It’s more that identifying a gun from a million other vaguely gun-like shapes, as well as completely non-gunlike shapes that are in fact guns… It’s an insane question to expect any software to solve, even an AI with a whole datacenter devoted to this one problem wouldn’t even begin to approach solving it.
Comment on California just passed a law forcing mandatory DRM in 3D printers
CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
[deleted]
CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 2 months ago
cy888@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Pop tarts may need to be banned
holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
With that logic you should have mandatory reporting of anyone entering a hardware store. Neither of these is a real problem.
kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
You can’t 100% 3D print a working gun that won’t be as dangerous to the user as it is to the target.
You still need some actual metal gun parts to make it do gun things properly.
cloudshouter@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
No, most people realize that it’s a nonsense argument based off a couple action movies. Same reason they banned butterfly knives and nunchucks in many states despite the fact that you can have any other knife and say a lock in a sock. It’s hype based pearl clutching. Why sneak a pos plastic gun through a metal detector when the better option that is already used is to wait for the target outside, or to just run in guns blazing? The whole concept of “ghost guns” is the same way. Criminals already are not getting tracked down by serial numbers. Even without the 2A arguments though, this is a stupid thing to put on 3d printers.
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 2 months ago
3D printed guns do not “get past metal detectors.” This is not nuance. It’s not a matter of techicalities. You just told a bold faced lie, and you did it speficially to try ro fear monger.
Printed guns still require metal springs, metal pins, metal bolts, metal barrels, and metal ammunition.
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I don’t think Tetsuya Yamagami used 3d printed parts. This has nothing to do with making things safe.
Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Printing a gun without a license can be and likely is currently illegal. You can just use traditional manufacturing methods to do the same thing anyways. It’s not rocket science. The issue is the control over people to maybe prevent them from doing what you’re saying. We could install cameras in everyone’s house to make super sure they’re not breaking any laws. I think you now see the problem. More control, more safety, less freedom.
ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Printing a gun without a license can be and likely is currently illegal*
*Highly dependant on location, in much of the US it is completely legal, you just can’t sell it.
Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
I’ll have to double check this… usually weapons manufacturing is pretty well controlled. Then again there’s always a way. Like no one thought that fertilizer sales should be monitored until the Unabomber.
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The US it is federally legal to manufacture your own firearm. There are some state level restrictions depending on which one of those you’re in. In the rest of the world it’s probably considerably more regulated, but then again in the rest of the world it’ll be tougher to get your hands on the all the other parts you’d need as well.
yermaw@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
It wont be about the guns. Its about control.
floofloof@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
Yes, stopping gun crime is how they sell it; protecting corporate profits by forbidding home-made repairs is how they will use it.