On Tuesday, December 3rd the Washington Post posted an article entitled "The House is really worried about 3d printed guns. So its voted to ban them." It starts off with a simple question that sums up the article pretty well, "Should Congress ban plastic guns?". I think printing guns has no true harm as long as they don't actually work. However, it is a scary thought that plastic guns could be brought into schools and other places a gun doesn't belong. I definitely agree with the ban on plastic guns as long as they can be used as actual weapons. I don't see anything wrong with a "toy" or "model" gun, but the idea of a plastic gun just seems unnecessary to me. Although the idea of printing exact models of Star Trek phasers and Batman gadgets would be pretty cool.
I totally agree with Dylan Reeves in his article "Should Congress ban plastic guns?”. The plastic guns are in a fast progress, they are becoming more and more powerful. The problem is that the plastic materiel is undetectable by the metal detectors and x ray machines which mean these types of firearms could easily be carried inside of hospitals, airports, school … that will create problems. I accept that kids can play with the plastics guns toys but human are going so far that they arrived to make it a deadly weapon. So I agree with the ban of plastic guns and control the 3D printers.
ReplyDeleteI don't really like the idea of plastic guns for the obvious, ease of concealment concerns, but I also think there's another aspect to the ban on 3-D printed guns. I think there is a little more to the 3-D gun argument than just our second amendment rights; it seems like there might be the potential for the argument to be made that we are having our privacy infringed upon by the government telling us what we can and can't do in the privacy of our homes. I could definitely see how some could be a little upset at the fact that our government is telling us we can print something, regardless of what it may be.
ReplyDelete