I understand the intent, but feel that there are so many other loopholes that put much worse weapons on the street than a printer. Besides, my prints can barely sustain normal use, much less a bullet being fired from them. I would think that this is more of a risk to the person holding the gun than who it’s pointing at.
Not sure how to tell you this, but however amusing… you are wrong. An Ender 3 in the hands of even a moderately experienced 3D hobbyist can absolutely produce a functional firearm.
not really. Well let me put it this way. The firearms that are entirely 3d printed are basically one-shot weapons.
the firearms that are single-printed components (or maybe more,) aren’t printing components that are part of the firing mechanism. for example, the DefCad team, they’re printing lower receiver for an AR. All the lower receiver does is holds the magazine in place for feeding into the chamber. For some technically obscure reason, it’s the part that is defined as “the” firearm for the purposes of registration.
the reason most ghost guns aren’t actually being printed is because there’s easier ways to get better firearms. Like driving to a state that allows the gunshow loophole and buying them cheap and flipping them in NY or whatever. printed ghost guns are… relatively uncommon, overall.