That said, the information that you can make sophisticated weapons with off the shelf parts is not new nor necessarily rare. Everything from guns to armored machine gun platforms, drone bombers, to drone like cruise missiles seem to have not only been built but fielded in recent battles. It's hard to imagine that anyone can keep this sort of information "secret" by hitting individual web sites with cease and desist orders.
This has pictures:
Last time I looked into this, legally speaking it is payload that matters, not guidance, at least until you try to export. Though there is a general bias in the hobby against doing things that attract negative attention, even if it is, strictly speaking, legal.
There have been other sun-seekers as well.
3d printing isn't that sophisticated considering you can build a working AR with off the shelf parts, a drill press, and a hand router.
Excavator work here is something for heroes and suicidal people.
Also, TNT releases NO2 when it burns (or detonates). Plus a bunch of ~toxic and ~mutagenic aromatic hydrocarbons, which end up absorbed on the soot. Some of which is respirable.
sounds like those self-made detonators we used to dispose the stuff of were a healthier choice :)
edit: hmm, maybe that doesn't make sense since he also says 12.7mm, maybe he lives where there was once a war like m0zg says
I guess this is all a long winded way of saying the 3D printing panic is both right and wrong but neither side is looking at it in a factual way.
Btw, you need a rifled barrel to make accurate shots at long-ish distances. For close quarter combat a submachine gun with a smooth bore would do quite well. Something similar to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borz. Any machine shop can crank those out in numbers.
Yes, you can get by with a smooth bore but "long-ish" here is significantly less than buckshot range. To get really nerdy, if volume of fire (submachine gun) is going to replace accuracy, the difficulty in creating a reliable magazine dwarfs the difficulty in rifling and while I haven't tried, I don't think 3D printing has the tolerances to solve that...yet.
Yes you can rifle a barrel in a garage but you need real machine tools as well as some very specialized tools that you'll need to either acquire or build which kind of adds steps beyond "have machine tools" -> "make gun"
For these designs you also do not need 3d printing at all. You just need suitable pipes, or sheets of metal that you bend and either weld or use fasteners to make the receiver. You are right though, designing and building reliable magazines is probably going to be one of the things that require a lot of attention to details.
There are books that have full blueprints for crude SMGs, here is an example:
I'm going to argue the point. Yes, your average suburban weekend warrior won't have the stuff. But if you are even slightly into machining, you almost certainly can.
Practically every machining magazine will have at least one article about rifling in every issue.
Yes, you need a metal lathe and some tooling. Those are neither rare nor that expensive--and very old lathes and tooling work just fine.
The biggest problem a machinist always has is space for the equipment.
I can't do it in my garage, because I don't have one. My machines have to go up stairs in an urban walkup, so they're too small, and as mentioned, I have no interest in making guns anyway.
But yeah, a lot of people have both the skill and the means. Remember that people started making rifled barrels in the 1500s, a little while before we had CNC or overnight commercial-grade metal delivery.
There are a zillion videos on YouTube about this.
The hard part isn't the rifling, it's cutting the bore. After that, you can "just" push a rifling button through it and it will cut the rifling.
seems like you'd have stiffness problems for long barrels (?)
Ehhh ... you talk a lot about 3D printing, but that’s not the only tool that people have in their garages. A huge number of people have metal lathes in their garages. I happen to have a small, CNC controlled metal lathe and mill in my garage. The whole setup cost me about the same as a high quality, rapid prototyping 3D printer (<4000USD). I am pretty sure I could make a firearm, in my garage, including rifling, if I was determined to do so.
Personally I have no desire to build my own firearms, because it’s illegal to do so in my country and it’s also extremely dangerous. But in many places in the US it does appear to be legal.
The majority of my firearm knowledge comes from that world of guns puzzle game so I'm probably very off on something, but I do remember there was a lot of going on in that area of the gun
Google "drop in auto sear" eventually you'll find something that explains the sequence of events of the trigger mechanism in sufficient detail.
Only if you want to crank them out by the millions. As the "shovel AK" clearly demonstrates you can get it done more easily if you don't need to produce them at scale.
Vs buying an 80% blank, drilling a few holes, and then routing.
(DIY metal smelting/foundries are a great way to waste a few hours watching Youtube videos)
Really cool. He had a milling machine though.
Only downside is you're limited to 4g, but that's not the end of the world.
Low update rate, but workaround-able with a IMU. A simple micro, accelerometer, gyro, and you're in business. Pulse jets can get stupid cheap -- there's not much more to them than sheet metal.
Frame is easy enough to fabricate -- Fusion360 will even simulate your aerodynamics for you.
This thing could be built for waaaay less than $5k; Probably buildable for < $1500, depending on what kind of explosives you load into it -- I have no idea how much those are. It's also well within the range of a hobbyist. Any sort of organized group should have no problem, assuming they can round up an electrical engineer and a machinist.
Thankfully most competent machinists and electrical engineers can find more profitable things to build.
I've said repeatedly, our best defense against terrorism is the fact that terrorists are dumb.
It's why good, old fashioned, people intensive police work is far more effective than high tech solutions.
His objectives state he is looking to build what is basically a custom jet with a 100mi range and 22lb payload. This significantly out performs the custom RC model turbine jets I found online, and their total weight fueled was like 50lb.
one I found, used, was ~$6K.
Also video from the same guy talking about pulsejets
Our on-demand global network of 3d printers quickly and reliably fulfills all your strike requests.
Comprehensive plans with a predictable kiloton/strike billing. Bitcoin accepted. Our activities are carbon-compensated to preserve the environment.
/s (I hope)
/s (if your's /s).
/s (I really REALLY hope)
Anyway the page has disappeared but can be seen on the Wayback Machine. The page itself seems not to contain any information that would fall under that legislation but perhaps some of the links it contains might.
As it is in the Wayback Machine and that is mirrored I wonder if the mere existence of the mirror would be enough to expose the hosting entity to a risk under the UK legislation.
2) It's not new law. The law is from 2000. You can diff these two for the new bits
3) Stop reading the shitty fucking register, because it's misleading you.
Instructions on how to build a cruise missile would seem to fall under that. So do you have a slightly more helpful answer. Whether it is from 2000 or 2019, seems irrelevant.
>Obviously the goal of this website is not to provide terrorists or other nefarious types with the plans for a working cruise missile but to prove the point that nations need to be prepared for this type of sophisticated attack from within their own borders.
>A detailed level of documentation will be provided to those who qualify and are willing to pay a small subscription for full access to the project diary.
Recurring payments do not work well with suicide bombers and alike. You've got to be careful with this.
That would apply to a guide on how to browse the web and use Google, wouldn't it?
This and it's ilk are basically "because we don't like your face" catch-all's.
Sadly the UK is good at those to whit - The Anti-Social Behaviour Order (defunct but lastesd from 98 to 2015) which made previously criminal behavior a civil matter.
We are a curiously illiberal liberal democracy.
I’m not sure what your point was, but GP’s was quite clear.
Aircraft roundels originated with the French Tricolore cockade. Concentric circles are used in many many country's roundels, and are far from anything particularly British.
It's as if I said "The American flag (composed of stripes and a blue corner)" and you were to say "wait, that's not exclusively American"
Yes but, so what?
Which you can distinguish from all other roundels, by definition, or they wouldn't be useful things to have!
'“It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that’s the least of the problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been measured. It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and water-with which it reacts explosively. It can be kept in some of the ordinary structural metals-steel, copper, aluminium, etc.-because of the formation of a thin film of insoluble metal fluoride which protects the bulk of the metal, just as the invisible coat of oxide on aluminium keeps it from burning up in the atmosphere. If, however, this coat is melted or scrubbed off, and has no chance to reform, the operator is confronted with the problem of coping with a metal-fluorine fire. For dealing with this situation, I have always recommended a good pair of running shoes.” '
I think I learned about the book from this blog, or a HN post of it,and it is both fun and expertly informed. http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/thi...
Carfentanil can be manufactured by the billions of lethal doses - or scaled to trillions, with a HELOC.
Virosynthesis isn't a hobbyist endeavor yet but soon will be.
The only reason we aren't all dead is lack of incentive. Of course a sufficiently bad government can change the incentive structure overnight.
The safe guard here is: (1) there is a reasonable level of engineering competence required, (2) a resource barrier (time and money), (3) building something like this is quite obvious and (4) most people don't want to hurt people.
If you want to be a weapons designer (and why not?), your best bet is probably working for the government. The second best option is to limit information distribution to other hobbyists / professionals.
The very development of personal computing and the Internet is a manifestation of this. In the early 1960s, computers used to be seen as giant, enormous, oppressive machines used by faceless corporations and governments to produce national statistics, design nuclear weapons, or perform top-secret cryptographic communications. On the other hand, our pioneers of personal computing have identified, that once the power of computers is available to everyone, to "we the people", it may become a powerful anti-authoritarian tool, something we've never seen in the human history. This is the original meaning behind the famous 1984 advertisement by Apple.
And we've been following the same path of liberties and decentralization down the road in the next 30 years. Although today, especially since after 2013/2016, computers and the Internet has somewhat restored its "oppressive" public image, Apple and Google becomes the new IBM, etc, but it's clear that the essence of the technology is still largely neutral, and we have many development in the decentralized, pro-freedom world.
The advent of free and open source software has mostly guaranteed that individuals could has the freedom to use the computer for any purpose. The discovery the public-key cryptography can protect personal communication against the most powerful nation-state on Earth, and in principle, allowing the construction of an anonymous communication system, which is believed by many as a mean to eliminate the state, partially or fully.
Recently, the proliferation of dirt-cheap electronics potentially allows a hardware hacker to manufacture semiconductors, electronic equipment, CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing toolkit, handguns, or missiles in his/her backyard. Most hackers see this aspect of technology as a force of liberation. If some people, somehow, eventually managed to create a stateless world in virtual reality, it would be impressive but not surprising.
The question is, what about malicious actors? Many things a hacker would do can be classified as illegal activities, but his/her intend is not malicious, just a different ideology.
But there are truly malicious actors in all civilizations.
The damage that can be done by a malicious actor in a free world, is proportional to the level of (decentralized) technological development. And they can be something more harmful than individuals - rogue nation-state, organized terrorism, etc. WMDs can be created in days, not years.
And you absolutely cannot ban the technology, for example, cryptography, because it's needed for a free society.
So, the eventual outcome is either,
(A) The civilization is destroyed by a few malicious actors.
(B) The civilization becomes a dictatorship, possibly driven by mass surveillance, where most individual liberties are abandoned, we either have 1984, The Matrix, or Black Mirror.
(C) Neo-Luddism, where technology is abolished.
Or a combination of (B) and (C), found in many Science Fictions. Is that the eventually doomsday of a free technological civilization? Do we the technologists still have hopes? For example...
(D) Due to space colonization, any malicious use of technology can only have localized effects, allows many free civilizations to survive?
(E) Due to mind-uploading, nobody bothers to mess with the physical world?
Did I miss something?
In particular, in some stories, the government plays a relatively ambiguous role - still being the oppressor, but also has an important duty of fighting terrorism, so that the world won't just collapse so easily because of a few mad men, and the hackers can keep having their parties.
The money quote, rot13-ed for spoilers:
"Abobql xarj nalguvat," fnvq Nenzna ovggreyl, "ohg lbh nyy whfg gbbx vg sbe tenagrq gung gur tbireazrag jnf fghcvqyl ohernhpengvp, ivpvbhf, glenaavpny, tvira gb fhccerffvat erfrnepu sbe gur uryy bs vg. Vg arire bppheerq gb nal bs lbh gung jr jrer gelvat gb cebgrpg znaxvaq nf orfg jr pbhyq."