Next video: If you support open source you must also support goose-step.
I just got my restricted possession and acquisition license in Canada (RPAL), which gives me the ability to own firearms and ammo.
It was fascinating to see just how different Canada and US laws are in this regard; and how much less likely a widespread ‘unrestricted gun rights’ movement is here.
Some are kinda, yeah. The AR-15 is for sure, and most 3d printed lowers would be, and iirc gen 3 glocks (I think, because that’s what all the 80% and 3d print glock lowers are), and I think colt SAA by now, but many designs are still owned by the original company.
Well everyone here loves piracy so ride this goalpost with me, it’s sustainable mass transit
I’m not an expert in 3D designing, but it seems to me that the AR-15 is a popular 3D print rifle from a practical perspective more than anything else.
The lower isn’t under extreme stresses, it can be thickened and reenforced without impeding function, and it snaps in modularly to factory made uppers. It helps a lot that the AR-15 parts market is diverse and easily accessed.
There’s a reason that I listed ARs and 3d printed lowers separately. ARs themselves are basically open source, nobody “owns” the design, so say Hodge, Noveske, Colt, SOLGW, Radian, etc, can all produce lowers etc, MIM industries can produce all the lpk bits, but so can NBS etc, cerro forge and Brass Aluminum Forge Co can both make identical “milspec” uppers, the only thing that is really “trademarked” on any of it is the branding, or an advancement like Geissele’s maritime bolt catch (which similar knock offs were produced immediately, anyway.) If you started making and selling say a2 parts (except lowers, but that’s just because you need a licence to manufacture for sale) tomorrow nobody could stop you.
I was just thinking out loud more about why you don’t see printed AKs or at least not nearly as much. The AR-15 layout just seems practical for printing.
Yeah the Plastikov does exist but is definitely less popular and a bit more involved. They also have printable CETMEs now though too lol. Basically any cheap parts kit someone is probably working on a solution if one doesn’t exist, and they’re doing cool shit like the 3011.
ARs and Glocks are also some of the most popular purchased firearms (like through an FFL), so I’m not surprised they’d be the most printed, they’re basically the Toyota Camry of guns, easy to work on, dependable, and last long.
A printed CETME is too adventurous for my blood.
Understandable lol, they do work though! Ivan made the file.
Interestingly, Glock is another one that there’s strong 3D printed support for. It’s likely because Glock was designed to be polymer, and there’s very strong aftermarket support for them, so you can print the serialized part and make it work as a firearm with no real problems.
“If you are in favor of free software, you are also in favor of computer viruses”
To be fair, enough guns can make any project open source.
Yes, there are open source firearms. there is even 3d printed designs for an MP5 the youtube channel Print shoot repeat showcases a lot of them.
having been around the block pretty recently with shit related to this. And my personal opinions coinciding quite nicely, i’ll leave this food for thought. Have a stroll down in the comments section, see whats going on down there :)
There are problems in the gun community. That much i’ll say.
You can’t install Arch by good sharpshooting skills.
A bullet tends to destroy the drive.
Um acktsually you could manipulate the keyboard with a low-powered pellet gun
Upgrade to hardened steel key caps so you can use a .22 for extra range.
I dont think I’m American enough to understand this. How does wanting people to have freedom to use their systems as they please correlate with everyone being able to own and freely carry weapons that can kill instantly?
deleted by creator
to put it blatantly. Pro 2A people (they should, on paper at least, in practice a significant portion of them are cunts and shouldn’t be allowed in the community but that’s a different rant all together) support the idea that people have rights. specifically to do with guns.
There is a very fundamental overlap in the whole “i believe i should be able to run whatever software i want, with no restrictions” and “i believe i should be allowed to own guns with minimal restrictions” crowds. It’s that simple, doesn’t matter whether you agree with it or not. If you’re a linux user, and you support open source software, and believe users should have rights. You automatically have a pretty significant moral overlap with pro 2A people. (on paper, again, fuck it, im ranting about it)
Also, minor nitpick, they don’t kill instantly, they certainly can. But if i shoot you in the toe, you probably won’t keel over and die immediately. That’s a gross mischaracterization of them.
The following is a tangential rant, feel free to ignore, it’s about gun owners being cunts. There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to (liberals edit, i misspoke here, i meant republicans, LOL) (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.
Now i feel like i don’t have to explain why this is maybe a very bad thing. But to put it bluntly, there are two good solutions here. Ban guns forever, permanently (which i disagree with, but that’s just my opinion on it) or, make it accessible to everybody, and give everyone access to them, and the materials required to be safe and responsible with them. Because after all, gun safety, is what keeps us safe when using them. While im sure the latter would make some amount of gun owning republicans uneasy, i propose they get a taste of their own fucking medicine.
Gun people and Open Source people both can appreciate the right to repair, although Americans, particularly southerners, have a certain tendency to have more gunowners across the land than people who can libreboot a chromebook. Both groups of people can use their devices for good or bad, and I think that was the original message the oop failed to relay; I don’t really know what they think they’re saying.
I see what you’re saying… I’m picking up what you’re putting down…
There’s an overlap of free rights to freedom and free rights to guns, but I think that they’re on different fields.
I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.
For the sake of conversation, I’m mixed. I have guns myself but I treat them with respect. My kids know how to handle them and can cite the rules of gun ownership. The guns are locked up at all times. My family does the same. I can’t imagine that everyone is doing the same thing.
Jordan Klepper noted that a firm overlap on both sides is stricter regulatory control of deeper background checks, but the NRA makes this impossible. Jordan Klepper Solves Guns.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I know this is about to sound stupid but I promise it isn’t as dumb as it sounds.
Guns are not designed to kill, nothing is designed to kill. Guns were designed to propel a projectile at incredible velocities, they were INVENTED to kill. What you do with the gun is what makes the difference.
i’ve never really found that argument compelling tbh. Guns are designed to kill.
So are knives, and machetes. And daggers, swords, etc… Nobody ever complains about those. Mostly because they have other uses, and aren’t in particularly heavy use.
I mean hell, you could argue a car is designed to kill people. F150s are a big contender there.
So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?
Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?
Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.
Guns have uses besides killing, the very presence of a firearm is a deterrant, that alone is a purpose that is given besides killing. I don’t agree with it, and I don’t even think everyone should just have easy access to firearms, but they definitely work for that purpose. Mentally unstable folks, it won’t work on those, but is that really the fault of guns themselves, or our country’s lackluster healthcare system, especially with the stigma around seeking mental help? A lack of access to guns is not going to stop someone from trying to kill someone, I am telling you that it is not. At the end of the day, external factors like economical reasons, mental health problems, stress related factors such as family issues, social issues, or work related issues, that’s what even drives people to do crimes like mass shootings in the first place.
Honestly, I could give less of a shit if guns even got taken away, but at the end of the day, there is still a problem to be dealt with and that is people who need help are not getting it, and as a result, are suffering.
So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?
Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?
Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.
this is exactly my point. It’s such a broad and wide reaching statement, that it completely excludes sport, and hunting. As well as defense, from what guns were designed to do. It’s just frankly a stupid statement to make.
That is the controversy about them. Essentially they’re super fast slingshots.
Again, I agree. It comes down to rights though.
Guns, to me, could maybe be paired with cars. You don’t need cars. Nobody needs to go that fast. Cars kill people. Cars ruin the environment. Etc.
Pretty much lol. At the end of the day, an object that you use with a purpose is a tool, what you use that tool to accomplish, i.e. running someone over with a car, bashing someone’s head in with a hammer, or shooting someone with a gun, that’s what is important. I won’t comment on the gun rights thing because I honestly think I’ve spent too much time in my life talking about it, but I think something that gets overlooked that could help alleviate the problem is widespread mental healthcare and awareness!
Unfortunately, that will probably never happen though.
deleted by creator
I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.
like wise you could argue that censorship resistant platforms, self hosting, and e2e encryption can cause acts of violence to be carried out against people. I don’t see anybody complaining about that though, that’s just an understood cause and effect of having freedom in regards to censorship. Shitty people exist, they will proceed to be shitty. You can censor them, but if you want to maintain truly uncensored speech, you must allow them to speak, unfortunately.
There is always a benefit, and a negative to any action taken. Guns can indeed kill people, you can argue they were made to kill, but you can also argue that the vast majority of guns in existence have never once killed a person. And therefore, statistically, are probably safer than a lot of other things. Like eating junk food.
Like you said, you treat guns with respect, because they can be dangerous, much like someone who interacts with powertools on the regular, understands the dangers of powertools, and how they can be used to hurt people, intentionally or otherwise. Just like when creating open source software, or using it, you have to respect it’s licensing, and use it appropriately.
The lack of respect is certainly a problem, but it is drastically upset when republicans, who disproportionately, understand gun safety, and utilize it to their benefit (as they should) don’t want to educate people they don’t find very appealing on how to be safe with them. Which not only leads to potential self inflicted dangers and injuries, but also potentially to others as well. If we want everyone to be safe and respectful of guns, we can’t simply ignore an entire segment of the population, it just doesn’t matter. You can’t justify that.
putting them on different fields is certainly understandable, they are different things after all, but i think it’s important to consider the underlying structures and mechanisms behind something, and seeing how those can be effectively applied elsewhere, if for no other reason than to prevent bias and hypocrisy. As well as ensuring consistent beliefs. Seeing as a non-insignificant portion of gun owning republicans seem to be experiencing this issue right now. I would say that’s fair.
it has fuck all to do with " people they don’t like owning guns." it has fucking everything to do with people unqualified and unsafe to own guns being able to obtain guns - whether through gun show loopholes, straw buyers, no yellow/red flag laws, etc.
fuck outa here with liberals getting antsy bullshit. if you weren’t paying attention, there’s a fucking gun violence epidemic going on, every fucking week there’s another mass shooting.
if that’s liberals getting antsy, maybe you should fucking wake up and realize this bullshit only happens here. bellend.
deleted by creator
Yeah it’s like saying if you support free software, you support companies to not pay taxes or companies putting nicotine in products.
just ask your fellow yarr friends whether there are “open source” gun designs. I’m sure they’ll give you a bit of a rough time for the question, and then immediately point you to the materials required to make illegal guns.
His arguments are so disingenuous, lol.
I support free software, but that doesn’t mean dangerous offensive software shouldn’t be regulated…
A currently viable virus should not be able to distributed freely without any regulation, even when it is licensed under GPL; the fact that viruses can be used for defensive purposes (hacking a hacker’s laptop to get ransomware pass code, or hacking scammers to warn victims etc.) also won’t change that.
It is the same way with lethal poison, just because it can be used in defensive ways, doesn’t mean it should not be controlled.
I watched the video. He says that if you support FOSS you should support guns, but never once advocates for guns to be free.
He says the problem is that politics are tribal, and people are simply in their corner, cheering for their teams - without acknowledging that there are Americans that want different levels of gun control, and there are reasons that people want gun control outside of tribal politics, and there are Republicans/conservatives/gun enthusiasts that have nuanced opinions, and support things like red flag laws and certain gun control policies.
He’s a troll trump supporter, which is all anyone needs to know. If there are 9 regular people at a table and a nazi sits down, and all that.
Man, Distrotube is such a fuckin wacko.
deleted by creator
