cross-posted from: https://ttrpg.network/post/4222671

Want a 3D printer in New York? Get ready for fingerprinting and a 15 day wait

Assembly Bill A8132 has been assigned a “Same As” bill in the Senate: S8586 [NYSenate.gov] [A8132 - 2023]

I don’t own a gun, I never have and I don’t plan to at any time in the future. But if these pass in the NYS Senate and Congress, it would be required to submit fingerprints for a background check then wait 15 days, before you could own any “COMPUTER OR COMPUTER-DRIVEN MACHINE OR DEVICE CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECT FROM A DIGITAL MODEL.”

This isn’t even going to stop any crimes from happening, for pity sakes regular guns end up in criminal charges all the time, regardless of background check laws. How about some real change and effective measures, rather then virtue-signaling and theater illusion for a constituency?

  • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    As usual, I have to wonder first if anyone actually put any thought into this, and further if anyone thought how the fuck they’re going to enforce it. This is just manufacturing one step removed… Anyone willing to make a gun with a 3D printer is certainly capable and willing of building their own 3D printer as well.

    Or buying/building a milling machine. Or a lathe. Or a drill, a hacksaw, and some files.

    Down this road lies madness.

    • GooseFinger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      If they cared more about making our society safer, they’d pay teachers more, build more homes, quintuple minimum wage, make education cheaper or free, actually tax the rich, reign in corpos, reform the police, abolish for profit prisons, make healthcare affordable and accessible, remove money from politics, just to start.

      But nah, virtue signaling is way easier and is clearly enough to get them re elected, so let’s ban 3D printers baby!

      • SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Damn it’s good to see this list. I’ve been preaching it for years now. Gun control is virtue signaling bullshit, it will not solve the problem because guns aren’t the issue. Our society is deeply troubled and we need to fix the why’s, and not the what tool was used.

        I’d wager UBI and single payer safety nets alone would have violence over all drop by 50+%

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          *Nods from other side of Pacific bathtub*

          I know one European country with a lot of guns that does not have problems with gun violence. Although gun violence had spiked in last few years due to uhh… external actors. Obviously I’m talking about Ukraine.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yep, and what do these euro counter parts have? Safety nets and logical shit that helps their people when they’re down on their luck. Here in the USA everyone is to busy fighting over the scraps that are thrown our way.

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        build more homes, quintuple minimum wage, make education cheaper or free, actually tax the rich, reign in corpos, reform the police, abolish for profit prisons, make healthcare affordable and accessible, remove money from politics, just to start.

        Even rightwingers here demand more: build homes for everyone, tenfold minimum wage, more funding for universal education, more funding for UHC.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Don’t tempt them. New York cops will already pull over cars crossing the bridges and have been known to fine and/or arrest people for bringing in cigarettes bought out of state.

        God forbid this passes and then they track you leaving the Microcenter in Paterson, NJ. They’ll probably call in a SWAT team and a helicopter.

        • seathru@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Or buying/building a milling machine. Or a lathe. Or a drill, a hacksaw, and some files.

          15 day waiting periods for Home Depot trips. You better plan those plumbing projects in advance.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          Wait it is illegal to bring cigarettes across state lines? Is that not a commerce clause issue?

          • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            Tobacco is taxed at the state level. NY©‘s tax is very high. Neighboring states’ taxes are lower. Or have been, historically. Thus NY gets unreasonably angry about this if you pay the cig tax to a different state.

            Mostly it’s just a pretense to pull people over and harass them over nothing. But if they can’t get you for anything else they’ve been documented to book individuals for possessing packs of smokes with the wrong tax stamp on them. Got two packs on you? Well, obviously that’s “intent to resell!” Book 'em, boys.

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I think they meant “cross state lines” to buy a 3d printer. That’s a felony for guns but idk what the charge for “possessing an unlicensed 3d printer” would be lol.

      • GooseFinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s a myth - It’s a felony offense for gun stores to sell guns to non residents of the state they’re in.

        • imakeninjascry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s definitely not a myth. I sold guns for Walmart for five years until mid 2022. The only people I couldn’t sell guns to were minors under 21 and residents of California, New York, and Illinois. We accepted IDs from every other state. And sometimes the background check was so quick they were even able to take it home same day.

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Or buying/building a milling machine. Or a lathe. Or a drill, a hacksaw, and some files.

      Can you imagine world where working class can’t own means of production? But you don’t need to, it already exists.

  • Pohl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    3d printed plastic guns are real in a sense but not in any practical way. I am not sure why so many people think this is a concern. If I have a box of ammo, I can probably go into my shop and come up with a way to fire it. I doubt I would use my 3d printer in that project though. There are better ways to makeshift a weapon.

    • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      While I majorly disagree with this legislation, its not about plastic guns.

      They only regulate the part of a gun that has the serial number, not the other parts. For “repairability.” Guess what that one part is easily made of? Yup, plastic.

      People are printing the easy part, and buying all the rest in metal. Proper control would be to regulate the sale of commercially manufactured replacement parts, not a tool.

      • B0rax@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Maybe start regulating normal guns more first… 3D printed guns are not a problem anywhere in the world.

        • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Well, yes, but I was specifically going down the replacement part road because the intent of the legislation is to limit ghost guns (unregistered firearms), not guns overall. IMO it’s just a play to say “we are cracking down on guns!” without actually doing it. And since it only hurts a niche audience, who cares, right?

      • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        So the point isn’t 3d printers making guns, it’s 3d printers enabling people to escape registration of guns, especially for unregulated sale of guns.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The lower receiver of an AR15 is legally considered the firearm. You can buy all other parts straight up, but you have to go through federal background checks on that one. Even with private sales, at least the first buyer would have to have gone through the process.

      On its own, it’s just a chunk of plastic or metal. It’s not pressure bearing and isn’t even all that mechanically stressed in typical use. Therefore, you can print that one part off, buy all other parts, bypass all checks, and have a completely unregistered AR15. It’s not especially difficult to do, though it does involve a few specialized tools.

      In the UK, regulation tends to be around pressure bearing parts, and this is a lot more sensible.

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        To drive the point home a little further. No one, at least in this context, is making an all plastic gun with a 3D printer. It simply doesn’t happen. Even the memeworthy and incredibly janky Harlot 22LR uses steel barrel liners. It is also difficult (read: impossible) to have strong enough springs to fire a primer without using steel. Plus cartridges and bullets themselves are famously made out of… metals.

        The notion of a 3D printed plastic gun sailing through a metal detector are pure fantasy. Completely fictional. Bogus, bunk, absolute bullshit.

        But legislators believe it, because politicians are not actually experts in anything except playing politics. Which in general does not equip you with knowledge or experience from the real world.

  • aelwero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    “COMPUTER OR COMPUTER-DRIVEN MACHINE OR DEVICE CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECT FROM A DIGITAL MODEL.”

    I can print an origami pattern on my inkjet using my cell phone…

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    This bill would require literally every single commercial machinist in the state to also register as they qualify under such broad wording. That’s fucking retarded and every single manufacturing company left (what few there may be) will fight this tooth and nail.

  • sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    lol

    And just imagine, you can make a shitty gun for 20 bucks using parts from the local hardware store.

      • RedEye FlightControl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        No he wasn’t. MacGyver didn’t like guns. This trope actually carried through to SG1.

        Luckily, MacGyver did like explosives.

        Regardless, this bill is stupid no matter how you look at it. Speaking as a 3d printer related business in NY. I will fight this lunacy.

      • Calcium5332@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Neither will 99% of 3D printed guns. Most 3D printed guns use metal parts, and ammo will likely be detected as well. Only single shot, entirely 3D printed guns with plastic ammo have any chance.

        • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          99% of 3D printed guns

          100% of 3D printed guns.

          Barrels and chambers are quite difficult to 3D print. But springs strong enough to set off primers, cartridge casings, and bullets must be made of metal. You can get clever with all of the above, but a plastic bullet would be laughably ineffective and even if you’re going to go with electrical rather than mechanical ignition to eliminate the springs you’re going to need metal batteries, metal wires, metal switches…

          It is functionally impossible to make an all-plastic firearm. You’d be better off making a Jörg Sprave style crossbow or something.

            • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Except for the firing pins. And the ammo. So it’s likely that they actually can’t, unless the detectors at the facility in question are so detuned that they’d also allow through razors and small pocketknives.

              Printed bullets would be like firing frozen paintballs at people. Injurious, yes. Deadly, most likely not.

  • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    ITT: Many people make the incorrect assumption that, aside from some specific state- and city-level ordinances, there is such a thing as “firearm registration” in the US.

    This is a myth largely promulgated by TV shows about cops. There is no nationwide firearms registry in the United States.

    Regulation != Registration.

    What does happen is that when a firearm is legally purchased from a dealer (FFL), the buyer must submit to and pass a federal background check. Records of these are not retained centrally, but each FFL dealer must maintain their own records of their own sales, indefinitely, as long as they remain in business. Ready to be reviewed at any time by the cops or ATF. Failure to do so can land the dealer in very deep shit. Centralized collection of firearm transaction records is prohibited by federal law, under the assumption that such a central record would be used to target, harass, and confiscate arms from their owners whenever the government felt like it (which is probably about a 50/50 mix of paranoia and accurate prediction).

    Some states also require their own more strict background checks. States also vary in how strict or lax they are in requiring background checks for transfers between private individuals, and not a dealer. There is no federal requirement for private sellers to conduct a background check to transfer ownership of a firearm except across state lines, but many states themselves do have such a requirement. Further, transfers and sales of handguns often have stricter state level requirements vs. long guns (rifles and shotguns).

    3D printing a firearm (receiver) does not allow any individual to “evade” any type of mythical “registration,” which by and large does not exist – as above. It does, however, allow a suitably motivated individual who could not pass a federal or state background check to get their hands on a presumably functional firearm.

    It is perfectly legal for a person who is not prohibited from possessing a firearm to begin with to manufacture their own firearm, via 3D printer or otherwise, on a federal level. Some states have already enacted restrictions on this, however.

    It is already illegal for a person prohibited from possessing a firearm to A) manufacture a firearm, B) possess any firearm (duh), or C) possess ammunition for any firearm, whether they are found to have a firearm to put it in or not.

    It is already illegal for a person to manufacture firearm(s) for the purposes of selling, trading, giving away, or otherwise putting into the possession of others, if they are not a federally licensed firearms manufacturer.

    It is already illegal to provide access to a firearm to a person prohibited.

    It is already illegal to use any manufacturing method (even a 3D printer) to produce a firearm or component that is otherwise illegal or restricted NFA item such as a machine gun, suppressor, short barreled rifle, etc., etc.

  • Andy@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think the reason is because legislators are looking for gun restrictions that can pass, and the combination of legislative obstruction and the Supreme Courts recent ruling against pretty much any gun law written after 1860 or something has basically made it impossible to regulate the purchase of actual guns. So now they’re looking for whatever law they can pass regardless of whether it makes sense.

    It’s fucked up.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Illinois has the foid system. You get a card that basically says that you’re legally allowed to own a gun. You need this card to buy ammunition and guns and to possess a gun. It’s not a bad system, problem is that Indiana and Wisconsin are so close to Chicago.

      • GooseFinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Just to clarify, the FOID approval process is effectively performed in every state for any gun purchase. It’s not like the FOID background check carries more scrutiny or anything. If a Texan resident can buy guns in Texas, they could get a FOID card if they lived in Illinois.

        And it’s federally illegal to sell guns to non-residents of the state the sale is made in, so Chicago residents can’t buy guns in neighboring states. Indiana and Wisconsin residents could bring guns into Chicago, but that alone is highly illegal too.

        • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Correct, but you cannot buy ammo without a foid, which stops people from using an illegal gun.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        It is federally illegal to buy a handgun outside your home state, and many states include rifles in this. They can be purchased technically, but they have to be shipped to an FFL dealer in your state for the NICs check. Even in states that will sell rifles to out of state IDs, the rifle still has to be legal in their home state and they have to follow all the laws of that state. IL specifically, if you go into any FFL in the country, you’ll be told “we’re sorry, can’t help you” because of their laws.

        I know the news pretends that none of that is true, but it is. Not likely people will know that though unless they have either tried it as a customer or worked in an FFL, I’m just informing not talking shit (sometimes intent gets lost through text, just clarifying.)

      • hglman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Sounds like chicago needs to do something about how close those other states are.

    • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      basically made it impossible to regulate the purchase of actual guns.

      Currently, the purchase of actual guns is still federally regulated, so it seems possible. What they keep striking down is meaningless feature bans and the states that want to lock carrying only to the rich and famous, which imo is also fucked up.

      • Andy@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        What I’m talking about specifically is NY v. Bruen. The supreme Court ruled that states can’t pass gun restrictions that aren’t reflective of historical tradition.

        As you can imagine, that makes drafting gun restrictions that are permitted under this reading of the construction nearly impossible.

        This kind of ban on 3d printers is an terrible but not unsurprising consequence of this really batshit ruling.

        https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-ruling-creates-turmoil-over-gun-laws-in-lower-courts

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Ehhhh tbh the pointless feature bans and denial of the ability to carry through “will only issue if you’re rich” permits ala CA and NY were in turn responsible for Bruen even being a case. The anti self defense crowd played with fire and got burned, and they still continue attempting the same thing. If there was proposed legislation that would:

          A) Actually make a meaningful impact,

          AND

          B) Not be easily (or by design) abused to deny rights to as many people as humanly possible because “gun bad,”

          AND

          C) Come from a place of understanding about guns rather than always sounding like Kevin De Leon, or Rep. Diana DeGette who believes magazines aren’t reloadable. If anyone proposing legislation had any credibility beyond “guns scary,” it’d probably be easier to convince those who do have guns and some knowledge about how they function.

          AND

          D) Don’t just go after “assault weapons” which are responsible for 500/60,000 gun deaths/yr. We’re smart enough to do the math on it. We don’t believe “all we want to do is ban the scary black rifles, the wooden ones that function identically are fine, because they’re slightly less comfortable to hold and have a harder time taking flashlights.”

          Unfortunately the literal opposite of that is happening, just pointless feature bans and “only the rich can carry” taxes or extra approval because “the poor don’t need to protect themselves as much as the rich.” (Which we can see by the 1% being the largest economic section victimized in violent crimes, definitely not the poor. /s)

  • gullible@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Don’t 3d printed guns crack after like 2 shots? Next they’re going to require ID to buy pipe and nails in order to guard everyone from modern improvised muskets.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      depends on the design, as well as the capability of the printer.

      DMLS is capable of producing basically anything you can think of in metal. FDM or resin, or whatever… you’re printing the frame.

      the DEFCAD design, specifically, you’re printing the AR lower receiver- which for some stupid reasons is designated as the “firearm” as far as laws and regulations go. So you can print the lower and buy the rest in cash as parts.that said, the only real function the lower serves in an AR is holding the magazine in place, so it’s not really subjected to anything that’s going to break it.

      Incidentally, $40 at a big box store and a lot of TLC with a dremmel can produce a passable SMG. in fact… many of the ww2 era machine guns were designed to be made in factories that used to turn out plumbing parts. (because this reduced the amount of time and materials spent on retooling the production lines.)

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Fully 3d printed ones, yes. But you can print all the plastic parts of a Glock, buy a kit of parts that don’t require any verification at all and assemble a fully working one that is about as good as a genuine glock.
      Or go a bit further with the FGC-9 or countless other similar things. The fewest actual gun parts used in successful firearms are in .22lr pepperboxes which use only barrel liners.

      Here in Finland, I couldn’t do any of that, because barrels, liners, trigger assemblies, magazines, ammo, they all require a background check and having a license to own a firearm. As would those printed Glock upper/lower parts, if I had access to the kits making them illegal to own.
      Instead of, you know, the 3d printer?

    • Confetti Camouflage@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      If it’s only 3d printed plastic, yes. Most “3d printed guns” are like Glocks. Metal for the important bits, plastic for everything else.

    • weeeeum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Even in one shot the 3d printed gun will explode. The cartridge is just a container for the gun powder, not the explosion. Real guns have a chamber that contains this explosive pressure.

      3d printed guns are nowhere near strong enough to contain this pressure and when the gun fires the bullet is flung harmlessly in some random direction. Since there is almost no energy imparted into the bullet it doesn’t have any power or lethality, heck the shrapnel from the casing is literally more deadly for the shooter than any bullet towards the shootee.

      Heck a 3d printed gun can even fire a bullet at all. Plastic is not rigid enough to detonate the primer and set the round off. You can literally fry bullets in a cheap metal pot and when they explode they won’t even go through the pot.

      The only way you could make a 3d printed gun work is by incorporating tons of other metal parts, at which point it isn’t a “3d printed gun”. Search up pipe shotguns. They can be made with a handful parts from home Depot and only require 1 or 2 tools at home (only 1 if you get them cut at home Depot). Far more effective and actually deadly, even used by guerilla forces against imperial Japan in the Philippines.

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      What people are doing with “3D printed” guns is printing the receiver or frame components that are otherwise serial numbered and federally regulated, and populating those with metal barrels, slides, upper receivers, trigger assemblies, pins, springs, etc., as appropriate from the genuine item. These can be quite functional and durable, because the majority of the gun is, in fact, still made from “real” gun parts.

      Clever individuals have gotten quite far in managing to print most of the required components, but several critical parts simply can’t be made with consumer level printing technology. At present it is impossible to fully print a gun out of plastic and actually have it work.

      The way federal law works, the ATF has identified and decided what constitutes the minimum identifiable major “gun part” of a given model of firearm, which is the part that must bear the serial number and is the component that cannot be sold without a background check through an FFL. For the Armalite platform, for instance, it is the lower receiver which is a component that can be 3D printed. The upper receiver is not a regulated part. For many polymer framed pistols like Glocks, the grip housing and frame is the FFL component. These can typically be 3D printed as well. But some guns, like the PTR/HK 91 and Sig P250 it’s not the frame, it’s the trigger assembly that’s the FFL item. You can’t effectively 3D print one of those – although you could probably manufacture one with a milling machine pretty easily.

        • RandomStickman@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          The ones used in Myanmar are variants of the FGC-9 which indeed contain metal parts.

          Currently the most common method of creating 3D printed guns are buying parts kit and printing the reciver (housing) for it. But the FGC-9 is specifically designed to be able to be made without any controlled parts, including the barrel. Any metal parts used can be bought in a hardware store.

  • rxbudian@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    There are probably makerspaces in NY where people can drop in and print stuff. No waiting or fingerprinting there, even when you want to print gun parts

  • evidences@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    “Any 3d printer capable of printing a gun” seems pretty broad but wouldn’t 3d print kits get around this easily. Like if I buy a prusa MK4 it can print gun parts out of the box but a pile of prusa mk4 parts ain’t printing shit.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    From a digital model

    Get ready for analog printing, boys.

    Also, if I move to New York, what then? I have to keep it in PA for two weeks?