3D printed parts and 922(r) compliance

D

dakota.potts

New member
I got to thinking in my head the other day about firearms manufacturing and 3D printing. I'm currently a machining and gunsmithing student, and I like to think about this kind of thing from time to time.

It seems to me that 3D printing might be a nice thing for parts kits guns that are making their way over to the US. There are several for which importing them in a rifle format is really troublesome because of the lack of US made parts. Often there's a considerable tooling cost associated with making these parts.

With the way 3D printing is moving, and the downward trend in price cost associated with printing plastics, it seems like there are opportunities out there.

I can see an ability within a few years for companies to quickly prototype these parts and, if 3D printers ever reach widespread home based use, may sell these files online for a low cost and allow the user to print their own parts at home.

I understand that they're not at the point where they're reliably printing metals to tight tolerances, but there are other options. For instance, you can get a total of 5 US made parts between the stock, grip, handguard, and magazine with base plate.

What do you think? Something we may be able to take advantage of in the next couple of years? it would be really something if sintering and other forms of meal printing advance to the point where we could begin printing other pieces such as pistons.
 
Read the proposed ITAR changes that are being ignored - they will have maximum impact on what you suggest. It will be made completely illegal. The ATF has proposed that computer files containing the instructions on how to print 3D parts are government property, and also contraband which is illegal to possess, transfer, or sell.

Only 7000 comments on the change proposed, it's being largely ignored by the traditional shooting community, and it will also impact having threads or discussions like this - because it will be illegal to suggest it can be done. Kinda like pointing out how to get dope. Forum owners will tell administrators and moderators to delete or edit posts that contain suspect language.

Aren't going to do it? They already do - look up a post on arfcom showing a Brace being held against the shoulder while the gun is fired. Banned and labeled "criminal activity." One open letter expressing an opinion did that - no actual regulation or statute.

Nobody is listening, comments like "somebody's tin foil is on too tight" are getting passed around, and we will likely have to pass the regulation to see what is in it.

That didn't turn out so well last time, did it? Oppressive governments are allowed to get away with things because citizens allow it. It's ironic that I just read a thread on Fast and Furious in which a poster asked "what was that about?"

Give it a few years, posters will ask, "3D parts, what was that about?" and a reply will constitute illegal communication contrary to ATF regulation.
 
"Read the proposed ITAR changes that are being ignored - they will have maximum impact on what you suggest."
True. The immediate motivation for the rule change is to stick it to Cody Wilson, specifically, for his mass-distribution of AR lower and magazine 3D printing files, and now, microwave-ready CNC programs for the 'Ghost Gunner' micro CNC mill he is supposedly shipping (I've only heard of like two in the wild, so I'm not sure where exactly that's going). By changing the lawsuit he's presently suing them over (only the second time ITAR has been challenged in court, having been defeated roundly the first time --which is why we civilians have access to computer encryption today), his lawsuit is mooted and he has to start over to get standing.

"It will be made completely illegal."
True. The publishing in the public domain (specifically, the internet) of so-called 'defense articles' defined by the State Department (described in the rule change as the information needed for manufacture, service, training, tactics, or operation of both firearms and their ammunition)

"The ATF has proposed that computer files containing the instructions on how to print 3D parts are government property, and also contraband which is illegal to possess, transfer, or sell."
That would be the State Department. They are not 'contraband,' though the practical implication of the change may seem like an outright ban. The rule makes it highly illegal (more so than NFA violations, btw) to divulge this "highly sensitive and critical to national strategic standing" :rolleyes: information to people or places likely to be accessible to foreign nationals, both abroad as well as within our borders. Since this forum and its servers can't be easily/practically severed from the world wide web, such that it is impossible for foreign nationals to access it, divulging firearms/ammo info like was is found in the technical and reloading forums would be cause for (most likely) self-censorship by staff, as well as post-deletion and the forwarding of the infraction to authorities in the most Orwellian scenario.

The ATF has floated the idea that CNC and 3D printing files are 'readily convertible' to firearms, and therefore are firearms, but that whole line of thinking is so plainly an insane can of worms, that they've gotten no traction. This concept of couching the restraint of speech as a national security measure is new, and very troubling. People tend to lose all thought and reason when those words are uttered, and more or less let the State Dept do whatever it wants. Much like the ATF, this rule change give the Secretary of State the power to both arbitrarily define select classes of knowledge as 'defense articles' and then direct enforcement of the decree to compliant courts. Highly dangerous, and a whole other order of magnitude above the ATF's humble operations.

"Give it a few years, posters will ask, "3D parts, what was that about?" and a reply will constitute illegal communication contrary to ATF regulation."
Far more troubling than this. 3D printing is unlikely to ever pan out into anything particularly suitable for personal firearms usage (at least, compared to other manufacturing methods). What is far more likely, is in a few years posters will ask "Is it legal to build your own guns?"

The only answer will be "Yes, but it is illegal for me to tell you without incorporating and paying thousands each year in ITAR fees (presumably for the rest of your life, since this knowledge is never divested from your actual brain)"

We were nearly to that point before the AR/AK 80% fad took off, and people learned that guns could be built legally, but only by obeying a bunch of really stupid laws, that are enforced/interpreted by the same doo-doo heads somehow, and silencers are actually a safety device, and... The whole thing was actually quite efficient for creating hard-core gun rights proponents. But if the knowledge needed to build the firearms becomes forbidden, we are left at the tender mercies of private corporations (that without fresh civilian perturbation, inexorably coalesce into massive State Armories like FNH, MAB, or H&K)

I keep posting up the information about the ITAR changes, and the mods keep cramming it down into Legal where it isn't seen nearly as much...

TCB
 
Dan, regardless of who it's aimed at, it's written so that citizens must follow it also. Even for manufacturers, following it represents a significant startup cost. I was a mold maker for s short time, and I know that a small plastic mold can cost thousands of dollars by the time all is said and done. Not cheap for a new manufacturer rebuilding imported guns
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top