Death Toll Revised Down to 24 After Monstrous Oklahoma Tornado…100+ Injured…Children Among the Dead…Stunning Pictures…Woman Finds Dog During Interview!

Live BlazeCast at 2 pm ET: Oklahoma Tornado the day after

Government

Congressman to Call for Renewed Ban on Guns…the Plastic Ones

Dec. 11, 2012 4:12pm Liz Klimas

Rep. Steve Israel Calls for Renewal of Undetectable Firearms Act to Ban 3 D Printed Plastic Guns

(Image: WikiWep DevBlog)

With a group hoping to promote “popular access to arms as guaranteed by the United States Constitution” by developing a working design for a 3-D printable gun, a Democratic congressman has called for the renewal of legislation that would ban plastic guns. But would it really put a stop to the 3-D printed gun project?

Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) late last week issued an announcement for legislation that would renew the ban of plastic guns under the Undetectable Firearms Act, which will expire December 2013.

“Congress passed a law banning plastic guns for two decades, when they were just a movie fantasy,” Israel said in a statement. “With the advent of 3-D printers these guns are suddenly a real possibility, but the law Congress passed is set to expire next year. We should act now to give law enforcement authorities the power to stop the development of these weapons before they are as easy to come by as a Google search.”

Reauthorization of the Undetectable Firearms Act would make it illegal for the next 10 years after enactment to manufacture, own, transport, buy or sell any firearm that is not detectable by metal detector and/or does not present an accurate image when put through an X-ray machine.

Although creating undetectable guns is not the intent behind Defense Distributed‘s Wiki Weapons project, founder Cody Wilson said the legislation shouldn’t pose a threat to the project anyway. In a phone interview with TheBlaze, Wilson pointed out that licensed manufacturers have some exemptions in the law.

“It’s ironic [that some are saying] Wiki Weapons would be affected,” Wilson said, noting that the law technically gives them more of an advantage, because it prevents others with a similar idea from doing what his project hopes to accomplish.

The law states:

[...] no provision of this Act shall not apply to: (1) the manufacture, possession, transfer, receipt, shipment, or delivery of a firearm by a licensed manufacturer for the purpose of examining and testing such firearm to determine whether it would be prohibited by this Act; and (2) any firearm which has been certified by the Secretary of Defense or the Director of Central Intelligence as necessary for military or intelligence applications and is manufactured for and sold exclusively to military or intelligence agencies of the United States.

Wilson explained that Defense Distributed, which has the ultimate goal of making 3-D printed gun designs available online at no cost, is a pending 501(c)(3), but under another entity, he has applied to become a licensed firearms manufacturer. Once licensed, the intellectual property files for the completed designs would be donated to Defense Distributed, which would then publish them online.

Under the Undetectable Firearms Act though unlicensed individuals would be prohibited from printing the firearms themselves. Wilson agreed with this and said the organization plans to include a disclaimer in its user licensing agreement that states, depending on the jurisdiction the person is in, printing of the gun might be considered illegal.

“We are going to do everything legally,” Wilson said of Defense Distributed.

Israel acknowledged that printing a complete, fully functional 3-D gun isn’t yet officially possible — as seen by a recent test by Wiki Weapons that destroyed a partially 3-D printed gun within six rounds. But there is still concerned about printing the lower portion of the gun, which does have designs already available online, given that it’s where the serial number is usually placed and is, according to Israel’s press release, the “most federally regulated.” The concern is that replicating this portion of the gun could work around gun control laws. As for the serial number issue, Wilson said the file for an online design does not have to be serialized. (There are more pictures of Wiki Weapons test of its gun with components made on a 3-D printer here.)

The green portion of this not fully put together gun was made using a 3-D printer. In Defense Distributed’s test, it broke within six rounds of shooting. (Image: WikiWep DevBlog)

The point of Defense Distributed is not so much about arming the masses in the future with easily printed guns, but more so about freedom of sharing information. As stated in one of its FAQ’s asking “why guns?” the group wrote: “If we truly believe information should be free, that the internet is the last bastion of freedom and knowledge, and that societies that share are superior to societies that censor and withhold, then why not guns?”

In another portion of Defense Distributed’s website, it states that the project could “change the way we think about gun control and consumption.” Although not necessarily advocating that people print the guns, which as we discussed above according to current law would be illegal for unlicensed manufacturers, Defense Distributed poses this question to get to its point: “how do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the Internet?”

(H/T: Daily Caller)

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (59)

Larry E
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:59pm
Stevie is a typical liberal idiot who knows next to nothing about guns or engineering. Any gun that has a plastic frame or lower or other parts has enough parts that are easily identifiable as a gun by anyone with an IQ above room temperature. When Glock pistols were first introduced many years ago another NW idiot Chuckie Schemer began screeching like a cat with its tail caught in a door about the same “problem” and how “plastic guns” needed to be banned. They are now some of the most popular guns with various police agencies, including NYC’s. They were easily detectable when they were introduced, and still are.

The gun “controllers” and banners are not interested in anything but control, except for maybe power.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Jerk
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 6:16pm
  “Stevie is a typical -Jewish- liberal idiot who knows next to nothing about guns or engineering.”
  
  He’s a follower of the Jewish Hess, Marx, Soros, Sunstein, Bloom, and Alinsky… as are 90% of his other Jewish Congress brothers. Just let the facts fly, and allow others to draw conclusions.
  
  Report this comment
- DeathRattle
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 6:30pm
  Carried a Glock 27 40cal sub as a backup weapon, nice piece of equipment. Always dropped back on target.
  
  Report this comment
- ehayes2006
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 10:37pm
  Heh! Nobody here ever heard of resin polymer printing? A bit more expensive setup, but MUCH faster. They said the lower receiver took 7 hours to print. What if it took you only 3 minutes? The resin polymer version is also much more durable and lasted 200 rds of .223 as opposed to the plastic version’s 5 or 6 (and was that with .22 or .223?). With the exception of the barrel, which lasted for about 50. A thicker design on the barrel fixed that. So, all in all, with resin polymer printing and a big enough surface area (say, 2ft by 2ft), one can print an ar-15 in about 7 minutes. It *will* take a bit of time after that trimming and sanding the individual parts, just like it did the plastic version….and it will cost you about $150 or so in printing media (resin polymer is much more expensive than plastic). It will also take some know-how as to how to operate the printer in such a way that you can remove the parts from the media fast enough and attach others to the crane drawing them up from the polymer bed…but a mere child of 7 could learn how to do that, just tell them its part of a video game and they’ll learn quickly enough. The ol’ Beckster allows articles to be written that don’t even take into account the fact that HE watches YOUTUBE and is up on 3d printing. Plastic is old school. Resin polymer is new and IN. About the only METAL they are going to need are for the recoil springs and the mag spring to feed ammo.
  
  Report this comment
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 9:01am
  My State mandates that I cannot own the real thing so I have one of these plastic replicas so criminals will think I am and too dangerous for them to invade my home.
  
  Report this comment
- G-WHIZ
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 10:29am
  The springs in the rear of ALL Corvettes are CARBONFIBER. Also, there is a CERAMIC which is more-than flexible-enough for making springs that last millions-of-flexes. So even the screws and springs are not metal. They also have a very-expensive and exotic matterial for the bullet-casings!
  Using a “plastic-explosive” for the primer and charge is also done.
  
  Report this comment
- M1A2_Tanker
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 11:53am
  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/building_a_firearm.pdf
  
  “Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal
  Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the
  firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also,
  the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully
  transferred in the future.”
  
  Report this comment
- Mako Dragoon
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 2:33pm
  That is actually a unique caliber/upper receiver. It shoots an FN 5.7x28mm, same diameter as .223 remmington / 5.56x45mm, but with a shorter case. It’s not quite as potent as the 5.56 Nato rounds, but it’s short, so it can use a top mount magazine (mounted horizontally above the barrel!). The black “thing” under the regular magazine well is actually a bag designed to collect the used brass after a round is fired and ejected.
  
  Report this comment
CaptainD51
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:53pm
Why would we allow such a law to pass without opposition? Nowhere in the 2nd amendment of the Constitution does it say “unless” the gun is made of plastic or any other material.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
FlagWavingPatriot
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:40pm
The only thing we need to ban anymore is banning.

We’ve had enough bans.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Tacticaltshirts.com
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 5:27pm
  Amen. Very good advice right here.
  
  Report this comment
sasquatch08
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:29pm
This guy is a moron. It’s plastic, not “undetectable”.

Even if large amounts of the gun are made from plastic the barrel is still metal, and will be detectable with a metal detector, and even if the gun was 100% plastic the bullets are still cased in brass which is detectable with a metal detector.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The_Jerk
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:43pm
  Rep. Steve Israel is another communist controlling, left-wing, Jewish follower of his Jewish brothers Marx, Soros and Alinsky.
  
  Report this comment
SocialistSlayer
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:28pm
I’m calling for a Ban of all Congressmen !

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
termyt
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:27pm
That technology could be the best thing for Liberty since the Constitution.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jessieH
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:24pm
Compared to what weapons some goverments are developing, this is nothing.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Royalkin
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:22pm
Here’s a news flash for the ******** amongst us, it is absolutely pointless to create laws dealing with so called ‘plastic’ firearms. Why? It’s the same reason why any gun control laws don’t work. Simply because a government enacts a law preventing ownership of a firearm, or to prevent possession of a firearm in a certain area, it doesn’t create a magical invisible bubble which prevents or eliminates what it intends to prevent or eliminate. Actually, the law abiding citizens are left defenseless, while the criminals (who will go to whatever means, legal or illegal to acquire them) have firearms.

So, therefore creating a law preventing the manufacture, ownership, transport, purchase or selling of ‘plastic’ guns is ridiculous, just as is any gun control law.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ALISSTER
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:12pm
He shouldn’t worry. I saw the testfire of the 3D printable gun and it fell apart. I’ll stick with the real thing.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
BlasberryStrat
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:07pm
Congress has an all out war on taking away our guns. They know they have already won, we just don’t know it yet. I’m still mad about them taking away my Cherry Bombs as a kid. Now it will soon be “no talking and no breathing in public places”. This Admin. has become every SiFi nightmare all in one. And if you Libs actually think they are going to stop at just us evil Republican’s guns, you are nucking futs!

Ban plastic guns. Get real. All this Admin. is doing is promoting the manufacturing of ‘homemade weapons’ that will be sold underground and have ZERO ability to trace. PLUS thousands of us are stocking up on YEARS of reloading materials. Don’t believe it? Just try to order a container of gun powder on Cheaper Than Dirt. Every warehouse is sold out! And bulk 9mm or .223 bullets? Forgetaboutit…”sold out”. If this Admin. thinks we Americans are stupid sheep, I will show you thousands of people who have their own metal lathes and already make their own gun parts. AND the Mexican economy will be booming when the thousands of Americans go over weekly to buy guns and ammo. It’s proven that there is ZERO problems with smuggling over guns and narcotics, and American officials actually turn their backs to allow it. So it’s “only fair” for us Americans to take a short drive across the border and get what we have a RIGHT to bare.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Bonnieblue2A
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:06pm
The manufacturing and sale of firearms without the proper FFL license (issued by BATFE) is already a crime. Does this idiot Congressman know any firearms laws already on the books or does he, like most hoplophobes, just make stuff up?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
BasketFullOfPuppies
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:05pm
This guy is concerned about the part that the serial number is on? He probably doesn’t even know that the reason the lowers are the part that are regulated, is that they contain the firing pin, and the trigger mechanism that determines whether the action is semi or fully automatic.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Bonnieblue2A
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:35pm
  The firing pin is NOT located in the lowers. Every country except the USA declares the upper as the firearm, not the lower, for that reason.
  
  Report this comment
dont_drive_slow_in_the_left_lane_obliviot
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:04pm
until springs barrels and ammo is all undetectable plastic there is no concern. just another freedom quashing ruse.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
MGrilla
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:59pm
If guy’s like Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) could have imagined the 9-11 attacks , then they would of stopped the Wright bro’s from ever getting off the ground, as to save us from our selves, never mind the benefit’s of flight. Further more does the government have the right to stop American citizen’s from innovation. Point being the government doesn’t grant us the future, we build it and they wouldn’t have one without us. Should we just forfeit our own ideas because the government feels less safe?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
nzkiwi
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:58pm
It strikes me that the UN might consider this a heaven-sent example to support their total control of the internet.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Deliverance_from_the_left_now
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:58pm
Shows how dem dems are…its plastic!!! It’t can’t fire an actual round of ammo…dems are the dumbest idiots on the planet!!! And before some other idiot chimes in and says a Glock, XD or M&P are plastic…the upper receivers are steel or stainless steel…plastic can’t hold the pressures of a round going off…once again, it’s plastic. Are democrats that scared of freedom? Democrats need to move to China where they can be oppressed, beaten and starved to death…then they’ll feel like they’ve reached their promised land. Die democrats!!!!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- tzion
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:17pm
  Even if it could withstand it, the bullets themselves are metal. On top of that, gunpowder can be detected by security scans as well.
  
  Report this comment
Landon410
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:47pm
this could make lowers a lot cheaper too, if a company like bushmaster or dpms can print off a bunch of these a day with only 1 employee hitting “print” then removing the finished prodect, these lowers could be sold at a much lower rate.

Then these companies could really market their uppers
I’d love a AR lower with a 223 and a 300aac blackout uppers
but it costs a lot, if i could get a lower for $200 or so, then we’d be talking

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- NorthEndofaSouthboundMule
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:21pm
  You can get a complete New Frontier Armory polymer AR-15 lower (lower receiver, trigger group, grip, & stock) for $109.00 + shipping and whatever your local FFL will charge you to do the transfer. Couple that with a “no bells and whistles” upper by DPMS and you have a decent $400 or $500 AR-15. http://www.lw15.com
  
  Report this comment
- Bub47
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 7:23pm
  NorthEndofaSouthboundMule: Tnx for the link! Way cool!
  
  Report this comment
- M1A2_Tanker
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 11:49am
  I wouldn’t call DPMS anything close to a “Decent” rifle. Head on over to M4CARBINE(Dot)NET Do a little reading and save yourselves some Cash and Headaches! Don’t take my word for it ask the folks whose lives rely on their Firearms @ M4CARBINE(Dot)NET
  
  (Please, If you own one of these brands and get ****-hurt because you wasted your money on a POS, save the Pro-DPMS, Pro-Shrub-Master, Pro-RockRiver, Pro-Olympic Flames for someone else, Facts are Facts. None of these mentioned are Serious Arms for anyone who plans on using them for Self Defense. Buy Once, Cry Once!)
  
  Report this comment
DougHuffman
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:47pm
Sheesh! Leroy’s pimping his sister out for $100 car park quickies and menage-a-trois with him for another $100. A cheap pimp for a cheap prostitute! Move on, Leroy, try the POTUS residence.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
tothepoint
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:46pm
Can our country and its absurd government get any more ridiculous? Probably.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
THX-1138
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:46pm
I have guns. I need small, portable SAM’s for the Drone Wars.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:12pm
  Then you do already have small portable SAMs. Work on your aim.
  
  Report this comment
chips1
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:44pm
He fails to realize that the ban also includes his own personal sex toys. Some are shaped like guns.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Dustoff
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:43pm
Another Nutty dem.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:42pm
I think that to create anymore laws, they need to take away a law. We have too many laws, now.
Create one, delete one.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- nzkiwi
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:56pm
  That’s a nice idea.
  
  Report this comment
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 5:10pm
  How about “create one, delete two or three?”
  
  Report this comment
- Hawk69
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 7:04pm
  If they create a new law they must delete two or three is an even better idea. Sadly Many Americans keep voting these nanny state socialist into office. They don’t value freedom it seems.
  
  Report this comment
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:29pm
I don’t recall seeing “except firearms we don’t like” in the 2nd Amendment.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:51pm
  The second amendment says whatever they say it says. Just like all the others, including the 10th & the 1st.
  
  Report this comment
joxercat
Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:25pm
Federal law allows a citizen to make a gun for personal use, you just can’t sell it. So how is this illegal? This worries the politicians because an armed society is a free society, and we know they are taking our freedoms away every day we read of another one lost. If they succeed in disarming us we will become sheep waiting for wolves to feast on us. Don’t say “bahhh, bahh” stand up for your rights resist the smiley face tyranny, wake up, pay attention and quit living in a world of denial. They are coming for our right to bear arms because they cannot tolerate us being independent.
I for one would not fire an weapon fabricated on those printers that plastic is not strong enough and is an accident waiting to happen. Now if you could get one to use carbon fiber then you would be onto something.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- BasketFullOfPuppies
  Posted on December 11, 2012 at 4:55pm
  This is how people get in some serious trouble. Federal law requires a license to manufacture any gun. You need to do your research before you promote BS like this. If a person is convicted of manufacturing weapons without a license, he will probably be unable to OWN a gun for the rest of his life, all because of you.
  
  Report this comment
- M1A2_Tanker
  Posted on December 12, 2012 at 11:51am
  YES YOU CAN MAKE YOUR OWN!!!!!!!!!!
  
  http://www.atf.gov/firearms/building_a_firearm.pdf
  
  “Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal
  Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the
  firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also,
  the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully
  transferred in the future.”
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.