• nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    there is probably no point in fighting this sort of thing, but i wish we would engineer something else instead

    • kitnaht@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Projectiles are a part of human nature. We’ve always thrown spears, rocks, etc – firearms are just an extension of our better understanding of the world. I know of barely anything else that uses explosive charges that is as widely applicable to the general public. Roofing nail guns? But that’s such a niche subject, it’s not something people are really worried about trying to make with 3D printing. Believe me, if I had a better engineering challenge for 3D printing, I’d be suggesting it. But nothing quite hits like containing an explosive charge, and utilizing the energy in a way that performs work without destroying itself.

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        camera gear? experimental musical instruments? i think an idiot could make a list of things that aren’t guns and don’t suck

        • kitnaht@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Did you miss the qualifier “that uses explosive charges”? The engineering challenge is in the explosive part.