MakerBot Deletes AR-15 Rifle 3D Blueprints

[Guest]

3D printer maker MakerBot quietly deleted blueprints for the lower receiver of the AR-15 assault rifle.

MakerBot Deletes AR-15 Rifle 3D Blueprints : Read more

 

[halcyon]

Smart move.

 

[Guest]

They want to avoid lawsuits in case some nut uses their prints to manufacture a weapon and commits a criem with it. NOt patriotic but then businesses are all about profits and selfish greed for the owners and not patriotism and the Bill of Rights. It's up to individuals to protect our rights—no one else will. especially this administration.

 

[A Bad Day]

I bet someone at the Department of Defense wanted the blueprint. Some might say that because the rifle broke after a few shots, 3D printing rifles are useless.

10-20 years from now, 3D printers will be able to use different materials.

 

[sacre]

This looks like the future fella's. Instead of crafting through forging and whatnot, we can have a printer use a synthetic material and create a weapon or a part for a vehicle, etc, right on the spot.

--right on the spot--

Thats what amazes me. Go to a car shop and ask for a part, if it ain't in stock pay an extra 5% and get it made on the spot for you.

We just have to come up with better materials the printer can work with. Stronger materials.

Man i want a 3d printer..

 

[fuzzion]

Let me tell you whats on the inside. This AR is one of many blueprints available for guns. They have now entered the torrent stream and can literally be downloaded as we speak. Welcome to the future.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]sacre[/nom]This looks like the future fella's. Instead of crafting through forging and whatnot, we can have a printer use a synthetic material and create a weapon or a part for a vehicle, etc, right on the spot. --right on the spot--Thats what amazes me. Go to a car shop and ask for a part, if it ain't in stock pay an extra 5% and get it made on the spot for you. We just have to come up with better materials the printer can work with. Stronger materials. Man i want a 3d printer..[/citation]

I think Officemax or Stapes have plans of starting a 3D printing service (and using a 3D printer company to do the printing jobs). Upload files, pay the charges and then wait for the shipment.

 

[InvalidError]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]10-20 years from now, 3D printers will be able to use different materials.[/citation]
What would those other materials be?

There already are 3D printers capable of working with powdered metals but you can imagine that fusing metal layer-by-layer is a far slower, more energy-intensive and more expensive process. There are also companies working on "printers" capable of printing small buildings (like homes) out of concrete.

The limits of 3D printing today already extend far beyond low-temperature polymers/plastics if you can afford the patience and cost.

 

[loomis86]

The problem with this article is...no one understands American gun laws. The people commenting here do not get it. The AR rifle is a unique firearm in that the BATFE has designated the lower receiver as "the firearm" and all other parts are merely mechanical parts. Only the lower receiver has a serial number on it. It is also unique because the part of the gun that is designated as "the firearm" does not withstand any forces of combustion or ballistics. Look at the pic. See that light blue part? That is the ONLY part that is 3D printed. The rest of it is mail ordered as non-firearm parts.

Let me state it another way...THIS IS THE ONLY firearm in America which can be produced via 3D printing because it is the only firearm with the unusual BATFE ruling that states the lower receiver is "the firearm".

In europe, they designate the barrel as "the firearm", and all other parts are merely parts. You can't print a barrel via 3D printing and expect it to function.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]InvalidError[/nom]What would those other materials be?There already are 3D printers capable of working with powdered metals but you can imagine that fusing metal layer-by-layer is a far slower, more energy-intensive and more expensive process. There are also companies working on "printers" capable of printing small buildings (like homes) out of concrete.The limits of 3D printing today already extend far beyond low-temperature polymers/plastics if you can afford the patience and cost.[/citation]

It's kinda hard to predict 1-2 decades into the future. Nobody predicted the iPhone back in 1995.

 

[acadia11]

Replicator!

 

[tokencode]

[citation][nom]InvalidError[/nom]What would those other materials be?There already are 3D printers capable of working with powdered metals but you can imagine that fusing metal layer-by-layer is a far slower, more energy-intensive and more expensive process. There are also companies working on "printers" capable of printing small buildings (like homes) out of concrete.The limits of 3D printing today already extend far beyond low-temperature polymers/plastics if you can afford the patience and cost.[/citation]


Absolutely correct, some on-line 3D printing companies already off stainless steel as a printing material. 3d printing isn't the only way to manufacture some of these parts either, simply get yourself a block of forged steel and a C&C machine and you can create stuff just a durable as the original. Someone is creating these parts some how. While it might be harder than printing plastic figurines, is not rocket science..

 

[cdburner5911]

[citation][nom]loomis86[/nom]The problem with this article is...no one understands American gun laws. The people commenting here do not get it. The AR rifle is a unique firearm in that the BATFE has designated the lower receiver as "the firearm" and all other parts are merely mechanical parts. Only the lower receiver has a serial number on it. It is also unique because the part of the gun that is designated as "the firearm" does not withstand any forces of combustion or ballistics. Look at the pic. See that light blue part? That is the ONLY part that is 3D printed. The rest of it is mail ordered as non-firearm parts.
Let me state it another way...THIS IS THE ONLY firearm in America which can be produced via 3D printing because it is the only firearm with the unusual BATFE ruling that states the lower receiver is "the firearm".
In europe, they designate the barrel as "the firearm", and all other parts are merely parts. You can't print a barrel via 3D printing and expect it to function.[/citation]

well, that is partially true (to my understanding). All guns have some form of "receiver" and that is always considered "the gun". So for a 1911 its the frame (i am pretty sure), for an AK it is the folded sheet metal body, for a bolt action rifle, it is the ting the bolt goes into. that's why you can buy "demilled machine guns" that are all functional, except 2 torch cuts through the receiver. that is also why you can buy an "80% receiver" (legally considered a hunk of metal) and with minimal machining knowledge, make a "gun"
and yes, the gun laws in the US are stupidly complicated!

and sure, prototype 1 of the printed receiver failed, but i can think of 2 easy modifications that would make it far more resilient, and I'm sure they are already hard at work making it stronger.

and heck, if they had access to a metal sintering machine that did stainless steel, they would be already done...

 

[cdburner5911]

[citation][nom]cdburner5911[/nom]well, that is partially true (to my understanding). All guns have some form of "receiver" and that is always considered "the gun". So for a 1911 its the frame (i am pretty sure), for an AK it is the folded sheet metal body, for a bolt action rifle, it is the ting the bolt goes into. that's why you can buy "demilled machine guns" that are all functional, except 2 torch cuts through the receiver. that is also why you can buy an "80% receiver" (legally considered a hunk of metal) and with minimal machining knowledge, make a "gun"and yes, the gun laws in the US are stupidly complicated!and sure, prototype 1 of the printed receiver failed, but i can think of 2 easy modifications that would make it far more resilient, and I'm sure they are already hard at work making it stronger.and heck, if they had access to a metal sintering machine that did stainless steel, they would be already done...[/citation]
hmm, just realized i totally read your post wrong =[
the lower only has to deal with the recoil forces, which were apparently too much for the resin it was printed with

 

[razor512]

the plastic that the 3d printer uses is hard to a point that it is brittle that is why it breaks so easily. (if you look at most plastic designed to handle some impact, high speed footage will show the plastic flex or even ripple when hit or dropped, but you will not be able to see this with a 3d printed object, it will remain rigid.

Because of that, items need to be designed differently.

The density must be taken into account and a 3D model and computer aided impact simulation must be conducted to find the fail points and then it must be altered to reinforce the fail points. if done properly, it should handle more shots but even then, it wont handle more than 6 or 7 shots. and considering the price of the plastic used in the 3D printer, it is cheaper to just buy the real gun part.

PS an interesting thing if you have access to some dentist tools, the high frequency tools designed to break up plaque can also damage plastic parts made with a 3D printer.

All in all, the current materials suck and are only useful for making mockups that can be passed around but never truly used.

 

[npcomplete]

There should be a marketplace or blueprint sharing site that does not get so easily scared and reactionary. According to their TOS, anything "objectionable" is fair game for removal. That can mean anything. Of course, every site uses that language or outright states they can remove anything for any reason, as is their right.

But I wish there was a site that stated they will not remove, and that users are responsible for any legal implications or liabilities, and to treat it like a contract, where if they did remove something that wasn't illegal, they would compensate the user. It sets these freedoms in stone for the user and allows the hosting service plausible deniability. Then when someone makes a fuss, they can just point to the terms and say, "Hey our hands are tied for existing users, since we would be paying a fine according to these arbitration agreements"

 

[mpdugas]

It's too bad that all of this legitimate concern over the sadness surrounding the deaths of so many innocent children avoids the real core of concern: the terrible state of care for the mentally ill.

Here in Texas, it takes a parent ten years to get their child seen by MHMRA; and that is due to gross lack of funding.

Who resists paying taxes the most? Only those who have the very most material privileges.

Those who won't pay taxes to the country whose laws shelter and protect them are the real culprits....it's a complex issue.

But one thing is certain: Greed kills.

 

[warezme]

Good, those things don't need to be up there. I have a Replicator 2 coming in soon and I don't want some bureaucrat or government agency scrutinizing a legitimate design tool because some fools want to be cute and print gun parts.

 

[dingo07]

@npcomplete - that will not work because of the way IP addresses are distributed... there's absolutely no way to tie Someone to an IP address, it's the same as tying someone to a home phone (land-line) number and has already been proven in court.

 

[unoriginal1]

[citation][nom]mpdugas[/nom]It's too bad that all of this legitimate concern over the sadness surrounding the deaths of so many innocent children avoids the real core of concern: the terrible state of care for the mentally ill.Here in Texas, it takes a parent ten years to get their child seen by MHMRA; and that is due to gross lack of funding.Who resists paying taxes the most? Only those who have the very most material privileges.Those who won't pay taxes to the country whose laws shelter and protect them are the real culprits....it's a complex issue.But one thing is certain: Greed kills.[/citation]
THANK GOD somebody gets it...... Ive been sick of hearing about control guns control guns.
Dumb... Naive people... People that are sick will find another way. Then what? Outlaw fertilizer, knives, hammers w/e their next weapon of choice is? Thank you for having some common sense. It's much to lacking into today's society. (especially in America) Sad to say that being an American :/.

 

[fimbulvinter]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]It's kinda hard to predict 1-2 decades into the future. Nobody predicted the iPhone back in 1995.[/citation]

A touch interface productivity device? Star Trek totally did.

 

[infernocy]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]It's kinda hard to predict 1-2 decades into the future. Nobody predicted the iPhone back in 1995.[/citation]

the first table was created in 1995 by microsoft .. touch screen interfaces where around from 1990

 

[phate]

Any company that makes overt moves to pander to a (any) political viewpoint, makes me far less likely to support them.

To me this is just censorship. I can still Google how to make a gun part, and they don't politicize the search results.

 

[keyanf]

How long till the government claims that if I manufacturer a receiver for my own use, it falls under the commerce clause because I am NOT selling it across state lines.

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

3D printing such a huge potential. I'm going to see some interesting stuff in my lifetime.