal furnace, very easy to make) and you have yourself a real metal receiver – all ready for your barrel to be screwed onto.
October 2nd, 2012 at 4:58 pm
Standard Mischief gets it.
The Defense Distributed guys don’t seem to understand the engineering involved, but I think their philosophy is decent.
The thing is, the perfect weapon for the HEAP already exists, it’s called the STEN.
October 3rd, 2012 at 4:34 am
Yep, the loonies are coming out of the woodwork and having hissy fits… Hence the pressure on the printer manufacturer!
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:42 am
@ #8: Actually, the M3 Grease Gun strikes me as being simpler than the Sten, or at least simpler to approximate with off the shelf hardware.
personally though, if I had my druthers which cheap subgun to manufacture post collapse, it would be the Sterling.
October 3rd, 2012 at 1:42 pm
HSR47–
Sten is easier to make. You can make one without even a milling machine for the bolt, and the receiver design is all common pipe sizes — Grease Guns are more difficult to make without the stamping tooling.
If you simplify the trigger group to auto-only instead of the Sten’s select fire, it is even easier. However, the Sten’s selective mechanism is really quite simple. The Sten is also one of the few guns where the STAMPED parts are usually more durable than the machined ones. (For example, the stamped trigger group parts are superior to the machined versions. just like the AK reciever — for all the fanboi flak on the issue, the stamped AKM receiver is actually better than the milled AK47.)
October 3rd, 2012 at 1:48 pm
It’s ALSO not just the gun community where notice of this interpretation of the lease agreement holds.
ANY manufacturer who relies on the ability to rapid prototype cannot afford to have their lease yanked “just because we say so”. What if one of your competitors gets a controlling plurality, and decides to yank your lease just in time to tank your new product line? what if you make something that may be viewed as “unworthy” by the unknown management of the printer company, because they are fundamentalist Chirstians/hate motorcycles/whatever? What if a loud protest group of extremists decides to pressure the printer company because either they don’t like you, your products, your suppliers, your customers, or the politics of your founder?
If the lease contract isn’t worth the paper it is printed on, I sure as Hell aren’t exposing the viability of MY company to the day-to-day whims of your management!
October 4th, 2012 at 4:20 pm
“holocaust education and avoidance pod”
I was thinking of the HEAP while reading this. Glad to see other fans of Cryptonomicon around.