×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

3D Printable Ammo Clip Skirts New Proposed Gun Laws

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the they'll-3d-print-you-a-fine-and-a-cell-door dept.

United States 1862

Sparrowvsrevolution writes "Over the past weekend, Defense Distributed successfully 3D-printed and tested a magazine for an AR semi-automatic rifle, loading and firing 86 rounds from the 30-round clip. That homemade chunk of curved plastic holds special significance: Between 1994 and 2004, so-called 'high capacity magazines' capable of holding more than 10 bullets were banned from sale. And a new gun control bill proposed by California Senator Dianne Feinstein in the wake of recent shootings would ban those larger ammo clips again. President Obama has also voiced support for the magazine restrictions. Defense Distributed says it hopes to preempt any high capacity magazine ban by showing how impossible it has become to prevent the creation of a simple spring-loaded box in the age of cheap 3D printing. It's posted the 3D-printable magazine blueprints on its website, Defcad.org, and gun enthusiasts have already downloaded files related to the ammo holders more than 2,200 times." Update: 01/15 23:15 GMT by T : Mea culpa; please blame my flu for mistakenly letting through that headline with "clip" where it should say "magazine." I know the difference — and I don't own any clips.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Clip (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591153)

Could people stop using that word? It's almost as bad as technobable on the idiot box.

Re:Clip (5, Informative)

gcnaddict (841664) | about 2 years ago | (#42591181)

Agreed.
Clip [wikipedia.org] versus Magazine [wikipedia.org]

Re:Clip (2)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | about 2 years ago | (#42591203)

Maybe they were printing cartoonish 30-round WWI-era stripper clips? :)

Re:Clip (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591485)

There's always the Garand, used in WW2.

This project makes a lot of sense though. Panic buying is out of control right now. 30rnd Magpul Pmags are going for 3-4x's their retail price because they're completely sold out everywhere. Defense Distributed is also working on a functional lower. Those are going for $300-$500/ea. Normally they're about $150.

Re:Clip (5, Insightful)

mumblestheclown (569987) | about 2 years ago | (#42591279)

Here's a better one: why don't we focus on the underlying issues rather than basically meaningless terminology that everybody involved understands what is meant anyway.

Re:Clip (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591363)

Let's not because it's not hard not to be a brain dead moron and just say the proper word, and since we're talking about gun laws the difference IS significant. Stop catering to dumb asses like yourself.

Re:Clip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591505)

So you'd rather focus on an irrelevant distinction than talk about the underlying issues. Gotcha.

Re:Clip (4, Insightful)

Kissing Crimson (197314) | about 2 years ago | (#42591317)

Thank you!

Maybe we should allow Senator Feinstein to ban 30 round "clips," thus protecting the sale of 20 and 30 round magazines.

Re:Clip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591423)

If we ban clips and magazines only criminals will have bullet-deal-em-holders.

Re:Clip (5, Funny)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42591455)

Apparently calling it a magazine confuuuuuses some people. I guess they think people will assume you could hold bullets in a rolled up copy of Us Weekly.

Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591155)

You know how you stop a bad guy with a gun?

A good guy with a gun. Anything else is handwaving bullshit.

Where's the school shooting going to happen? At the school with the "Gun Free Zone" sign, or at the school with the "Protected by Armed Guards" sign?

Blood is on the NRA Hands (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591281)

Well, Columbine had armed guards, but the school shooters still used the tools the NRA provided to them to effectively kill many children.

Perhaps taking the gun from the bad guys - Alex Jones, and the gun stroking retards who support the NRA would be a more effective tactic.

Re:Blood is on the NRA Hands (4, Interesting)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#42591399)

And yesterday, the news reported a woman who, along with her two children, was hiding in the attic because a guy broke in with a crowbar. When he began to enter the attic, she shot him. It's very likely that if she had any weapon other than a gun, she would not have been able to stop him.

Of course, a gun being used properly isn't sensationalist for you.
Source: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/ [wsbtv.com]

Re:Blood is on the NRA Hands (4, Insightful)

bit trollent (824666) | about 2 years ago | (#42591503)

Oh yeah,

Well another woman was killed by her own AR-15 assault rifle, and then had her gun used to murder 20 children.

28 people were killed by guns yesterday, and most of them probably didn't deserve to die.

28 more will die tomorrow. And the next day. Just like every day for the past decade.

Anecdotes prove nothing. Statistics should be analyzed intelligently and acted upon.

28 gun deaths per day is a steep price for our society's inability to distinguish between anecdotes and statistics.

Re:Blood is on the NRA Hands (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591411)

Well, Columbine had armed guards, but the school shooters still used the tools the NRA provided to them to effectively kill many children.

Perhaps taking the gun from the bad guys - Alex Jones, and the gun stroking retards who support the NRA would be a more effective tactic.

Take the guns away. Like Norway does, right?

That'll work.

Oh, wait. The largest mass shooting in history happened on oh-so-fucking-civilized NORWAY?

And who finally stopped the Columbine shooters from killing more people, you unthinking* moron? The Tooth Fairy? No, it was good guys with guns.

* - Literally. You're UNTHINKING.

Re:Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#42591319)

That's why Columbine was an epic failure, right? And why the so-called 'green on blue' attacks on NATO servicemen aren't even close to being a weekly occurrence?

Re:Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (4, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about 2 years ago | (#42591397)

Last time I checked, another way to stop a bad guy with a gun was to catch him when he was reloading because he exhausted the ammunition in his firearm. That worked in Tucson.

I would like to see documented cases where an otherwise-innocent civilian with no connection to the military, to law enforcement, or to private security needed more than ten rounds, or was harmed for running out of ammunition over ten rounds...

Re:Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591431)

Fuck you. Fuck the NRA. Repeal the second amendment.

Re:Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about 2 years ago | (#42591465)

You can also stop a high percentage of the bad guys from getting guns in the first place. This isn't a pipe dream - most of the developed world has something on the order of 100x fewer gun homicides.

Of course, assault rifles are objectively not a big problem. Handguns are. But the path of least resistance for Obama is to score some easy points by going after the big easy target. And because he's going after something that isn't a problem, it gives the other side an easy out as well. Everyone wins, ain't politics great? Oh, sure, we still have something like 8000 handgun homicides at the end, but whatever.

Re:Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (5, Insightful)

heefeneet (2709235) | about 2 years ago | (#42591479)

You know how you stop a bad guy with a gun?

A good guy with a gun.

Excellent. Now all we need is a way to tell the two guys apart before the shooting starts.

Re:Almost no one is killed by "assault weapons" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591491)

You know how you stop a bad guy with a gun?

A good guy with a gun. Anything else is handwaving bullshit.

Where's the school shooting going to happen? At the school with the "Gun Free Zone" sign, or at the school with the "Protected by Armed Guards" sign?

You know the Sandy Hook shooting started and was done in a matter of minutes. How can armed guards even respond in that amount of time? The shooters at Sandy Hook and columbine clearly had no intent of surviving. Also, deployed in every school, armed guards will likely lead to statistically more gun related fatalities.

well talking about usa (0)

Kkloe (2751395) | about 2 years ago | (#42591157)

'merica

Technology Misuse (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591159)

Sad times ahead...

Re:Technology Misuse (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591247)

Good point. That is to say, you and every other Slashdork is all gung-ho about "technology misuse" when it comes to, say, pirated software or movie or music distribution or breaking DRM, but when it comes to printing a sodding plastic box, we get "omfg, technology misuse" and Slashdot turns into a cesspool of whiny moralising dweebs.

It's also impossible to prevent fermting alcohol (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591161)

Yet there are numerous restrictions and bans on them. Or using alcohol. Is there any law which is going to stop a person who is bound and determined to drink and drive?

The real reason for laws and regulations isn't absolute prohibition or removal, just reduction.

Well, other than the "laws" found in Scientific contexts, but those are really quite different.

Re:It's also impossible to prevent fermting alcoho (0)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 2 years ago | (#42591401)

It is legal to make alcohol at home. It is just illegal to sell it, or drive drunk. Are you suggesting that is should be legal to make 30 round magazines at home?

Re:It's also impossible to prevent fermting alcoho (4, Insightful)

Culture20 (968837) | about 2 years ago | (#42591453)

Yet there are numerous restrictions and bans on them. Or using alcohol. Is there any law which is going to stop a person who is bound and determined to drink and drive?

The real reason for laws and regulations isn't absolute prohibition or removal, just reduction.

You're talking about laws that reduce poor judgment or carelessness. They enforce proper action in good-hearted people. But murder is different. It requires evil intent. There are already laws against murder. Once someone decides that (mass)murder is their goal, there aren't a whole lot of laws that will stop them. Maybe serve as a bar by which to judge and punish the murderer, yes, but precious few laws create an environment which will stop them.

Hair-splitting (5, Insightful)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | about 2 years ago | (#42591171)

For one thing, these are not called "clips", they are magazines. And magazines hold rounds, not "bullets", which are part of a round. Seeing these terms used clues the reader in that the author knows little to nothing about firearms.

In a larger sense, I don't think we need printer control in response to this, because (a) not a single one of the new regulations being proposed would have stopped any of these mass shootings, and (b) because I can't see these plastic magazines working exceptionally well.

Re: Hair-splitting (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591219)

Pro-mags are plastic and are some of the best functioning AR-15 mags out there.

Re: Hair-splitting (2)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | about 2 years ago | (#42591255)

Sure, but can the printer nearly approach the functioning quality of the material used in those..?

Re: Hair-splitting (2)

Charcharodon (611187) | about 2 years ago | (#42591335)

It can make me an excellent mold, which can be used to make higher quality plastic products or used to create an even stronger mold to use in metal stamping.

Re: Hair-splitting (2)

Bigby (659157) | about 2 years ago | (#42591361)

Eventually. Initially, the Internet couldn't compete with the phone book.

Re: Hair-splitting (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#42591483)

What's a phone book?

Re: Hair-splitting (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#42591371)

The trouble isn't with polymers, most guns that aren't entirely metal or banged together in 1950's Soviet Russia People's 3rd Patriotic Machinery Plant, have polymer parts, it's that shitty extruded ABS filaments that are just about managing to stick to each other aren't even close to being in the same category as decent injection moulded parts, let alone glass-filled polymer composites and the like(and, if somebody does have a really classy 3D printer, the results probably cost more than proper parts prepared by the usual means).

Re:Hair-splitting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591301)

Hey, it's Forbes, not a hunting magazine.

Anyway, the mags don't need to work well - they just need to be passably useful. (Sort of like how DOS took over the world.)

Expect "printer control" to become a big deal when electron beam melting technology reaches the mass market. (EBM probably already is controlled under the Wassenaar agreement, I'd guess - but that's just export control, not end-user ownership restrictions, AFAIK.)

Re:Hair-splitting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591381)

Indeed. I'm no gun owner, never even held one. But I hate misinformation too. It would bother me just as much if someone said "Linux is a kind of Windows". Yes, they're similar things, but at the same time, very different.

And not only would be easy to find large magazines in the black market, that sort of stuff doesn't really matter on a shooting spree. Remember the 2011 Rio School Shooting? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_de_Janeiro_school_shooting

Guy used two six-shot revolvers, in .38 and .32 caliber. No "scary assault weapons holding dozens of powerful child killing rounds", no, just two revolvers chambered for rounds designed in the end of the 19th century.

Re:Hair-splitting (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about 2 years ago | (#42591443)

Words have flexible meaning. To a petty little dweeb clip and magazine or bullet and round are not interchangeable. I know the difference, I suppose you know the difference. It is not significant enough of a difference to worry about it.

Re:Hair-splitting (1)

SGDarkKnight (253157) | about 2 years ago | (#42591477)

technically it's called a cartridge, but round has become more acceptable over the years.

I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (4, Insightful)

exabrial (818005) | about 2 years ago | (#42591185)

How does this keep schools safer?

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (5, Insightful)

krovisser (1056294) | about 2 years ago | (#42591225)

In the same way that an unenforced "Gun Free Zone" does.


It doesn't.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (3, Insightful)

nschubach (922175) | about 2 years ago | (#42591249)

It's stated in the article. They assume that since some previous gun incidents have been stopped when the gunman had to reload that limiting the amount you can fire off will allow someone to be a hero and tackle the gunman.

Horwitz points out that Tucson shooter Jared Loughner was tackled while attempting to reload a new magazine into his Glock handgun. And police say that Newtown, Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza may have allowed some of his victims to escape while he reloaded his smaller clips.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (1)

krovisser (1056294) | about 2 years ago | (#42591289)

Tackle? I thought everyone was supposed to duck and hide? You can't fight back. You have to do what the bad guy wants, and then he'll let you... oh wait.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591345)

Pretty sure the fairy bitch in Newtown had 30 round mags that he just reloaded halfway through. And, honestly, if he took long enough to reload that six people got away, it's only his incompetence that saved them.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (3, Interesting)

mumblestheclown (569987) | about 2 years ago | (#42591295)

Here are my views on gun control:

Every year, an average of 9,200 Americans are murdered by handguns, according to Department of Justice statistics. This does not include suicides or the tens of thousands of robberies, rapes and assaults committed with handguns. This level of violence must be stopped.

I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.

This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety ... While we recognize that assault-weapon legislation will not stop all assault-weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals.

I think maybe there could be some restrictions that there had to be a certain amount of training taken.

With the right to bear arms comes a great responsibility to use caution and common sense on handgun purchases.

- Ronald Wilson Reagan

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (1)

Farmer Pete (1350093) | about 2 years ago | (#42591387)

As an owner of a semi-automatic AK-47, I can assure you that I have taken my AK-47 hunting on several occasions. Would I have been better off with a more traditional hunting rifle? Maybe. But I don't like unitaskers. I like having multifunctional devices. By the way, my AK-47 has a scope and it was outfitted with 5 round mags (the legal max size in Michigan).

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (5, Insightful)

kimvette (919543) | about 2 years ago | (#42591457)

I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.

The purpose of the second amendment is not for sporting, hunting, or even home defense. It is there to prevent the government from disarming the people and instituting tyranny and/or fascism. We have the second amendment to preserve our natural right to shoot tyrants and fascists should our system of checks and balances fail and they come into power.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (4, Insightful)

Bigby (659157) | about 2 years ago | (#42591469)

The citizens do not have an explicit right for guns for sporting, hunting, and home defense. They have a right for the purpose of fighting back from an oppressive government. If I see sporting/hunting with regard to gun rights again, I am going to ...

And don't be naive with regard to how the US government could turn on its citizens enough to warrant such use of guns. If the citizens cannot fight back, the oppression WILL happen. It would just be a matter of time.

And no, our military power couldn't stop an armed populace. The military wouldn't have a chance...unless they wanted to just kill everyone. But then who do you exercise power over at that point?

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (1)

Farmer Pete (1350093) | about 2 years ago | (#42591309)

It forces killers to have to reload more often...unless they can afford preban magazines, which will undoubtedly be more expensive. The market for high capacity mags has already shot sky high. You could have tripled your money in a week if you had the foresight to buy bulk quantities of magazines before the Sandy Hook incident.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591357)

You could have tripled your money in a week if you had the foresight to buy bulk quantities of magazines before the Sandy Hook incident.

Nothing disgusting nor reprehensible about that statement, no sir.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 2 years ago | (#42591315)

Because a criminal obviously can't carry more than one gun or magazine. Hell, no one reads magazines these days anyway.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#42591445)

Because a criminal obviously can't carry more than one gun or magazine.

LOL this is by far the funniest part about the whole ban. Now carrying ten "three shot" 50 caliber rifles is impractical but multiple saturday night specials is quite reasonable. In fact a RAID array of handguns is by far higher availability than a single high capacity handgun. Any /.er should understand this about RAID arrays. Did "saturday night special #5" jam? Who cares drop #5 and grab #6.

The real reason is wanting to appear to be doing something, mostly to "preach to the choir" and appease supporters who are profoundly ignorant and like it that way.

Re:I don't understand the "high cap" magazine ban (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591391)

It isn't just about schools, Mass shootings are becoming common place in this country, the idea is to slow the mentally ill gun nut wackos down, because if they only have 6 bullets thats the maximum people they can kill.

The people who buy the most guns are the people you don't want owning any guns.

I grew up in a conservative rural area, Gun nuts are scary as hell!! they are paranoid, hate filled, and wouldn't hesitate to pull a gun on anyone.

We need to wake up and realize that guns are a privilege not a right.

It's a magazine (0)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | about 2 years ago | (#42591195)

Not a clip.

Re:It's a magazine (1)

SoupGuru (723634) | about 2 years ago | (#42591331)

A magazine is a generic term that refers to the storage of ammunition. You can certainly keep 30 rounds of ammo in your rifle's detachable magazine. You can also store your ship's ammunition in the ship's magazine. You could even replenish your bolt action hunting rifle's magazine.

So you should be clear on your terminology before you take part in these discussions. Otherwise we can dismiss anything you say since you've already displayed your ignorance on the topic.

-can I out-pedant a pedant?

Re:It's a magazine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591447)

You've got lawn chairs in the hoplogargh? Oh, in the trunk! Where's your elephant? Or did you mean tree trunk?

-can I out-pedant a pedant?

Maybe if you find one. This is basic terminology though.

Fucking homonyms. How do they work?

Re:It's a magazine (1)

jittles (1613415) | about 2 years ago | (#42591481)

A magazine is a generic term that refers to the storage of ammunition. You can certainly keep 30 rounds of ammo in your rifle's detachable magazine. You can also store your ship's ammunition in the ship's magazine. You could even replenish your bolt action hunting rifle's magazine.

So you should be clear on your terminology before you take part in these discussions. Otherwise we can dismiss anything you say since you've already displayed your ignorance on the topic.

-can I out-pedant a pedant?

No, you can't. He's right, you are not. The term clip comes from stripper-clips that were used to load magazines during WWI and WWII. You use a stripper clip when loading an internal magazine on a weapon, for instance. US culture misuses the word clip because the M-1 Garand, of WWII fame, used a box clip to load ammo into the internal magazine of the weapon. All those vets came back thinking that the clip from their M1 was the same thing as the magazine that you might load into your semi-automatic pistol.

Magazine, Not Clip (1)

zicAU (867771) | about 2 years ago | (#42591207)

Please learn the terminology if you want to have intelligent conversations about a topic. Even if you are pro gun control, learn the terms. Calling a magazine a "clip" is like calling an entire computer a "CPU": its wrong and no one knowledgeable in the field would say it.

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (5, Funny)

Russ1642 (1087959) | about 2 years ago | (#42591245)

We do it intentionally because it makes you guys so mad. It's hilarious. "It's not a CLIP!!! AAAAAAA"

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591337)

Then we'll keep calling them death panels...

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591435)

Then we'll keep calling them death panels...

that's alright, nobody is listening to you anymore.

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (2)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 2 years ago | (#42591489)

They *are* death panels. Just recognize that private insurance companies have them too, and they have shareholders to satisfy...

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591259)

Fuck no. Just like I will not spend time learning every fucking pokemon name, I will not familiarize myself with the jargon of red-necks and right-wing idiots.

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591367)

So, ignorance is bliss?

It shows how uninformed you are if you can't identify the parts of the weapon that is the problem. It would be like banning cars with "wings" because they allow people to drive fast.

Re:Magazine, Not Clip (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591375)

1/10, try harder

Clip Magazine (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591209)

Clips Feed Magazines
Magazines Feed Rifles

Going the wrong way (3, Interesting)

Zerth (26112) | about 2 years ago | (#42591217)

So instead of convincing them not to ban large magazines, they'll just ban guns that don't have fixed magazines.

Is that really what they wanted?

Re:Going the wrong way (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#42591441)

Maybe any auto load even. Bolt action, pump and lever action might stay.

Re:Going the wrong way (0)

logjon (1411219) | about 2 years ago | (#42591475)

Until they see a good opportunity to ban them.

Suck on that (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591223)

You California kike.

Laws aren't meant to prevent knowledge... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591227)

they're meant to prevent actions. Just because you show the government you still can, won't prevent them from throwing you in federal pound you in the a$$ prison.

It's a Magazine (3, Informative)

SavoWood (650474) | about 2 years ago | (#42591239)

Unfortunately, TV and film have filled us with bad terminology. This is about a magazine. A clip is a completely different thing.

Magazines hold multiple rounds. They're typically enclosed for protection from dust and dirt, and are inserted into a firearm through a receiving slot. Magazines are used in semi-automatic pistols like your average Glock, Sig Sauer, Walther, etc. They're also used in rifles like the M-16 or AR-15.

Clips hold two rounds together in a belt fed weapon, like the M-60. They're typically fed from an ammunition box or other container. The clips are expelled after running through the weapon. The expulsion is similar to the way the brass casings are expelled. It's basically a small curved springy piece of metal holding two rounds together.

The names are not interchangeable. There's no such thing as a 30 round clip. It's a 30 round magazine.

Re:It's a Magazine (2)

SoupGuru (723634) | about 2 years ago | (#42591377)

You store ammo in a magazine. Ships have magazines, semi-automatic pistols have magazines, and even your bolt-action hunting rifles have magazines.

Are you specifically talking about detachable magazines for semi-automatic rifles? Why didn't you say so? I hate it when people use generic terms when they mean something specific.

Re:It's a Magazine (2, Informative)

mumblestheclown (569987) | about 2 years ago | (#42591385)

The term clip is commonly used to describe a firearm magazine, especially in newspapers, movies, and on television. Because of this usage, the Merriam-Webster dictionary now defines a clip as "a device to hold cartridges for charging the magazines of some rifles; also :a magazine from which ammunition is fed into the chamber of a firearm".

Language changes. Get over it. Moreover, even while you are technically correct, this distinction has no substantive impact on the underlying discussion.

Also: your definition of clip is wrong. Both stripper and en block clips can hold more than two rounds, and the weapon involved need not be belt fed.

Re:It's a Magazine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591437)

Clips hold two rounds together in a belt fed weapon, like the M-60. They're typically fed from an ammunition box or other container. The clips are expelled after running through the weapon. The expulsion is similar to the way the brass casings are expelled. It's basically a small curved springy piece of metal holding two rounds together.

A clip is a device used to hold multiple cartridges (or rounds in the vernacular) together for easy and rapid charging of a magazine. You're thinking of belts made of links. Belts are not clips.

Re:It's a Magazine (1)

nschubach (922175) | about 2 years ago | (#42591473)

Clips refer to the bent metal piece used to hold several rounds together but are not fully enclosed. ( ex: http://www.zib-militaria.de/WebRoot/Store8/Shops/61431412/48C1/1864/62AB/9010/85F2/C0A8/28BD/B650/792.jpg [zib-militaria.de] ) These were commonly used in older rifles like the M1 Garand.

Lame (1)

JockTroll (996521) | about 2 years ago | (#42591257)

It will be news when you can print a firing chamber and a rifled barrel, both capable of not self-destructing upon use. You want to print cheap guns, you print gyrojet-like weapons or try to make a coilgun with more power than your average air pistol. Both work with lower or no pressure and do not require rifling to stabilize the round.

What's more likely? (4, Insightful)

thelovebus (264467) | about 2 years ago | (#42591261)

That our esteemed legislators say to themselves
"Well, that's that, then! I guess it's pointless to ban high-capacity magazines."
or
"This is insidious! Alongside a high-capacity magazine ban, we should also ban 3D printing! Clearly it's a technology that will only be used by TERRORISTS!"

I think something like the latter is more likely, and I'm not even one of /.'s famed government-hating libertarian fundamentalists!

Re:What's more likely? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591421)

Or maybe they'll say, "Of course no ban is perfect against a determined enough and skilled enough individual, but public policy is about statistics not perfection. After all it's perfectly possible for a home machinist to make a fully automatic weapon, but all mass shootings have involved off-the-shelf semi-automatic weapons. And frankly a world where school shooters are using home made plastic magazines is one where the goal of slowing the rate of fire due to reloading or jamming has been achieved."

Beeing able to create (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591283)

thing does not mean it should be legal. You can not by a bomb but you can create one. This does not mean we should lift the ban.

spo8ge (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591293)

log on Then the at death's door your replies rather of walnut Creek, There are about 700 completely before about half of the The most. Look at

High capacity magazines are illegal in many states (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591297)

Unless of course, you're a leftie arguing for gun control, in which case you're allowed to break the law:

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/12/dc_police_investigating_nbc_co.html [nola.com]

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/01/nbc_host_will_not_be_charged_f.html [nola.com]

Good - The Constitution says "arms", you assholes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591321)

I hate it when the gutless, spineless Washington bureaucrats trample all over my rights. The constitution says "arms" for a reason you assholes. You soulless cunts can hide behind your wealth and your tax-payer bought and paid-for man-servants that are armed with the weapons you say I can't have. I don't have that luxury and I don't appreciate your "camel's nose" approach to building a prison out of the nation I love.

The constitution says "arms" for reason assholes, not "all arms except for these things" you fucking twits. And yes you can shout fire in a crowded theater, when the theater is on fire - and the theater is most certainly on fire. So don't give me that intellectually vacant response you vapid bureaucrat.

--Citizen

Re:Good - The Constitution says "arms", you asshol (1)

azalin (67640) | about 2 years ago | (#42591495)

I am not sure if this rant was supposed to be pro or contra gun control but it makes a decent point to double check permits to weed out the nutcases.

Woah - Banned things can be made? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591339)

I wonder if this might have implications elsewhere. I mean, if we discovered that people could also make drugs, moonshine or nuclear bombs, we'd definitely make those things legal too, wouldn't we? Come to think of it - I think that it might be possible to kill people even though that's totally illegal. Why the heck are we criminalizing all the legitimate uses of murder when bad people can just go ahead and do it anyway?

To eliminate is not the point (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591341)

The gun lobby's argument against legislation is always that criminals will break the law anyway, so we might as well not bother. Sure, anyone intent on going out and shooting 30 people is going to be able to find a way around whatever laws are put in place to prevent it.

The point of these laws is to reduce the probability that an unmotivated person turns into a criminal. Before congress banned gun-violence epidemiology, it looked like a gun was 40 times more likely to be used on a household member than on an invader. Those aren't crimes where Billy Bob establishes an elaborate, secretive plan to shoot his wife, those are crimes where Billy Bob gets really pissed off, grabs the nearby gun and pulls the trigger in a drunken haze. Small restrictions, with minimal impact on legitimate gun use, can reduce gun violence. It's not the committed, determined criminal we need to worry about: it's the person who turns to the weapon closest to hand in a fit of anger.

can you 3d print a bomb? pop quiz hot shot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591343)

pop quiz hot shot I just printed a bomb and if you don't pay up it will go off and if you try to cut the power it will go off what do you do?

Re:can you 3d print a bomb? pop quiz hot shot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591403)

Cut all the wires at once, duh. None of this blue wire red wire bullshit.

So what? (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 2 years ago | (#42591349)

The Newtown shooter used his mother's guns, right? Guns which were legally purchased and registered.

So sure someone who is going to go on a shooting spree isn't likely to care much about what the law says they can and can't have. However, the guns and magazines they manage to get their hands on are likely to be restricted by such laws since that's what will be easiest to get.

Solutions simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591351)

Declare the War on Guns, Make possion of these types of clips a mandatory 20 year sentance no parole and siezure of assets like the war on drugs.

Bingo everyone wins and some more money is given to the rich for keeping people in jail , This also creates new jobs.

Free 3-D printers (1)

denbesten (63853) | about 2 years ago | (#42591359)

Perhaps this is a thinly veiled effort to get you to donate your 3-D printer to the government compliments of forfeiture law [thefreedictionary.com] . [grin; duck]

This isn't good for anyone (3, Insightful)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about 2 years ago | (#42591369)

" Defense Distributed says it hopes to preempt any high capacity magazine ban by showing how impossible it has become to prevent the creation of a simple spring-loaded box in the age of cheap 3D printing"

They are much more likely to inspire legislation banning 3D printing.

On the list (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 years ago | (#42591417)

Everyone who downloads that file will find themselves actually needing a tinfoil hat. It's not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

Oops, they forgot something (5, Insightful)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#42591427)

I can reload a new, full pistol mag in under 1.5 seconds consistently. So, what's the point of that law? And what's to stop a crazy person from walking into a school with a machete, taser, and body armor? Good luck stopping that combo without a weapon. And what's going to stop someone from carrying bleach with chlorine into a crowded place and mixing it, making mustard gas (if I remember correctly). That's like a gun x10.

You either toddler-proof the entire world or you realize you're not going to stop a crazy person from doing stupid shit. There is no solution to mass shooting problems unless you go get some oracles and put them in a pool and form a precrime division...and even that didn't work out, lol.

I'm from Wisconsin where we FINALLY become the 49th state to have a conceiled weapons permit available about a year ago. Now every store that's run by a dumbass has a sign that says "Only criminals are allowed to carry weapons in this store." It actually says "no guns or weapons allowed" but since criminals won't read or respect that, I translated it.

For the record, I don't own a gun. I only carry LTL weapons because they work better at disabling a target and the court case would go a lot better if someone who tries to rob me isn't dead. Also it's easier to get financial compensation from them, lol.

If they think 20 bullets per mag is going to stop someone from going on a shooting spree or that 20 less dead people is acceptable, they're dreaming. I mean I know not one single politician actually believe any of this gun law BS, it's all just for show, but still.

The genie is out. (1)

XeLiTuS (2787743) | about 2 years ago | (#42591429)

What the government is going to quickly realize is that, like the recording industry, they're going to simply start playing a game of whack-a-mole since this type of processes is going going to become cheaper and more widely available.

Not high capacity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591439)

A 30 round magazine is normal capacity for the AR-15.

they would ban 3D printers first (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591461)

3D printers are still relatively new and easier to control. There's not "need" for it other than for hobbyist and enthusiasts. They did it for model rockets propellants. Anyways, I believe this whole "we'll show them!" attitude from Defense Distributed is misguided and it could blow up in their face.

Just like with NRA, why are they doubling-down on a bad hand instead of doing something constructive? Use 3D printers to create water filtration systems instead of weapons? Or safety mechanisms for guns (whatever they may be?) I'm all for guns and enjoy shooting them at a range, but the public opinion has been tipped over against guns. Or at least that's how I'm perceiving the news.

Doesnt matter.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42591463)

If the NY bill goes through, it will be illegal to own any 30 round mag whether you print it yourself or not.

Show me how any of the proposed laws (4, Insightful)

Shivetya (243324) | about 2 years ago | (#42591493)

Would have prevented Sandy Hook or Aurora?

The simple fact is politicians are going for low hanging fruit because they do not want to admit we live in a world with dysfunctional people and the money that could be spent to treat them does not buy sufficient votes for those in power.

Simple fix. (1)

rickb928 (945187) | about 2 years ago | (#42591499)

Redefine in law that manufacturing includes providing the specifications, instructions, and details for a manufacturing device - be it a CNC machine or a 3d printer.

Now the poor blighter with a printer can't use the file, since that would be, legally, the product, and prohibited from distribution.

Fear not, the Legislature will find a way to outloaw all this if they can. And they are persistent.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?