3D Printed Guns Can Now be Detected

[CrowdPete]

Some UK company claims they have come up with a radar solution using highly sophisticated Artificial Intelligence to scan or items such as 3D printed guns:

http://3dprint.com/1341/company-crea...-printed-guns/

Seems like technology always finds a way to keep up....

[James K]

It is no coincidence that 1984 was set in the U.K. Probably no other nation that was not a Nazi or Communist dictatorship has devoted more money and resources to shadowing and tracking its own citizens.

I remember a Scotland Yard officer on BBC saying, "There is nowhere you can go in the U.K. that we are not watching you." While that might not be absolutely true, it does show the police state attitude of the U.K. and the seeming acceptance by the people that their privacy is unimportant.

Unfortunately, we are going the same route. With surveillance cameras in every store and "red light" cameras on every corner, and now an Obama administration plan to link all government and private security cameras in a nationwide surveillance network, it will not be too far in the future that the director of the FBI will also be able to boast that "we are watching you."

After all, as has been pointed out by the administration, the Bill of Rights limits the actions of Congress; there is no "right to privacy" and no Constitutional limit on laws enacted by the president as Executive Orders.

Jim

[SHE3PDOG]

I was unaware that any 3D gun had been made which did not at least utilize a metal barrel. Am I wrong? If there were a metal barrel, it would still be detected by standard means. Either way, I doubt this detection technology will be too wide spread any time soon.

[Martowski]

The 3D gun scare is equivalent to the plastic gun scare of the 80's. "Die Hard" scared people into thinking those plastic Glocks with ceramic barrels could pass through metal detectors with no problem. The same thing is happening with the 3D gun scare now.

[southjk]

Am I wrong? If there were a metal barrel, it would still be detected by standard means.

I believe you are. The ones I saw were completely plastic except for the firing pin. That was the only metal in it. Even the (very thick) barrel was plastic.

[TXAZ]

I call BS on the implied capabilities.
They may be using mm radar or backscatter, and able to detect specific aberrations but there is a heck of a lot more to reliably detecting ABS or other plastics than a simple wave of a radar transceiver coupled to AI software.

There is a reason you walk into a scanner at the airport, spread your legs and arms and stand motionless, at very close range I might add, for 2 seconds: it takes serious processing from up close sensors to generate the analysis.

And, I might add, there are specific holes in the airport scanner capabilities that would allow a knowledgable person to walk a piece of plastic or a small gun through without detection.
BS.

[Pond, James Pond]

Probably no other nation that was not a Nazi or Communist dictatorship has devoted more money and resources to shadowing and tracking its own citizens.

You.
Are.
Kidding.

By the second post?!

That is a private company and has nothing to do with the UK government.

Good to see others are staying on topic.

At the end of the day, one would have thought that this was good news, unless we need undetectable guns. Think of it this way, now the authorities cannot claim detection, or a lack thereof, as a reason against a private citizen printing parts...

[SHE3PDOG]

Thanks for the clarification, I was totally unaware that the entire gun could be made from plastic now. That's actually kind of cool from a technological stand point.

Anyways, I DO know more than my fair share about how those radio waves work, and I'm unconvinced that it would be able to tell if you had something on you based solely on shapes it has previously identified as guns. Even if it could, it seems to me that the design could simply change and make it undetectable once more. I'd have to see this thing work in more than just a controlled scenario to be even remotely convinced of its capabilities.

[Andy Blozinski]

If it's basing its detection of the shapes of plastic parts, it would be so easy to defeat. One only has to make the weapon in the shape of something that isn't a gun. Some ladies carry a plastic device in their purse that could easily be a camouflaged plastic weapon.

[Martowski]

An entirely plastic gun including the barrel? How durable would that be? I guess if you're looking for a throw away pistol that can be used to fire a shot or two maybe, but wouldn't the pressures destroy a plastic chamber? I can't imagine trying to get a hot brass casing out of a plastic chamber either; I would think they would melt together?

[Uncle Malice]

An entirely plastic gun including the barrel? How durable would that be?

They are designed to be single shot, disposable self-defense weapons. They use a break open design like a single-shot shotgun and a nail as the firing pin.

Would be good to have a truck load of them to hand out just in case things ever got 'bad' but practically, they are of little use in current climates. More a proof of concept than anything.

[barnbwt]

Sounds like live radar, basically a live action version of the ghost-**** machines in airports. It can only detect shapes, not guns, and absorptive materials can block it (and wouldn't set off a passive detection system like that described.

Anyone notice that a lot (as in nearly all) dystopic literature takes place or is written in England? On some level, I imagine a lot of Brits are surprised the country hasn't gone despotic fascist already.

TCB

[Doc Intrepid]

Originally Posted by Uncle Malice

"Would be good to have a truck load of them to hand out just in case things ever got 'bad' but practically, they are of little use in current climates. More a proof of concept than anything."

Ten years from now it may be a different story.

[Rifleman1776]

So what? I would rather use my energy to revise the laws into something sensible and Constitutional than try to circumvent existing laws.

[zxcvbob]

After all, as has been pointed out by the administration, the Bill of Rights limits the actions of Congress; there is no "right to privacy" and no Constitutional limit on laws enacted by the president as Executive Orders.

That's where the 3rd Amendment might finally get some use.

[TunnelRat]

You.
Are.
Kidding.

By the second post?!

That is a private company and has nothing to do with the UK government.

Good to see others are staying on topic.

At the end of the day, one would have thought that this was good news, unless we need undetectable guns. Think of it this way, now the authorities cannot claim detection, or a lack thereof, as a reason against a private citizen printing parts...

In my years I have discovered there is a dramatic difference in the mentality of citizens of the UK and citizens of the US. It truly has become a fundamental difference over time. There is a reason our two nations separated, and anyone that thinks it's just because of taxes is full of it. But that doesn't mean we can't still enjoy firearms together. And given that this forum is about firearms I will restrict my conversation to that.

I see extremely little explanation here as to how this technology works, other than a video with a blinking red symbol saying something was detected. I was also unaware that people generally move at 0.5 mph. Detection technology is constantly in a race, a race against those that seek to defeat it. Immense effort is often put in to detection, only to have the opposition exert a mere percentage of that effort to defeat it once they realize how that technology works. It can be maddening. As to this technology, I imagine the goal is to prevent someone from going through an airport with a gun. But what about at the entrance? I could simply use a bomb or a normal gun at the entrance to engage in terrorism. A large number of people milling about in close proximity. Even the car park is a potential target. What really is someone going to do with a 3D printed gun in an airport or shopping center? A gun that can typically only fire one shot? That's far from my nightmare scenario when it comes to attacks on public centers. Even if detected, were I a determined attacked that had made peace with my own death I would still go about my act of terror. The detector would be no more of an alert than the first shots that were fired.

[totalloser]

I'll note that entire metal guns have been printed (including barrel) and fired. Good for demonstrating the technology, ridiculous for actually making a gun.

It will *never* be a viable alternative for investment casting and forging processes. If in doubt, research the investment casting process.

When I was bored in middle school science class I attached a few big rubber bands to a plastic pen and used it to launch a bamboo skewer right through the ceiling. This whole ado about useless junky guns going through airports is ridiculous. A cudgel would be a more effective weapon.

And the best deterrent is empowering beating the dumb out of hi-jackers en masse and/or letting pilots carry *real* guns.

[Pond, James Pond]

I see extremely little explanation here as to how this technology works, other than a video with a blinking red symbol saying something was detected. I was also unaware that people generally move at 0.5 mph. Detection technology is constantly in a race, a race against those that seek to defeat it. Immense effort is often put in to detection, only to have the opposition exert a mere percentage of that effort to defeat it once they realize how that technology works. It can be maddening. As to this technology, I imagine the goal is to prevent someone from going through an airport with a gun. But what about at the entrance? I could simply use a bomb or a normal gun at the entrance to engage in terrorism. A large number of people milling about in close proximity. Even the car park is a potential target. What really is someone going to do with a 3D printed gun in an airport or shopping center? A gun that can typically only fire one shot? That's far from my nightmare scenario when it comes to attacks on public centers. Even if detected, were I a determined attacked that had made peace with my own death I would still go about my act of terror. The detector would be no more of an alert than the first shots that were fired.

TBH, I'm not sure I see the connection with my post, but then I've been doing accounts all day and so the brain is suffering.

If your point is that the technology is, in every practical sense, pointless well, yes it may be and if that proves to be the case it is going to be something the company that invested dinero in its development will have to worry about.

But as I said: half the hoo-hah about these was the lack of detection. That ostensibly no longer exists so end of that argument against 3D-printers.

As for airports, I'd have thought the metal detectors would catch the firing-pin or even the bullet and brass: a plastic gun is pretty useless without those.

[TunnelRat]

But as I said: half the hoo-hah about these was the lack of detection. That ostensibly no longer exists so end of that argument against 3D-printers

Nah mate, they'll still want to restrict them anyway. Again, I've seen nothing in this video other than a cherry picked example of this technology working. I work in a related field, I'll leave it at that. I have to see a lot more to convince me.

As for a connection to your post, only the first paragraph was directed at you and others because I was worried this thread might go down the politics path which will see it quickly locked. I didn't mean to single you out or to make you think that, apologies.

[Pond, James Pond]

Sometimes things go over my head in a stratospheric way, so no need to apologise, just wasn't sure: that is all.

Going back to the technology, despite your comment about it not being effective, I would be the least bit surprised if some public money gets thrown at them in some countries just so they can say "See? We're doing something useful. Aren't we useful? Vote for us..."

I honestly think some actions, particularly in places like airports, are more for passenger reassurance than actually being an effective detection/prevention resource... Just my impression.

[power5]

I don't care how plastic the gun is. I don't think you can get ammo through a standard metal detector.

[Uncle Malice]

I don't care how plastic the gun is. I don't think you can get ammo through a standard metal detector.

Why would you think that? There's nothing magnetic about brass, copper, or lead. In such small amounts as a single round in one of these plastic guns, there's no question that it would make it through

[TunnelRat]

Oh I know public money will get thrown at it. My whole career has been witness to countless wasted government dollars.

As you said it will mostly be for show.

[power5]

Why would you think that? There's nothing magnetic about brass, copper, or lead. In such small amounts as a single round in one of these plastic guns, there's no question that it would make it through

I did not think that airport detectors only worked on magnetism.

[Uncle Malice]

Perhaps not, but I can tell you from experience that I can get through with over 6 ounces of surgical steel without setting them off. Not sure how else that would work.