[syops]

It’s easy to grow marijuana, for instance. I can do it. I can not manufacture a gun easily. In countries where legal gun ownership is hard to obtain they have much lower rates of crimes involving guns while at the same time having ready access to illegal drugs. Your counterpoint is not apt.

[theodric]

Not only can you make a gun easily, 3d printed or not, you can even bootstrap (I don't just mean handload) ammo now. Criminals will hella have hella guns and the cat is too far from the bag to put it back. Even individual manufacture isn't a real hindrance as long as your network contains someone who can make a gun.

The old Improvised Munitions handbook has instructions for how to make a "zip gun" with little more than pipe and a nail. Guns are easy. Safe, reliable, long-lasting guns require a bit more work.

[kbelder]

Guns are not hard to make yourself, now, if you have a little competence with tools. In ten-twenty years, you'll be able to print off as many as you want with absolutely no technical skill.

Stopping people from killing others with guns is a cultural and social issue. Trying to fix it by blocking access to guns is an ever-more losing strategy.

[syops]

There are lots of examples of countries whose ban on guns work and whose ban on drugs doesn’t work. Therefore it is a bad argument that guns can’t effectively be banned since our ban on drugs hasn’t worked.

[rascul]

> I can not manufacture a gun easily.

Easy enough if you have access to the necessary power tools (usually a drill press or a router). There are a number of companies creating unfinished lower receivers and providing kits for one to finish it themselves. It's also legal in the US.

https://www.5dtactical.com/80-lowers-s/101.htm

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/are-%E2%80%9C80%E2%80%9D-or-...

[carmen_sandiego]

It's as easy to smuggle guns into the US as it is to smuggle in drugs that aren't grown there. It's also pretty easy to manufacture them. I suspect the latter is just your perception from never having tried.

[syops]

I don’t know much about gun smuggling. Do you have sources or experience in this area to know that gun smuggling is as easy as drug smuggling? My impression, not based on experience, is that gun smuggling can’t occur at near the level that drug smuggling does. For one it’s far easier to track the manufacturing of guns as the location of factories is well known and public knowledge.

Is it your contention that any old fool like myself can produce useful guns (ones that don’t explode when I shoot it) and ammunition? Does this ability scale the same way that growing marijuana does?

[carmen_sandiego]

You might know where the factories are, but what does that matter if manufacturing guns isn't illegal in those places? At present, guns are smuggled _out_ of the US quite effectively [1]

As for whether it's easy to produce a working gun: well, generally you can purchase the component parts of a gun on some continuum between raw materials and final product. The exact point on the continuum that you make your purchase depending on your risk level and how restrictive gun component laws are where you live. After that it's a case of following schematics and a little machining skill.

However, it seems unlikely that individual criminals would manufacture their own guns, in the same way that drug users don't typically manufacture their own drugs. It would require investment into machinery and minor expertise, but the barrier to entry is low enough that suppliers shouldn't have much problem stepping in to meet demand. I would assume that the US has the highest prevalence of gunsmithing expertise of almost any nation at this point. Those skills won't vanish overnight.

If you're really interested in making a home made gun, without involving a supplier, there are already ways to do that [2]. It seems unlikely a ban on 3D printing or other machinery and raw materials would work out.

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-flow-of-guns-from-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Distributed

[syops]

I’m aware of 3D printing. At this time it is not ubiquitous or cheap enough for mass consumption. When it becomes so then the comparison to the drug trade will become more apt.

There are lots of examples of countries with effective illegal drug operations and effective gun control. Therefore the belief that banning guns will necessarily be as effective as banning drugs is provably false. As such it’s a poor argument. There are lots of valid reasons to believe that banning guns in the U.S. won’t work.

[r3trohack3r]

Your first half is somewhat valid (sans DIY culture). A portion of drug consumption is domestically produced. But you’re ignoring the international and inter-state drug trades.

I.E. Columbia accounts for 43%[1] of the global coca supply. Taking your argument at face value, Colombians would consume 43% of the worlds coca supply having no impact on your ability to purchase cocaine in, say, Miami.

Comparing other countries success on one form of prohibition doesn’t give much insight. Compare it to America’s success on current and historical prohibition. American’s don’t honor prohibition.

[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/13/colombia-calls-a-draw-i...

[syops]

Comparing across generations is not valid as times and perceptions and social values change. What didn’t work in the past may work in the future.

I’m not ignoring the nature of the drug trade. I’m claiming that the drug trade and drug smuggling are not apt comparisons to illegal gun manufacturing and smuggling. I don’t have any other claims. The argument that making guns illegal can’t work because it didn’t work for drugs is a dumb one.

[r3trohack3r]

I’m asserting they are apt comparisons.

> Comparing across generations is not valid as times and perceptions and social values change.

No need to look across generations. There are plenty of prohibitions to choose from today. Like automatic rifles and opium.

> I’m claiming that the drug trade and drug smuggling are not apt comparisons the illegal gun manufacturing and smuggling.

I’m going to hazard a guess that you don’t come from a gun culture.

Otherwise law abiding citizens smoke weed. Likewise they source fully automatic mods for their rifles and hoard bump stocks.

And these are just hobbyists.

Add in the game theory incentives of organized crime and their already established distribution channels (the same distribution channels they’re using to move drugs). I don’t understand how it isn’t close to apples-apples.

[syops]

So let me try another explanation for why I think the comparison with the drug trade is not valid. We have many examples of European countries where guns are effectively illegal to own in the sense of being hard to legally obtain. These same countries have well developed illegal drug operations. These same countries have much lower use of guns in crime. These countries are counterexamples to the argument:

Making guns illegal won’t be effective because making drugs illegal hasn’t been effective.

As such this argument is not valid. A person who wants to intelligently argue why banning gun ownership in the U.S. won’t work must use a different argument.

All criminal laws have as their aim to make prohibitions of certain behaviors. All fail at 100% efficiency but most do well in terms of regulating acceptable behavior over time. The prohibition on slavery was quite effective in the U.S. If you want to argue that banning guns in the U.S. won’t work go ahead and argue that. Just don’t use the foolish argument that since banning drugs didn’t work in the U.S. then banning guns won’t work. It is sloppy thinking.

I can think of a lot of reasons why banning guns in the U.S. won’t work. You alluded to one of the reasons why I think this. None of my arguments on why this won’t be effective in the U.S. have anything to do with the ineffectiveness of the war on drugs.

[FpUser]

>"In countries where legal gun ownership is hard to obtain they have much lower rates of crimes involving guns"

I suggest reading a bit about countries like Mexico where the reality is totally opposite to what you claim.

[syops]

Yes. I ought to have specified that I was referring to countries with the same level of socio-economic development. I intended to compare like to like so to speak.