I'm not going to address the issue of gun control directly, but I think an interesting point that will be relevant in the near future is the ability to easily build your own guns with relatively cheap and accessible technology. As i'm sure many have seen, 3d printing has already proven to be a capable technology with the potential to produce polymer lower receivers or even a fully functioning firearm. As the lower receiver is the only part of a gun that is registered/considered a weapon, current access to the rest of what you need to build a fully functional rifle is as easy as a few clicks on the internet. It would even make building a fully automatic gun much easier than it currently is, which isn't extremely difficult now, but requires some machining or metal work(unless you consider the rubber band or string trick to produce a reliable fully automatic weapon too). The strength and quality of the polymers used in 3d printing is only going to improve, as well as the resolution of the 3d printer, which is already quite high. Laser sintering has even proven capable to build a complete, metal firearm, but the cost and availability for that technology will take a bit longer, I believe, to be accessible to the general public. It has also proven capable to subvert the high capacity magazine bans in states where they are banned, which isn't really as much of a new issue as driving across state lines is all that is necessary currently. My question is, does this mean that if we choose to regulate these weapons, do we not also have to regulate the machinery that has the capability to produce a highly functional and reliable weapon as well? Obviously the machinery now is not regulated, but it takes a certain degree of skill to operate the machinery to a degree which would allow someone to build a functioning firearm, which is probably a good enough barrier for most people who would want to build a firearm for nefarious purposes. When all it takes is a $300 printer and a quick download of a 3d model for a functional and reliable lower receiver though, does that not make gun regulation pointless? Would we need to expand our definition of what is a gun to prevent the purchase of the other components necessary to build the weapon, or is that irrelevant as 3d printing can produce a complete weapon, albeit one that's currently not extremely reliable(this could easily change though as the technology improves). I'm interested in others thoughts, especially as 3d printing is becoming more and more common as well as cheaper. Also just for reference here are some videos about 3d printed guns. Liberator Pistol This video talks about how the gov't wants to regulate the actual file instead, which we all know how hard that will be to find with p2p distribution. Printing of an AR15 lower Printed metal firearm using laser sintering