Buckeye Firearms Association

Op-Ed: Bloomberg Uses Commencement Speech to Push Gun Control, Rails Against ‘Extremist’ NRA

cbaus — Fri, 24 May 2013 15:00:00 -0400

by Alicia Powe

America's most dangerous Mayor used his commencement address at Kenyon College in Ohio as a political opportunity to slam members of Congress for failing to pass background check legislation.

"Have courage to act on your hopes, don't be paralyzed by your fears," Mayor Bloomberg told the graduating class. "Have the courage to think for yourself and to believe in your ideas. That kind of idea lies in the heart of human invention and progress. And a lot of it lies in the heart of our political problems today."

The mayor then spent the better part of his 15 minute address on gun control, celebrating the occasion by attacking the NRA and highlighting recent gun violence.

"Too many members of Congress did not have the courage to stand up for the increasingly extremist views of the NRA's Washington lobbyist," he said. "Many of them feel that voting for common sense policy would lead to someone challenging them in a primary or hurt their chances to win their party’s nomination to higher office."

Bloomberg told the graduates that since they were freshmen four years ago, more than 40,000 American people have been murdered with guns. He referenced a shooting last year by a 17-year-old who opened fire at an Ohio high school, killing three and injuring others.

"It was national news — for a day or two. Then came mass shootings in Pittsburgh, Miami, Oakland, Tulsa, Seattle, Wilmington, Aurora, Milwaukee, Texas A&M, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Portland, and after each one, those in Washington just shrugged," he said.

Click here to read the entire article at TownHall.com.

"Semper Paratus": A good motto for you, too

cbaus — Fri, 24 May 2013 07:00:00 -0400

by Erin Marshall

The United States Coast Guard motto is "Semper Paratus" which means "Always Ready." The Boy Scout motto is "Be Prepared." What does it mean to be ready or prepared? I am not talking about stockpiling MREs and canned foods. I'm not talking about building a bomb shelter or hoarding ammo. I am talking about the state of being ready or being prepared. I believe there are two main parts to being ready. There is a mental part and a physical part.

Why do you need to be ready and what do you need to be ready for? It seems like the past few years we've been seeing more and more natural disasters. Blizzards, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, landslides, wildfires, and thunderstorms can strike and leave you in a tough spot. If a large storm knocks out power for millions do you have water, food, or warmth for your family while you wait for them to restore power? If you must evacuate due to a storm do you have a plan, a meeting place, somewhere to go, a way to get there? If there is a dangerous situation in your neighborhood and you are told to stay inside can you do so with essentials for your family? We also need to take financial hardships into account. If you lose your income can you feed your family if money runs short? Having some food stored away could be helpful in the wake of the stress of losing a job.

Think about our dependence on technology. Do you have maps if your GPS or your phone aren't working? Do you have cash on hand in case you can't use a card to get gas while trying to evacuate an affected area? Do you have important phone numbers or addresses written down? The world we live in continues to be unpredictable. Over the past year we've seen events both natural and manmade that have caused people to have to evacuate their homes or stay in them for several days. Hurricanes, blizzards, sinkholes, tornadoes, or other dangerous situations can derail your plans. During the hunt for the bombers of the Boston marathon they locked down neighborhoods. There are increasing reasons to be ready and aware and to be able to get out of a dangerous situation or stay in to avoid one.

There are two parts of preparedness. The mental part is to have the knowledge you need and a plan. As humans, we cannot know everything. We cannot know every process, fact, or happening. We can do our best to have a general grasp of concepts and by familiarizing ourselves with helpful information found in books, magazines, web sites, courses, and knowledgeable people. First you should evaluate what you know and what you should know. Maybe you are really good at tracking animals but you have never started a fire without lighter fluid. Figure out what you know and what you need to know. Then decide what to do to increase or hone your knowledge. Take classes, read, and practice.

Choose the most important things that you should know. Take a CPR course, learn some basic first aid, and learn how to deal with a medical emergency. This knowledge could save a life. Learn how to start a fire. If you are for some reason stranded outside could you make a fire for heat, food, and to boil water? There are many techniques and tools to choose from. Learn how to do this and practice. Could you provide water for yourself from the wild? Do you know where to get it and how to make it safe to drink? There are many techniques to purify water as well. Familiarize yourself with them. Could you feed yourself in the outdoors? Are you familiar with any wild edibles? Learn a few that are available in your area. Identify them. Acquainting yourself with a map and compass is another great idea. There are so many things to think about when it comes to having to get out of a dangerous place or staying in. Learn what you need to do to keep you and your loved ones safe in emergency situations.

Next, a plan. It is not realistic to try and plan for each possible event. Plan for the ones most likely to happen to you and your family. If you live on the east coast develop a plan if you have to be evacuated because of a hurricane. If you live in the Midwest make a plan as to what you will do when a tornado is spotted. If you live up north plan how you would live through a snowstorm that knocks out power for an extended period of time. Come up with a plan and discuss it with your loved ones. Make sure everyone knows the plan to limit chaos and confusion if you have to put the plan into action.

The physical part of being ready is having a body able to complete the needed tasks and the equipment to do so. Do your best to be fit so you can travel and handle stress. Take care of yourself so you can be helpful in a bad situation instead of a liability. Have the proper equipment or products you may need, keep them in working order, and know how to use them. Learn to replace water filters, sharpen knives, clean your rifle, use your camp stove. Do you have a bug out bag or a go bag? If your family had to evacuate unexpectedly would you be able to do so in time with the necessary items? Many people keep go bags that have necessary items just in case they have to grab and go. Make a go-bag, first aid kit, stock your pantry, and store water.

Do you have any first aid knowledge? Could you give CPR to someone if you were the only one around? Do you know how to clean and dress a wound? Do you have a first aid kit? If you do, have you opened it and familiarized yourself with what is inside?

Go out and practice basic skills. Take a compass on a hike, identify wild edibles, start a fire from a fire steel. You never know when these skills could save a life. Practice and keep your body familiar with performing these tasks.

If something happens you want to be able to take care of yourself and your loved ones and not have to depend on someone else for rescue. Don't become overwhelmed with these questions. Do something about these questions you don't know how to answer. You can't do everything at once. Start small. Pick an area to improve and do it. Make a plan and a to-do list. Talk to your loved ones to get them on the same page. When unforeseen circumstances are upon you being prepared will keep you from panicking and keep you clear-headed and ready for anything.

Erin Marshall is Executive Editor of Self Reliance Illustrated (www.selfrelianceillustrated.com).

Republished from The Outdoor Wire.

More Turkey Hunters Successful in 2013 Spring Season

cbaus — Thu, 23 May 2013 15:00:00 -0400

COLUMBUS, OH - Ohio's wild turkey hunters checked 18,391 birds during the 2013 spring hunting season, according to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR).

The state total is a 4 percent increase from 2012, when hunters harvested 17,646 birds. The 2013 harvest total is a combination of the youth turkey season and the spring turkey season, April 20-May 19. Ashtabula County again led the state in the number of wild turkeys killed during the four-week season with 766.

The ODNR Division of Wildlife estimates that more than 70,000 people hunted turkeys during the spring wild turkey season. Prior to the start of the spring hunting season, ODNR Division of Wildlife biologists estimated the wild turkey population in Ohio to be 180,000 birds.

Wild turkeys were nearly eliminated in Ohio before being reintroduced in the mid-1950s by the ODNR Division of Wildlife. Ohio's first modern day wild turkey season opened in 1966 in nine counties, and hunters checked 12 birds. The total number of checked turkeys topped 1,000 for the first time in 1984. Spring turkey hunting opened statewide in 2000.

Hunting licenses purchased now are valid throughout the 2013-2014 hunting season. Spring turkey permits are good for spring season only. Those participating in the fall turkey season will need to buy a fall turkey permit. Hunting licenses are no longer printed on weatherproof paper. Protect licenses and permits from the elements by carrying them in a protective pouch or wallet.

ODNR ensures a balance between wise use and protection of our natural resources for the benefit of all. Visit the ODNR website at www.ohiodnr.gov.

Headline: Advocates put police, gun laws to the test

cbaus — Thu, 23 May 2013 07:00:00 -0400

by Chad D. Baus

WHIO-TV (CBS Dayton) is reporting on a lawsuit that has been filed against the City of Riverside after an incident involving the arrest of a man who was open carrying a firearm.

From the article:

Advocates of "open carry" of weapons are testing police on their knowledge of state laws and then posting the results on the internet.

The most recent case involved a Tipp City man, Roy Call, who walked into a Speedway gas station at 3201 Valley Pike in Riverside at 4:30 am on August 28, 2012 with a gun holstered on his hip in full view by anyone in the store. A customer alerted a police officer who happened to be in the store parking lot. When the officer asked Call who he was and what he was doing, Call said he was exercising his Second Amendment rights and initially declined to identify himself. The officer arrested Call and charged him with obstructing official business.

Call eventually produced identification and was released. Later, the charge against him was dropped but Call filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging his rights were violated and demanded $3.6 million.

Larry Moore, a leader of the Buckeye Firearms Association, said Call was within his rights to openly carry a weapon. The store does not have a sign telling customers that guns are not allowed. "Open carry is legal. It's constitutional under our Ohio constitution but a lot of people don't understand that and maybe our law enforcement community is not as well educated about it as they should be," Moore said.

The article goes on to say that the City of Riverside, whose mayor Bill Flaute is a member of the anti-gun group Mayors Against Illegal Guns, is supporting its officers and their handling of the incident.

Police Chief Mark Reiss told the I-Team that officers make decisions in the field every day that have to balance people's rights and public safety. "Given the circumstances that existed that evening, the time of day, the type of establishment and given the fact that convenience stores are often targets for robberies, I think it was reasonable for the officers to make that approach and ask that person for that identity," Reiss said.

Moore said though the officers overreacted and should not have detained Call. "We understand that law enforcement officers have a very difficult and dangerous job on the street," Moore said. Still, Moore added that people have the right to carry their weapons openly without a license. He described the situation as a thin double-sided coin of rights and responsibilities. "A little respect on both sides will go a long way," Moore said.

The suit in federal court was not the only response from Call after the incident. He obtained a copy of the police dash-cam video of the incident through a public records request and posted it on YouTube. He added quotes from sections of Ohio Law on when people must identify themselves to police officers. The internet posting is among many others from around the country showing how local police react to "open carry" situations.

In the July 3, 2012 Cincinnati Police Department Staff Notes, CPD Chief James E. Craig took the opportunity to inform his department on the law regarding open carry of a firearm in Ohio. The chief paid particular attention to the issue at question in this case - when do officers have a right to stop a person who is open carrying?

From the document:

3. LAW DEPARTMENT MEMO ON OPEN CARRY OF A FIREARM IN OHIO

Ohio law permits the open carry of a firearm with few exceptions. Citizens may openly carry firearms in public places unless there is a specific prohibition against carrying a firearm in that place (police station, school safety zone, courthouse, etc.).

Since Cleveland v. State of Ohio, 2010-Ohio-6318, regulation of the "ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition" is only done by state and federal law. Local municipal laws may only regulate the discharge of firearms. Therefore, officers should not charge individuals with violations of the Cincinnati Municipal Code unless the ordinance deals with the discharge of a firearm.

Many people worry when they see someone openly carrying a gun. Officers can expect to receive calls when this happens. But, openly carrying a firearm, by itself, is not illegal. The fact that someone has called 911 or flagged down an officer about seeing someone with a gun in public is probably not enough to support an investigative detention. In such situations, an officer must observe the subject and evaluate the totality of circumstances to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to justify detaining the individual. If the individual is doing nothing else that arouses suspicion, simply wearing a gun will not justify a detention.

It is important to note, open carry by itself also would not support a charge of Disorderly Conduct or Inducing Panic. There must be additional facts to support these offenses. If someone is lawfully carrying a firearm—and doing nothing else— the fact that it causes alarm to others does not support a charge.

Equally important, before you charge someone with a violation of Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 2921.29, Failure to Disclose Personal Information (also referred to as the "Stop and I.D." law), you first must have reasonable suspicion that person has, is, or is about to commit a criminal offense. The "Stop and I.D." law does not apply unless you already have a valid investigative detention of the person – and open carry by itself is not enough. Citizens may ignore your request for information during a consensual encounter, so you may only charge a citizen with a violation of ORC 2921.29 when they are legally detained.

Private businesses or property owners may prohibit all firearms on their property. They may post signs prohibiting firearms or they may order a person to leave for such behavior. Criminal Trespass is the appropriate charge if a person is on private property in violation of such a prohibition.

Direct any questions regarding this issue to Mr. Peter Stackpole, or Mr. Charlie Rubenstein, Law Department, at 352-3334.

At the time this was published, Buckeye Firearms Association expressed that we were pleased to see this accurate analysis of the legality of open carry and issues regarding law enforcement interaction with a person who is openly carrying a firearm. We recommended that police chiefs across the Buckeye state would do well to distribute this among their staff far and wide. Unfortunately, it seems pretty clear the memo wasn't read in Riverside.

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Vice Chairman.

Additional Information:
Man sues Riverside in open carry handgun case

Op-Ed: Unintended Victims - the most vulnerable among us are most harmed by ill-conceived gun control laws

cbaus — Wed, 22 May 2013 15:00:00 -0400

by C.D. Michel

She went home from the gun store to endure a ten day cooling off period before she could take her new gun home. But her estranged husband, the subject of a restraining order, was not cooling off about their pending divorce. That same evening she was raped, beaten nearly to death, and their son was almost killed by the man he once called "Daddy."

Every law has unintended consequences. Many have perverse intended consequences. Nowhere are the perverse results more horrific than with gun control laws, because laws relating the legal acquisition of firearms often harm no one except those who are inclined to obey such legislation.

Oddly, it is the most vulnerable among us who are most harmed by ill-conceived gun control laws. According to criminologists, guns are used to prevent violence about six times more often than commit it. In the absence of efficacy as a crime deterrent – a conclusion reached by the National Academy of Science – we should accept that gun control laws endanger people. And disproportionately so.

Disempowering Women

The old adage goes: "When a 220 pound rapist attacks a 110 pound woman, the rapist wins. When a 200 pound rapist attacks a 110 pound woman with a revolver, the revolver wins."

Despite legal equality, the reality is that typically women are physically unequal to men. On average women are weaker, putting woman at a disadvantage during physical altercations with a man. Many thuggish men rely on this, and it shows in the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics. Women are nearly as likely to be assaulted as men, but are less physically able to resist. Needless to say, women make up nearly all rapes victims. The curve also disfavors younger women (ages 12-24) who are more prone to being violently attacked than older women.

Given these physical dynamics, a woman’s enhanced ability in defending herself becomes important. According to national victimization surveys gathered by the government, the most commonly advised forms of self-defense or physical resistance are largely ineffective and often downright dangerous. To avoid injury and death, women should avoid physical, or even close contact with their attacker.

But using a gun results in the victim being injured about 1/5th as often as when mere physical resistance was used, and 1/4th of as often when trying to get help. So of all means cataloged, using a gun for self-defense resulted in fewer people suffering at the hands of violent attackers.

This is where gun control really works to a woman's detriment.

Click here to read the entire op-ed, which goes on to explain how gun control laws disproportionately harm disadvantaged poor and minorities, as well as the elderly and children.

The Gun Control Lie

cbaus — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:00:00 -0400

by Jeff Knox

Gun control advocates are compulsive liars. They have to be because the truth doesn't support their agenda. Even the names of gun control groups – suggesting "violence policy," "violence prevention," and "gun safety" – are all lies. And the term "gun control" itself is a lie. Virtually everything coming from gun control advocates today is a lie.

I'm not talking about simple distortions or cases of "my statistics are better than your statistics." These are intentional, calculated, bald-faced deceptions, foisted on the American public by ideologically motivated zealots trying to force an agenda of citizen disarmament and government control. That's not to say that everyone who supports gun control is driven by the same ideology, or that there are no honest, passionate, idealistic, true believers among the ranks of gun control advocates. There are some very good, honest, sincere people who promote gun control, but unfortunately these misguided souls are steeped in emotion and inculcated with the never ending lies of the professional gun haters.

Let's dissect some of the lies:

Over 90% (almost 90%, close to 90%) of Americans support "universal background checks," as do various large percentages of gun owners and NRA members.
Anyone with a brain should realize that these statistics were fraudulent based solely on the fact that there is almost nothing that 90% of Americans agree on. But this lie has gotten bigger as time has gone by. More recent polls place support for any gun control at less than 50%, and approval of the Senate's rejection of expanded background checks at almost 40% – yet gun control advocates and politicians continue to declare that 90% of Americans support universal background checks. It is a lie.
Almost 40% of firearms sales occur without a background check.
That lie was a stretch when it was presented in late December, and it was soon declared to be a distortion by the fact check column in the Washington Post – garnering "2 Pinocchios." The bogus statistic was then called out by several other watchdog centers, but Obama and company have continued to preach it as Gospel, right up to this very day. That earned Mr. Obama an extra "Pinocchio" from the Post. When you say something that's not true, even after you know it's not true, that's called a lie.
Gun control is needed to "make our children and our communities safer."
This presumes that guns serve only evil purposes, and that passing laws prevents criminal violence. There has never been a supportable study proving, or even strongly suggesting, that gun control does anything to reduce criminal violence or even suicide. Reviews of existing literature going back to the 1970's have consistently found no positive connection between gun control and crime. On the other hand, there are several peer-reviewed studies which show that guns in private hands are used to stop crimes much more often than they are used to commit crimes, and that the prevalence of guns appears to result in reduced violent crime. Claims of improved safety with gun control are lies.
About 30,000 lives are lost to "gun violence" each year in the US, and; "Thirteen children a day are killed in gun violence."
The 30,000 number is based predominantly on suicides. Suicide is not "gun violence" and gun control doesn't reduce suicide. Guns are much more prevalent in the US than Canada, and are used more frequently in suicides here than there, yet the suicide rate in the U.S. is only slightly higher. Reducing guns doesn't reduce suicide – saying it does is a lie.

The "13 a day" statistic includes "children" up to 24. The peak age range for criminal activity is 16 to 27. That is also a peak age range for suicide. Virtually all of the guns used by these young people are obtained illegally. The 30,000 and 13 a day claims are intentional lies.
There is an epidemic of violent crime and mass murder sweeping the nation.
No there isn't. Crime is at its lowest rate in decades. It has gone down as gun ownership and concealed carry have gone up. Atrocities like Sandy Hook and the Batman movie massacre tend to run in copycat cycles based largely on media play. There is no growing epidemic. Claims otherwise are lies.

Gun control groups are based in lies. They call themselves "violence prevention" and "gun safety" groups even though the only violence prevention and gun safety policies they espouse are restrictions on legal access to firearms. They lie about who they are, what they stand for, and what they want. They use lies to press their agenda, and they lie about what that agenda is and what impact it would have. They are liars through and through, and it is ridiculous that the media and politicians promote and parrot the lies.

The truth is, Gun Control Doesn't.

Permission to reprint or post this article in its entirety is hereby granted provided this credit and link to www.FirearmsCoalition.org is included.

Confiscate! Confiscate! Confiscate!

cbaus — Tue, 21 May 2013 15:00:00 -0400

Hell hath no fury like an anti-gunner who doesn't get her way on gun control.

The Star-Ledger reported last Friday that after a closed-door hearing on gun control in the New Jersey Senate the previous day, three state senators--believed to be Democrats Loretta Weinberg, Sandra Cunningham and Linda Greenstein--were caught on tape, complaining that bills introduced in the Garden State--including one that would require mandatory training to possess a firearm--don't go far enough.

First, a voice is heard complaining, "We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate." Then, the trio apparently focuses its ire on gun control opponents who say that the way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals is to throw the book at them.

Weinberg, willing to have no part of it, says "They want to keep the guns out of the hands of the bad guys, but they don't have any regulations to do it." Cunningham then snipes, "They don't care about the bad guys. All they want to do is have their little guns and do whatever they want with them," and Greenstein chimes in that enforcing existing law is "the line they have developed."

Strong rhetoric that reveals how gun control supporters really feel about their issue is nothing new, of course. Nearly 20 years ago, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that if she had been able to muster the votes, her 1994 "assault weapon" ban would not have merely prohibited various guns from being made with pistol grips, folding stocks and flash suppressors, but would have required a far harsher outcome; as Sen. Feinstein put it, "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in."

However, the fact that gun control supporters still feel that way, after violent crime rates have plummeted as gun controls have been eliminated and gun sales and gun ownership rates have soared, suggests that we're up against ideologically driven adversaries with whom there can be no negotiation--only victory or defeat.

Support Knife Rights and win knives, guns, and more - over $100,000 in prizes!

drieck — Tue, 21 May 2013 07:00:00 -0400

Knives are one of mankind's oldest and most commonly used tools. Elsewhere in the world, many of the knives sold and used daily in the United States are illegal or severely restricted and the restrictions are growing every day.

Even in the U.S., efforts to demonize knives and to place more restrictions on knives are becoming more commonplace. Without a dedicated grassroots organization to protect our knives, they are an easy target for those who seek restrictions on our freedoms.

Knife Rights is a dedicated grassroots organization that works to defend your knife rights.

While our knives are primarily tools, ultimately our right to own and carry these tools is enshrined in the Second Amendment. The fight to protect our knives is the Second Front in Defense of the Second Amendment. The two pillars upon which Knife Rights stands are "Essential Tools - Essential Rights." We cannot retain the former without the latter.

Win knives, guns, and more - over $100,000 in prizes!

Knife Rights has assembled an incredible array of prizes for their "Ultimate Steel Spectacular," with over $100,000 in custom, limited edition and production knives, celebrity signed knives, guns and more. Every prize has been generously donated, so 100% of the proceeds supports Knife Rights' pro-knife legislative initiatives.

Click here to visit our friends at Knife Rights to donate and take your chance at winning some spectacular prizes.

Obama Administration to Sign U.N. Arms Trade Treaty "In the Very Near Future"

cbaus — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:00:00 -0400

As we reported last month, on April 2, the United Nations General Assembly voted 153-4 to pass the Arms Trade Treaty, with the United States voting in favor and several countries abstaining. The vote in the General Assembly pushed the treaty process forward after negotiations twice failed to deliver on the goal of developing the treaty by consensus. The Obama Administration is expected to sign the treaty soon after it is opened for signature on June 3.

According to a May 16 Amnesty International article, a senior US diplomat--Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman--has confirmed the U.S. government will be quick to sign the new treaty. According to the article, Countryman said on Wednesday that the United States would sign the ATT "in the very near future."

If the deeply problematic treaty is signed, the fight will move to the U.S. Senate, where the Obama administration would need to find 67 senators to ratify the treaty.

Of course, anti-gun Amnesty International approves of the treaty and is advocating its signing and ratification. In addition, Amnesty International has gone so far as to claim that the treaty will not affect "domestic gun control regulations."

On the contrary, the ATT does indeed threaten the rights and privacy of American gun owners. Signatories will be encouraged to keep information on the "end users" of arms imported into their territory and supply such information to the exporting country. Exporting nations, nearly all of which have civilian firearm control regimes far harsher than the U.S., will be encouraged to take the firearm control laws of an importing country into account before approving a transfer of arms. And the treaty also encourages states to adopt domestic legislation to facilitate the treaty's onerous requirements.

A majority of senators have already made clear their opposition to ratifying the ATT. On March 23, 53 senators endorsed an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2014, "establish[ing] a deficit neutral fund" to oppose United States entrance into the treaty. Additionally, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), along with 32 cosponsors, has put forth a concurrent resolution expressing the Senate's opposition to the ATT, as it "fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms and the individual right of personal self-defense... and thus risks infringing on freedoms protected by the Second Amendment."

Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified.

3D Printing is Way Scarier Than Plastic Guns

cbaus — Sat, 18 May 2013 07:00:00 -0400

Editor's Note: Today's feature is reproduced with permission from http://www.shellypalmer.com/2013/05/3d-printing-is-way-scarier-than-plas.... We might not agree with Shelly's characterization of printing guns as the "dark side of the technology" but we agree wholeheartedly with his description and assessment on the future of 3D printing.

by Shelly Palmer

Ever the publicity hound, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who obviously has no idea what additive manufacturing actually is, came out big and strong against "stomach-churning" 3D printed plastic guns last week.

"Everyone's seen the movie 'In The Line of Fire,' where one of the great bad guys, [played by] John Malkovich, labored at making a gun out of plastic and wood so it could get through metal detectors and he could assassinate the president..." Senator Schumer went on to say, "But that was only a movie, and just this week, it has become reality. We're facing a situation where anyone -- a felon, a terrorist -- can open a gun factory in their garage and the weapons they make will be undetectable. It's stomach-churning."

This naive, sensationalist rant so misunderstands the issue, I almost don't know where to start. He goes on to inform the public that because these guns are made of plastic, they are undetectable, so he must introduce legislation that will make it illegal to possess an undetectable or an untraceable weapon. This is like putting a "Band-Aid on a heart attack." Sen. Schumer simply doesn't understand what he is dealing with. In fact, most of us don't.

We (all of us) need to understand how different the actual world is from the world most of us think we're living in. Most people believe that tomorrow is going to be substantially identical to today. The sun will rise, you'll have breakfast, go to work, etc. But, those are the things we try to keep constant in our lives ... technological advances don't work that way.

Technology is evolving at an accelerating rate and we really have no chance of keeping up with it - not legally, not legislatively, not socially, not strategically, and not at all. The best we can do is position ourselves to quickly adapt to change - it is the only guaranteed part of our reality.

Back to 3D printing, aka additive manufacturing -- 3D printed plastic handguns are just one example of an unimaginably large number of weapons one could manufacture using a 3D printer. They are also an example (by manufacturing technique only) of the infinite number of constructive, uplifting, world-changing, life-affirming, life-saving items that one can manufacture using the exact same technology.

There are several variations of additive manufacturing technology. The 3D printer that has everyone's attention prints one layer of plastic at a time. The thickness of the each layer determines the printer's resolution. Thinner layers allow for more complicated and intricate output. Resolution of the printer is also a function of the materials being used to create the output. Some materials require thicker layers to print stable objects, other materials can be printed on nano-tech scales. The plastic guns in question are easy to print on inexpensive 3D printers because they are basically simple blocks of plastic with grooves and a few holes in them.

Now that you know what a 3D printer is, you must also understand that 3D printers are not limited to printing in plastic. There are 3D printers that print in wood (a mixture of wood particles and binding agent that dries as wood) ceramic, carbon fiber, bronze, iron, steel, cellulose, human tissue (certain body parts for human transplant are grown using 3D printed frameworks) ... there are limitations to the range of additive manufacturing materials, but the technology is evolving rapidly.

As for guns ... CAD/CAM files (the computer files that 3D printers transform into physical objects one layer at a time) for the .45 caliber M1911 or the 1911A-1 single-action, semi-automatic pistol have been online for years. In fact, you can find all kinds of CAD/CAM files for all kinds of gun parts, bomb parts, bazooka parts, rocket launcher parts and other deadly weapons online. These are computer files, like songs or movies or documents or images, they cannot be protected or digitally rights managed (DRM) any better than the entertainment industry has done with its intellectual property. A file is a file, if someone wants to copy it - it will be copied. You can't tell what the file contains unless you open it and, most importantly, there is no way to ban or prohibit the transfer of files. In this case, the genie is out of the bottle, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, the ship has sailed - the files are out there.

Plastic guns? Seriously. How about guns printed in steel, guns printed in carbon fiber, guns printed in, you name it - there's a 3D printer that can print in the medium. In a world of 3D printers, there is no such thing as gun control - people who are so inclined will print all the guns and ammo they need - untraceable, no serial numbers, no markings about point of origin, no trade marks, nothing!

That's the dark side of this technology. However, the benefits of 3D printing are overwhelmingly positive.

This is a picture of a 3D printed replacement part for a baby stroller. It was printed at a 3D printing bureau called Shapeways. You can think of Shapeways as a Kinkos for 3D printing. Shapeways prints in all kinds of materials, including stainless steel.

One of the employees of Shapeways needed a replacement part for his kid's stroller, so he emailed the manufacturer and they emailed him a CAD/CAM file for the part. He printed two of them in stainless steel - one for the stroller and one to display at the Maker Faire, where I took this picture.

This stainless steel part was annealed, deburred in a tub of ceramic balls and looks exactly like the spare part the manufacturer would have sent him. The difference is profound. The replacement part was printed on demand. The spare part would have to have been manufactured in advance, stored on a shelf, picked, packed and shipped. Rent would have been paid on the real estate the physical spare part occupied and it would have to be kept in stock during the entire useful life of the particular stroller design.

Go have a look at an average manufacturing facility and see how much real estate and other resources are used storing parts that may break sometime in the future. Now multiply this by everything ever made in a factory and you start to see the kind of economic impact 3D printing may have. How about 3D printers in sterile environments (like Hospitals) creating specialized instruments for surgery (robotic or other)? Let your imagination run wild - once you understand additive manufacturing, you will think of thousand of ways to use this technology - you will also realize how it is going to change supply chains and shipping and real estate and materials handling and on and on. 3D printing is changing the world.

Now Sen. Schumer, let's start over. This is not a technology to sensationalize. When high-speed laser printers became economical for people to have at home, they did not start printing counterfeit books - but the nature of printed material changed forever. That is exactly what is going to happen here. Some things will be 3D printed, others will not. Some things will be cheaper or better in 3D printed at home, others will be better 3D printed by companies like Shapeways, and still others will be printed in factories because it is more cost-effective to do so.

From now on, physical goods can easily be produced from the files that were created to design them - which give a whole to meaning to "Real 3D" and gives us a science fact version of Star Trek'sTranstater (sans Transporter and Warp Drive).

Shelly Palmer is Fox 5 New York's On-air Tech Expert (WNYW-TV) and the host of Fox Television's monthly show Shelly Palmer Digital Living.