You need to look at the issue a little more specifically.
**
- Will this suddenly make illegal weapons legal?**
No, they will still be illegal.
2) Will it suddenly make unavailable weapons available?
No, at least in the US automatic weapons can be obtained in a lot of places right now with a few licensing hurdles.
Moreover illegal automatic firearms are already available to anyone who wants to ask around the internet of the local bars.
3) But will it mean that criminals can suddenly get weapons that are unavailable to them?
No, they’re criminals. Criminals don’t care if they break the law, that’s why they are criminals. Assuming that they want the weapon to kill someone, murder is already a greater offence than possession of an illegal weapon.
Criminals willing to commit murder with automatic weapons generally already have contact with people who know people. So this won’t give them anything they already want.
4) But will it mean that criminals will suddenly get easier access to weapons that are unavailable to them?
Maybe, but probably not. Depends how the technology works.
Firearms aren’t frypans. They aren’t even bicycles. They need to take enormous stresses and be machined down tho the nearest 1/10 of a millimetre. You can’t just print them out of white metal. which is what 3d printers use. You need to cast all the parts differently, then and temper them and machine them to have any hope of them not exploding when fired and to then actually hit anything.
By the time a printer gets to the stage that it can produce a firearm it will be basically printing at a molecular level. That’s not impossible of course. It’s plausible could live to see it. But when printing gets to that level then there two other factors to consider.
Firstly, firearms will be the least of your worries. If a gang banger can print at a molecular level why the hell would he print a firearm rather than simply printing drugs or poisons or printing your front door key?
Secondly if people can print at a molecular level, what exactly are they going to be using the weapons for? It can’t possibly be any harder to print a car or a plasma screen TV than to print the guns to defend the turf to sell the drugs to get the money money to buy …a plasma screen TV and a car.
So the whole thing seems like a non issue.
5) But won’t it mean that when there will be lots of gun related deaths?
I can’t see why. Automatic weapons are bulkier than semi-autos, so harder to conceal. Most murders are deliberate and targetted, so automatic weapons are pointless. Gang members doing drive bys with automatic wepoans s scary, but the actual death rate form them is insignificant. In fact I would argue that the inaccuracy of auotmatic fire means that they should be encouraged to do use automatics if we want to keep the death rate down. They would be far more dangerous if they actually aimed.
I can’t see why they would be much less unenforcable than now. I don’t see any comparison with porn. The use of porn is, by itself, legal, even if the possession is illegal. Feeling horny and jerking off are not and never have been illegal. Otherwise law abiding people can and do break just that one law. That means that laws against porn or prostitution are always doomed to failure because there is no crime to discover even if the law is broken.
In contrast the use of an automatic weapon inevitably results in a serious crime that will be discovered 99% of the time. Law abiding people have no incentive to break the gun laws. So unless you are worried about people possessing firearms but never using them, I can’t see how it is any *less * enforceable than today. If the cops search your house and you have an illegal weapon or plans thereof, you are convicted of a serious crime. If you obtain the weapon for committing a specific crime and dispose of it afterwards the it is no different to what happens today.
The only possible difference I can see is that wannabes might keep an automatic weapon around to look cool, instead of a handgun. Big deal. Automatic fire is actually less dangerous than aimed fire. I’d rather they had a SMG that they coudl get no range time with, than a pistol or longarm that they just might practice with.
It’s impossible to predict technology, but it’s hard to see how this could be done without rendering the machine useless. As I said above, we aren’t talking about white metal, we’re talking about molecular printing. Unless you render the machine incapable of printing anything but pre-approved patterns how can you possibly stop me?
I think they’d have a hard time getting a judge to sign off on constant wiretaps for everybody in the country. Because that is what you are talking about, No?
Without a doubt. But guns won’t be the hot item. Someone’s crack latest I-phone will be.
Trying to predict future society is a mug’s game, but it’s hard to see how this could happen. You have constitutional protections of your privacy. They could only possibly get you when the information is shared over public networks. But we know that just direct person to person transmission would work to stifle this sort of nonsense. Once one person has the latest x-box plans they would give to all their friends and within hours the whole world would have it. the only time the authorities could even know about it is if they search you/tap your phones for another reason.
Prohibition worked kinda because alcohol had to be physically transported and people wanted payment. If the same bottle of whisky could have been duplicated endlessly and sent over the phone lines, and people were prepared to do so for free, then prohibition would never have even been proposed.