The Shot Heard Around The World From A 3D Printed Firearm

A functional entirely 3D Printed firearm:

Defense-Distributed-Liberator-PartsNot many details on it yet, but there are some pics and you can download the files at DEFCAD.

There are talks about the barrel being smoothbore, thus falling under the AOW (Any Other Weapon) provision of the NFA.  I wondering if “disposable” rifling was put in the barrel so that it just got ripped off on the first shot would be a loophole? haha

Forbes has an article about the first shot.

Thoughts?

22 COMMENTS

JUMP DOWN ↓ TO ADD ANOTHER

Bilbo May 7, 2013 at 04:30 am

I thought the bore was smooth to reduce friction to allow more shots. ?

Reply

drone May 7, 2013 at 06:36 am

The dangerous part of a firearm system is the ammunition, not the gun.

A person capable of running a 3D printer is also capable of making a functioning zip gun from off-the-shelf plumbing parts and basic tools.

The hysteria surrounding this project borders on the ludicrous.

Reply

Suburban Sheepdog May 8, 2013 at 07:51 pm

This exactly.

California legislator was talking today about simply banning 3D printers.

So are they going to ban galvanized pipe, finishing nails and the springs from ballpoint pens?

Reply

PhoenixNFA May 7, 2013 at 06:52 am

Meh.

Reply

pointblank4445 May 7, 2013 at 07:56 am

I have little doubt that 3D printing will play a role in firearm parts manufacturing once they become more prolific and people figure out HOW they should be used. This joker is drawing WAY too much attention to himself (which I believe is his true intent) and will probably ruin 3D printing before it ever takes off because he’s trying to cobble together junk zip guns like this “liberator” just because he can.

Reply

PhoenixNFA May 7, 2013 at 07:59 am

My question is this.

Inevitably, some bozo with a printer will print his gun and put it together. He will have an out of battery, the plastic won’t be strong enough, double charged ammo, something. The gun blows up.

What happens then? What happens when his medical insurance company sues defdist?

Reply

ENDO-Mike May 7, 2013 at 08:00 am

Yea I agree… obviously there are “disclaimers” involved, but I don’t know how much those matter if someone really hurts themselves.

Reply

PhoenixNFA May 7, 2013 at 09:12 am

Unless someone signs something, they don’t mean shit. Signing something would negate the “anonymity” of this project and make it real easy if ATF see this as another Akins accelerator.

Reply

mitch May 7, 2013 at 08:21 am

Liberal media flipping out over something someone made that could have been made better and with cheaper tools 30 years ago. what a load of shit. Yellow Journalism never died.

Reply

pointblank4445 May 7, 2013 at 10:25 am

Very true, but the squeaky wheel is going to get the grease. This pales in comparison to the guy who made an AK in his garage out of some scrap and a shovel. Restrictions are more likely to be placed on things that get attention…whether it makes sense or not. Example: pressure cookers being pulled off the shelves.

Reply

Jim P. May 7, 2013 at 12:20 pm

Basically what needs to happen is that enough home made weapons, suppressors, etc. need to be made and not used for anything harmful to get through to the general population that it is not the weapon but the person using it that is at fault.

Make a video without your face in it and post it on youtube. if there were 10K or 50K videos showing people making their own weapons and not using them for a violent purpose, and the people were arrested and jailed by the ATF, the prisons would overflow. Or if even one person could afford to be the example case to challenge the laws. I’d be willing to send $50 every two weeks to support the defendant; and I bet others would too.

Reply

phoenixNFA May 7, 2013 at 08:18 pm

This is a very bad idea and should not be done by anyone. Period.

Sorry bud, life dont always work that way.

Reply

Jim P. May 7, 2013 at 08:28 pm

Well if they try to pass gun/mag bans in my state, I’m going to challenge them on 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendment grounds.

It will not be comfortable — but that needs to be done.

Reply

PhoenixNFA May 8, 2013 at 07:35 am

Good luck boss. There have been many who have tried to challenge the Hughes amendment or the NFA in general and have been shot down. Sucks playing the game your opponent invented on their home court.

Reply

Joe May 7, 2013 at 10:28 pm

Bad idea jim, NFA manufacturers and dealers need those laws to mark up simple cnc turned parts (suppressors) 2,000%.

An even better idea would be to get large groups of people to claim maximum withholding exemptions and not file income taxes.

Reply

PhoenixNFA May 8, 2013 at 07:29 am

…someone doesn’t know how business works.

Reply

Joe May 8, 2013 at 05:03 pm

Someone doesn’t know how regulations often, if not always, make prices on simple items artificially high. If suppressors weren’t restricted their prices would compare to high end shotgun chokes.

Reply

phoenixNFA May 8, 2013 at 05:57 pm

no. they dont.

do you know the markup dealers charge on cans? i do. do you know how much research and failed designs go into attempting to get one more db reduction? i do. this is no longer a simple “lets just put some baffles in a tube and see what happens”. those days are long gone. now we are trying to get 40db reduction out of a 22can on a pistol while keeping it below 7oz.

you can make your own cans if you are so mad about prices. Form1 boss. you can even submit an application for a 02/07 if you want and sell $100 cans to everyone!

there are companies who make $100 cans who sell them for $200 MSRP. i have seen those cans and yes they are made on a CNC mill.

this is a very competitive market and if silencerco wanted to sell their osprey for $400 they would. could you imagine the best selling 9mm can for $400? right now i cant.

Reply

Jim P. May 8, 2013 at 09:14 pm

The amount of work to get a $200 NFA and the mental rape is ridiculous.

Yes, the amount of research may be costly. But if they were selling half the number of suppressors as they are the AR-15s the cost per item would be far cheaper. What is the cost to register each suppressor — $200 each? What if it were $50 and could be done on a 4733?

Do you think the rate of gun violence would go up?

The law abiding person that gets a full auto weapon, a suppressor, SBR or anything similar is going to the gun range and show it off to his buddies. Yes, there will be the prepper types. Then there is going to be the types that were first to have the zero-turn mowers, or 60 inch plasmas, or any similar bragging item. And how much did they pay for them?

But because of the government regulations the incentive is not there. So you have a small subset that takes the time and energy to go to a CLEO and the rest of the crap that is associated with it.

That isn’t liberty. That is asking permission from your overlords.

Reply

theblackknight May 7, 2013 at 11:34 pm

Let’s not forget making your own firearm for personal use is legal.

If you are wondering, he is completely doing to for the face time. Watch his VICE episode, he says so himself.

Reply

Nick May 8, 2013 at 12:34 pm

This 3d printed gun hype is hilarious. CA Senator Leeland Yee had this to say, “What I’m looking at right now is to ensure that any individual who is going to make a gun out of these 3D printers go through a background check, just like any other individuals who purchase a gun,” Yee said.

What idiots. Background checks for all people that want to make a gun on a 3D printer. Yeah I’m sure they’ll just step right up. News flash guys…I can make a 3d printer out of parts for less than $1000 bucks. Better have the machine shop around the country register their Bridgeports and CNC mills. Drill presses at home who needs them, ban that too. Why don’t more people manufacture their own guns…because it’s easier and cheaper to buy them. Make that go away and home built guns pop up that instant. That’s point gun grabbers don’t get. Prohibition doesn’t work. Didn’t work with alcohol, doesn’t work with drugs, won’t work with firearms.

The point Defense Distributed is making isn’t that everyone should make a 3D printed firearm. It’s to show jackasses how trivial it is to make a firearm, trying to get them to understand that bans wouldn’t fix the problem. Problem is these jackasses are idiots and have failed at logical thinking.

Personally a 3D printer is the last tool I’d grab to make a gun. Congrats Main Stream Media for advertising how trivial making a gun is.

Reply

El Duderino May 8, 2013 at 09:57 pm

Any crappy machine shop can make simple open-bolt submachineguns a la the Sten, if there is a professionally made barrel all the better. Why don’t they do it? Well, 10 years in PMITA federal prison plus the fine. Along these lines, expect homemade firearms to become illegal (state by state, maybe federal, who knows) within the next couple years. No FFL to manufacture, not legal.

Won’t do anything from the builders who by receivers/frames through an FFL.

Reply

LEAVE A COMMENT:

Previous post:

Next post: