To: PapaBear3625
I doubt that the target equipment is these 3D printers, which do not produce very strong “printouts.” Driving CAD/CAM equipment seems to be the goal.
15 posted on
09/21/2016 10:44:59 AM PDT by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: HiTech RedNeck
18 posted on
09/21/2016 10:48:07 AM PDT by
Deek
To: HiTech RedNeck
“I doubt that the target equipment is these 3D printers, which do not produce very strong printouts. Driving CAD/CAM equipment seems to be the goal.”
The morons pushing this stuff don’t know anything except what ‘looks scary’. They could not spell CAD/CAM. The CAD/CAM capability for this has been widely available as long as you or I have been alive.
36 posted on
09/21/2016 11:45:40 AM PDT by
TalonDJ
To: HiTech RedNeck
I doubt that the target equipment is these 3D printers, which do not produce very strong printouts. Driving CAD/CAM equipment seems to be the goal. You can buy polymer AR lowers, so I'm thinking an AR lower from a 3D printer might work OK. If it's not robust, you can make more...
38 posted on
09/21/2016 12:44:00 PM PDT by
PapaBear3625
(Big government is attractive to those who think that THEY will be in control of it.)
To: HiTech RedNeck
I doubt that the target equipment is these 3D printers, which do not produce very strong printouts. Driving CAD/CAM equipment seems to be the goal.
Print a wax lower and pour yourself a brass copy using the lost-wax method. Could probably use aluminum as the casting material but I've always wanted a nice, heavy, brass AR-15.
Machined or cast. Metal or plastic. They can't stop this stuff, it's already out there. I don't know why they even waste their time trying to put it back in the box.
44 posted on
09/21/2016 2:31:36 PM PDT by
Garth Tater
(What's mine is mine.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson