DEFCAD taken offline at request of US Department of Defense Trade Controls - page 2.

herzmeister

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 02:43:51 PM

What I don't get is this idea of resistance against the government. I get it if you are totally libertarian, but at the same time the people that talk about lax gunrights seem to support anti terrorism laws and a strong military. It is like "we are a state, we have the right to bear an army and kill everyone to remain free."

that's the US conservatives/republicans. Libertarians usually do not support strong military (or any state military for that matter). It's a philosophy of strong individualism.

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: myrkul on May 10, 2013, 05:34:36 PM

Quote from: Elwar on May 10, 2013, 05:27:12 PM

But think about someone in Rwanda getting hold of a cheap 3D printer, perhaps a whole village pooling their money to get one and spitting out a gun for every man woman and child in a village. The next time a warlord rolls in with his truck full of armed men to rape and pillage, they may be met by a village of armed citizens.

This. This right here. This is exactly what I was saying. The right to own weapons is the right to be free.

As has been said many times before, it puts a little old lady on (mostly) equal footing with a burly 250lb man.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Elwar on May 10, 2013, 05:27:12 PM

But think about someone in Rwanda getting hold of a cheap 3D printer, perhaps a whole village pooling their money to get one and spitting out a gun for every man woman and child in a village. The next time a warlord rolls in with his truck full of armed men to rape and pillage, they may be met by a village of armed citizens.

This. This right here. This is exactly what I was saying. The right to own weapons is the right to be free.

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

People are too focussed on this being revolutionary in the US.

But think about someone in Rwanda getting hold of a cheap 3D printer, perhaps a whole village pooling their money to get one and spitting out a gun for every man woman and child in a village. The next time a warlord rolls in with his truck full of armed men to rape and pillage, they may be met by a village of armed citizens.

There is plenty of tyranny out there suprisingly worse than the US. This will have an impact there before anything happens in the US.

Rassah

legendary

Activity: 1680

Merit: 1035

Even if this plastic gun is a piece of sh**, considering you can print dozens of them and just throw them around the house...

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 02:43:51 PM

What I don't get is this idea of resistance against the government. I get it if you are totally libertarian, but at the same time the people that talk about lax gunrights seem to support anti terrorism laws and a strong military. It is like "we are a state, we have the right to bear an army and kill everyone to remain free."

Because things like the Holocaust actually happened. That's why. It's not resistance against the government today, it's resistance against the government in the future in case we need it.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 02:43:51 PM

Quote from: myrkul on May 10, 2013, 02:37:05 PM

Think about it. Why could knights and kings lord it over the peasants? Why did the Japanese forbid any but the Samurai to carry swords? Even Hitler knew the value of keeping the populace disarmed:

See, here is my problem with this: Human psychology is tending to simply comply. There is no need for weapons, you just tell people what to do and a majority will follow.

Ahh, indeed, that is why socialized education is so important to a modern State:

"Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted." - Vladimir Lenin

A well-brainwashed populace doesn't need to be forced with arms, they'll follow along willingly.

A free population, once conquered, however, must remain under the gun until a few generations have passed and the people are well trained.

Schrankwand

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote

See, that's exactly my point. The massive power disparity is exactly the problem.

Think about it. Why could knights and kings lord it over the peasants? Why did the Japanese forbid any but the Samurai to carry swords? Even Hitler knew the value of keeping the populace disarmed:

See, here is my problem with this: Human psychology is tending to simply comply. There is no need for weapons, you just tell people what to do and a majority will follow.

Quote

For me, it's for fun (target shooting) and for if someone breaks into my house. They'd get a face full of rounds from me.

I get that. That is what I believe is an okay solution. Even if I consider the statistics of how many people are actually shot by burglars with their own guns Wink

What I don't get is this idea of resistance against the government. I get it if you are totally libertarian, but at the same time the people that talk about lax gunrights seem to support anti terrorism laws and a strong military. It is like "we are a state, we have the right to bear an army and kill everyone to remain free."

I don't get that logic, to be honest. I have traveled the world like crazy, and the countries that are the "least" free when it comes to these matters felt the most free to me. Free from fear.

uMMcQxCWELNzkt

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

Thanks USA, thanks for finding new ways of killing people.

Lethn

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1000

I'm a strictly self-defence, defence of others person kind of guy, I do however believe if that you're going to have gun control the people policing should have to obey the same rules as well and come up with other forms of defence against guns which I'd actually be happy to help with if that were the case. Anything else is just a power grab and shows that governments only want to have complete control over us.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 02:14:52 PM

I doubt there is that much truth to it. Freedom needs weapons? What for? For the right to shoot someone?

The one thing I have never understood is, considering the immense might of the united states military. How does anyone in his right mind think that beating this complex with a revolution is a good idea? Cheesy

See, that's exactly my point. The massive power disparity is exactly the problem.

Think about it. Why could knights and kings lord it over the peasants? Why did the Japanese forbid any but the Samurai to carry swords? Even Hitler knew the value of keeping the populace disarmed:

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so."
--- Adolf Hitler

The simple fact is that if you do not have a weapon to defend yourself, you are a slave to anyone who does have a weapon. The right to buy a weapon is the right to be free. Period.

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 02:14:52 PM

Quote from: myrkul on May 10, 2013, 01:33:15 PM

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 01:07:23 PM

Still, I don't know why you should actually own these things, but that is kind of an american thing.

"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free" - A. E. van Vogt

One would imagine the right to make weapons would be even more the right to be free.

I doubt there is that much truth to it. Freedom needs weapons? What for? For the right to shoot someone?

The one thing I have never understood is, considering the immense might of the united states military. How does anyone in his right mind think that beating this complex with a revolution is a good idea? Cheesy

The use of weapons always brings nothing else but death.

Don't get me wrong, im not an anti gun nut, but neither am I a believer that everyone should be armed. I don't see any use for it.

For me, it's for fun (target shooting) and for if someone breaks into my house. They'd get a face full of rounds from me.

Schrankwand

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote from: myrkul on May 10, 2013, 01:33:15 PM

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 01:07:23 PM

Still, I don't know why you should actually own these things, but that is kind of an american thing.

"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free" - A. E. van Vogt

One would imagine the right to make weapons would be even more the right to be free.

I doubt there is that much truth to it. Freedom needs weapons? What for? For the right to shoot someone?

The one thing I have never understood is, considering the immense might of the united states military. How does anyone in his right mind think that beating this complex with a revolution is a good idea? Cheesy

The use of weapons always brings nothing else but death.

Don't get me wrong, im not an anti gun nut, but neither am I a believer that everyone should be armed. I don't see any use for it.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Schrankwand on May 10, 2013, 01:07:23 PM

Still, I don't know why you should actually own these things, but that is kind of an american thing.

"The right to buy weapons is the right to be free" - A. E. van Vogt

One would imagine the right to make weapons would be even more the right to be free.

Schrankwand

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

I would by the way recommend, if you are seeding those, not to do this when NOT behind a foreign VPN or Tor.

If it is easy to find someone that downloads movies... take my guess.

Still, I don't know why you should actually own these things, but that is kind of an american thing.

Operatr

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

www.DonateMedia.org

Quote from: wdmw on May 10, 2013, 09:09:04 AM

Quote from: Operatr on May 10, 2013, 08:10:43 AM

DefDist already has a working full auto. The first had problems with the receiver cracking after a few rounds. Realizing they are not made of metal they beefed it up considerably, and can now make it through several clips. This is just the first one

I want to point out, as this is a huge misunderstanding in the current US gun control debate, an AR-15 is semi-automatic, not fully automatic.

A fully automatic fires repeatedly with one pull of the trigger; aka a 'machine gun'. These have been generally banned since the 1986 Firearms Owners' Protection Act was passed at the federal level.

Semi-automatic weapons fire one shot each time you pull the trigger without needing to be manually reloaded or reset. Most guns are semi-automatic, with the exception of muzzle-loaders, bolt-action, single-shot, and some revolvers.

Absolutely correct (been up too long...)

I suppose more my point was simply there is already a big brother of the Liberator being developed. I'm curious why the Feds are only now freaking out, since the receiver has been around a while already. The receiver still counts as a gun which is why DefDist went through the steps to be recognized as a legal weapons manufacturer in the 'States.

wdmw

full member

Activity: 199

Merit: 100

Quote from: Operatr on May 10, 2013, 08:10:43 AM

DefDist already has a working full auto. The first had problems with the receiver cracking after a few rounds. Realizing they are not made of metal they beefed it up considerably, and can now make it through several clips. This is just the first one

I want to point out, as this is a huge misunderstanding in the current US gun control debate, an AR-15 is semi-automatic, not fully automatic.

A fully automatic fires repeatedly with one pull of the trigger; aka a 'machine gun'. These have been generally banned since the 1986 Firearms Owners' Protection Act was passed at the federal level.

Semi-automatic weapons fire one shot each time you pull the trigger without needing to be manually reloaded or reset. Most guns are semi-automatic, with the exception of muzzle-loaders, bolt-action, single-shot, and some revolvers.

Mageant

legendary

Activity: 1145

Merit: 1001

We can now add 3d-printing as one of the new Internet-based technologies that are eroding the power of the state.

The other Internet technologies that have contributed to that are:
- blogs/alternative media
- file-sharing
- cryptocurrencies

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: meowmeowbrowncow on May 10, 2013, 08:32:36 AM

Quote from: RenegadeMind on May 09, 2013, 10:49:08 PM

Quote from: MysteryMiner on May 09, 2013, 06:50:15 PM

But as serious weapon 3D printing is not practical. Firearm must be reliable to fire tens of thousands of rounds. It must not break when dropped or grabbed by enemy in close quarter combat.

Sharing blueprints of real guns is the way to go. Maybe initially optimized designs like Sten SMG or Makarov PM. Then someone with right tools and materials can make copies.

I'm not so sure about that. Yes, "real" guns are certainly much better long term.

But perhaps the question should be more something like this:

Could John Wilkes Booth have used this effectively?

Bingo.

Nothing like something one-time-use lethal to kill your least favorite rich person or politician.

The 2nd amendment is not about killing the person you don't like, rich or poor. You can simply use a shank made from a spoon like in any prison for that.

Cody wilson just made a lot laws irrelevant with his plastic gun while the governement is running guns to mexico and through Benghazi.

meowmeowbrowncow

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: RenegadeMind on May 09, 2013, 10:49:08 PM

Quote from: MysteryMiner on May 09, 2013, 06:50:15 PM

But as serious weapon 3D printing is not practical. Firearm must be reliable to fire tens of thousands of rounds. It must not break when dropped or grabbed by enemy in close quarter combat.

Sharing blueprints of real guns is the way to go. Maybe initially optimized designs like Sten SMG or Makarov PM. Then someone with right tools and materials can make copies.

I'm not so sure about that. Yes, "real" guns are certainly much better long term.

But perhaps the question should be more something like this:

Could John Wilkes Booth have used this effectively?

Bingo.

Nothing like something one-time-use lethal to kill your least favorite rich person or politician.

Topic: DEFCAD taken offline at request of US Department of Defense Trade Controls - page 2. (Read 3212 times)