Printed Guns: Desktop Manufacturing and Firearms

Desktop manufacture promises a potential for homemade weapons of several types, from potentially using 3D printed firearms to entirely novel designs. While policy implications have been covered before, many aspects of the field could be entirely novel relative to current technology. In other words, homemade weapons and gadgets may not be limited to ones we are familiar with today.

For example, a homemade firearm may no longer need be either a "zip gun" or some ad hoc apparatus firing conventional brass cartridges. Existing technologies hint at what may come. Caseless ammunition, for example, means that all one needs is a projectile and propellant. Desktop production of caseless ammo may mean that ammunition becomes even easier to acquire. (Quality, performance, and consistency of ammunition, however, is another matter entirely.) 

One relevant topic to this is stacked ammunition, or a superposed load. This technology is an ancient one, dating back to the first firearms in history. The concept is multiple bullets in the same barrel, each ignited separately. This was done with wheellock, flintlock, and caplock systems, but this concept has been revisited with the Aussie Metal Storm concept. The Aussie concept used several bullets in the same barrel with electric current used to ignite each round. The barrels would be swapped instead of magazines changed. Imagine, in the not too distant future, a Metal Storm-like system that can be printed at home with the bullets built right in the barrel. Such a weapon would likely lack accuracy and power, perhaps compensated for by a high rate of fire. 

However, the Metal Storm system and this system has flaws. For instance, the Metal Storm operates best when using low power, low recoil loads. This means that powerful, armor piercing or rifle-type rounds may suffer, but pistol or shotgun type shells may work. However, the high volume of fire is offset by the extremely low ammo capacity of the system. So, it may be more useful as a blank firing system (essentially a glorified Roman candle), rubber bullet spraying riot control device, or anti-missile point defense for warships. 

As such, designs with multiple smoothbore barrels from history may come back. For example, the pepperbox pistol may return. A related design is the duck-foot pistol, where barrels are angled away from each other (such a weapon was preferred by naval officers during the Age of Sail) due to utility in close range combat. A revolver with preloaded cylinders may also return, perhaps with several bullets in each cylinder. Furthermore, each barrel (or cylinder) can be loaded with separate types of munitions. One may fire subsonic munitions in one barrel, conventional rounds in another, rubber bullets in another, and so on. 

This versatility makes for some interesting potential combinations (and potential mishaps). As the technology to manufacture weapons and munitions at home is refined from crude tools to automated production, I find it logical to think that law enforcement and military units will remain several steps ahead. Criminals, however, will always strive to find new methods and hacks for their own needs. Crime will not vanish from human society, and I am confident that such weapons can be used by both victims and criminals. 

Arsenal of Democracy

    "Personal weapons are what raised mankind out of the mud, and the rifle is the queen of personal weapons." –Jeff Cooper, “The Art of the Rifle”

 

You may recall I covered weapons and policies regarding them several times in this blog. Weapons and laws regarding their use are very relevant topics for a blog regarding supervillainy. This column is an expansion on Dr. Brin’s excellent “Jefferson Rifle” essay. He proposes setting aside one specific class of firearms from registration as a safeguard against tyranny, as a counterpoint to the “slippery slope” view of gun control: the bolt-action rifle. There is significant historical background and reason for this, as a neighbors covering each other with hunting rifles can turn an urban warfare situation into a meatgrinder for conventional and modern armies. Jeff Cooper, the founder of the "Modern Technique" of handgun shooting, preferred a bolt action "scout rifle" as his ideal firearm. This was shown in countless conflicts, but most recently with the Bougainville uprising. A group of natives, angry about a polluting mine, used obsolete weapons against the forces of Papua New Guinea (and later, mercenaries and international forces). 

Regulation and cataloguing of certain types of firearms can eventually reach a point of diminishing returns. As the New Zealand government determined, hunting and sporting weapons are the least regulated of their own categories of firearms (with pistols and then semi-automatics with higher capacity detachable magazines being more regulated). “Hunting and sporting” weapons include primarily manually cycled long-arms, such as bolt action, pump action, and lever action rifles and shotguns. These weapons are hard to conceal, have a low rate of fire compared to a semi-auto, and are slower to reload. This makes them impractical for most criminals or spree killers. A criminal may try to “saw one off,” but by that point, the weapon has probably already been stolen and/or resold on the black market. New Zealand also counts semi-automatics with a fixed magazine in the sporting category, like the Mossberg 10/22, to be added to the sporting category. It is harder to reload such a system than, say, an AR-15 style rifle or civilian AK copy. Firearms such as these may be good additions to the “Jefferson rifle” advocated by Brin. Other things, such as air rifles, slingshots, and crossbows, also belong here.  

I would argue a few other things could be added to this “least regulated/unregulated category,” as even many countries with strict gun control do. These include black powder pistols, from flintlock horse pistols to cap and ball revolvers. The inaccuracy, size, noise, and awkward dimensions of say, a flintlock pistol make it impractical for spree-killings and more practical as a “range toy” or decoration or movie prop. This “historic” category could also include some early semi-automatic pistols (and perhaps modern replicas), such as the Mauser C96 or C93 Borchardt pistols, due to their low ammo capacity, awkwardness reloading, and awkward size compared to modern semi-automatic pistols. 1901 seems to be a good cut-off point, as the first Browning design utilizing a slide was made in 1899, and this date also includes designs from the Boer Wars. 

Lastly, even Russia and Germany allow for individuals to carry less-lethal weapons for defense without much paperwork. This includes things like gas guns shooting rubber bullets, pepper spray, tasers, and so forth. While less lethal weapons can kill, their purpose is to deter or distract an attacker long enough to get away. A robber may use them for intimidation, but they may do the same for with a sawn off shotgun or knife. As far as carry concealed firearms, I will cover that next.

The ability of civilians to legally carry a concealed pistol is interestingly supported by some gun control proponents, as carry concealed laws are essentially a form of gun control (requiring registration, background checks, and so forth). However, most places even the US have background checks, required training, and criminal penalties against the misuse of such a firearm. As Larry Correia states, a carry concealed permit is not a badge. Small amounts of ammo can be carried (hence why compact automatics and revolvers are favored for the task), rather than say, a higher capacity semi-automatic. To prevent issues such as the Trayvon Martin shooting, cameras may be required to be added to the pistol to record each time it is shot outside of a firing range. It is not merely humans I am concerned with. In wilderness areas, there are threats like wild animals, rabid/feral dogs, and the like that may require lethal force. This is one reason the Pacific Northwest in the USA and western Canada tend to be more permissive of firearms, given the wolves and bears that live in the wilderness nearby. Concealed carry owners have stopped a few spree killings, as may mad shooters tend to turn their weapons on themselves after encountering significant resistance. A concealed carry pistol with limited ammo capacity, a “paper trail” registered with police, limitations on use, stringent storage requirements, and perhaps a camera to ensure proper usage makes for a poor weapon for spree killings and crime.  

There is a last category of firearms which may be completely impractical to regulate or legislate, unlike carry concealed models or historical relics/replicas. That is homemade weapons. There are two broad categories of homemade firearms: the first are hobbyists or recreational users. The second one are “black market” gunsmiths. A hobbyist may indeed manufacture historic weapons, as a hobbyist can include a historical re-enactor, collector, or prop-designer. Their weapons are primarily designed for fun, or legitimate profit (such as making exotic prop guns for a science fiction movie). So long as their designs meet the “Jeffersonian” category I’ve described earlier, I would allow them to produce such devices. The advent of desktop manufacture (potentially with new technologies, like caseless ammo) may mean this could become nearly impossible to track via conventional means. If they start providing or selling weapons for the black market with definite intent, then there are already a number of criminal charges suitable for them. 

The current generation of firearms requires bullets to work, otherwise they are merely clubs. A simpler solution than cumbersome regulations could simply be tracing ammunition rather than firearms. If regulations are to be written, focusing on the logistics of the issue seems more prudent than every individual manifestation of the symptoms. My inner civil libertarian wishes to see everyone allowed to do what they want, so long as they don’t hurt anyone. As stated before, the ideas I list primarily come from Russian, German, New Zealand, and (smarter) US policies. 

As an aside, I believe ending the drug war, for-profit prisons, and the current incarnation of the American criminal justice system/prison-industrial complex will lower gun crime rates more than any bill or executive order being dreamed up now. Drug related shootings comprise about 80-85% of firearms homicide. A professor who studied the history of violence in the US interestingly found that social inequity and a lack of social safety nets is the major driver of crimes and depraved spree killings. A policy like Brin’s “Moron Act” to deny killers infamy is another sound idea, depriving bad guys of infamy. The problem is, the status quo has all the momentum of a cyberpunk dystopia, and the other indicators (climate disruption, resource depletion, market manipulations, legal impunity for endemic financial fraud, etc.) mean the emergence of corrupt neofeudalism more than any kind of democratic grand compromises or enlightened decision making.  

Varangian Arms: Sophia

"Mad Science" means never stopping to ask "what's the worst thing that could happen?"
–Schlock Mercenary 
 
A firearm is a confluence of many fields of science and technology: chemistry (for the propellant), metallurgy/materials science (for the substances used in manufacture), mechanics (for moving parts), physics (for the ballistics of the projectile), biomechanics (for the actual ergonomics/handling of it), (arguably) psychology and neuroscience (for how the person handling it actually thinks and treats it), and perhaps one day, electronics (if electronics come to displace many of the old fashioned mechanical systems). I am proud to announce a series of posts for weaponry designed as more novelties for hobbyists, researchers, movie/stage props, and "firing range toys" more than actual tools for combat or defense. In the words of Cave Johnson, "Science isn't about why, it's about why not."

You may have heard of the WikiWeapon project to create an open source, 3D printable firearm, but "open source" development of weapons without conventional patents is not a new concept. I figure the zeitgeist may be right for open source weaponry and concepts. The manufacture of the first weapons pre-dates the modern concept of intellectual properties by thousands of years. Likewise, some designs are simple to manufacture and replicate with basic tools, such that a patent cannot be easily enforced. For instance, the Kalashnikov family of weapons has long since become the de facto open source platform in the developing world, churned out in places like Khyber Pass workshops by the dozens.

So, without further delay, I would introduce you to Varangian Arms: Weapons designed for aesthetics, novelty, and curiosity rather than self defense or combat. This makes them more suitable (as stated before) as stage props, oddities for a gun range, and glorified science projects. From steampunky anachronisms to futuristic designs, Varangian Arms is based on historical, obscure, and interesting designs. If anyone out there actually designs one of the Varangian projects on CAD or actually builds the thing, I have one request: that it be put under an Open Hardware license. The abuse of intellectual property laws by rent-seeking media companies and patent trolls is something I find annoying. A few other common sense things: Obey local ordinances and policies regarding the use of these designs, since these are more science projects. Varangian Arms designs are deliberately unsuitable for criminals and spree killers. Also, avoid infringing on existing patents, since an army of angry lawyers is the last thing any field needs.

The first Varangian Arms design is a cyberpunk inspired firearm called "Sophia," specifically a re-imagining of the revolver. The Greek word for "Wisdom" ironically describes a confluence of bizarre innovations used in revolvers. Sophia would be a suitable sidearm for a science fiction character, perhaps a detective or mad scientist. "Sophia" is inspired heavily by the designs of Emilio Ghisoni, such as the Mateba Model 6 Unica and Chiappa Rhino. It should have most of the following features (if possible).

1) Most importantly, Sophia has the barrel being located at the bottom "6 o'clock" position instead of the "12 o'clock" position common for revolvers. This makes handling recoil easier, although increases the mechanical complexity. Sophia is NOT an auto-revolver, but instead just a weird "conventional" double action revolver (although it should be able to fire single action).

2) The cylinder has a few quirks on its own. It has the ability to chamber multiple calibers, like the Medusa Model 47, due to claws that lock the bullets into place. It is still designed to withstand the pressures of up to a .357 Magnum shell firing, and has 6 chambers.

3) Another feature is the cylinder slides forward when the trigger is compressed, much like the Russian Nagant M1895 gas seal. This feature allows a revolver to be suppressed conventionally, like the KGB did with the Nagant.

4) I am not sure the sliding cylinder feature would allow a conventional swing-out cylinder to be used (like in the bulk of modern designs), but there are some alternative possibilities: One is a cylinder that partially "pops" out (like the Russian OTs-38), a replaceable pre-loaded cylinder (like a Remington 1858), or perhaps even a side-mounted loading gate with spent cartridge ejector (like the original Nagant revolver).

Sophia is a fairly complex system, with the cylinder and unconventional barrel placement being the most complicated (and arguably delicate) parts. I would hope some individuals out there would seek to further the mad science of "bizarro gunsmithing," as advocated by Varangian Arms.

Shadow Banks, Shadow Economies

Like it or not, currency systems have long been part of civilization. The types of currency range from gold and silver coins to fiat paper bills to digital, decentralized algorithms. What a proper currency allows an individual to do is have a common method for acquiring the services of goods and services. Barter systems were out-competed by currency in the richest countries, although barter returns after disasters and in the informal economy.

Even the most basic barter system allows one to engage in economic activity. Thus, price discovery, or the ability to accurately determine the cost of a product or service, is a precondition for a vibrant economy. Instead, high frequency trading, short sales, and interest rate rigging reduce the foundation of capitalism to a rigged carnival game. This process has been ongoing for decades, and is unlikely to change, no matter what legislation gets passed (as loopholes can be added). Legal gray areas are often not a bug, but a feature of new laws.

In thriving economies, ecosystems, political, and agricultural systems, diversity is a sign of life. Thriving economies allow for plenty of competition, coexistence of large and small. Although some entities out-compete others, others can arise to fill the void. Thriving ecosystems, such as a forest or jungle, have more types of species than a lawn or parking lot. Thriving democracies have a variety of parties. While some parties may become the most common mainstream ones, it is not impossible for other groups to get elected. An agricultural situation with several types of crops (and multiple species of each) means that a drought or pest is unlikely to destroy all of them.

Instead, we face monoculture in all areas. Markets are rigged to benefit a few big firms. Ecosystems are disrupted at even the microscopic level. Electoral districts are gerrymandered to benefit parties and incumbents. Factory farming has replaced conventional farming as a source of food production. The problem with monoculture is that catastrophic failures become all the larger, as they are inherently brittle.

As these systems fail, others arise outside of the existing legal and political framework. This "black market," informal economic sector is today called System D, as discussed before. As things are banned by increasingly corrupt governments, System D is poised to grow. Furthermore, System D itself is the future of many "legit" firms. The "shadow banking" system comprises the majority of the world's currency reserves, existing in legal limbo in offshore accounts. Somehow, multiple times the planet's GDP in debt was wasted and frittered into this black hole. As something new arises, Ragnarok style, the darkness will turn into the new system.

The Supervillainy of Christmas

The modern Christmas tradition started as consumer goods became increasingly cheap, so that each year became a boost to the economy. A month before Christmas in the US, the Friday after Thanksgiving became known as "Black Friday" due to stores going from "red" debt to "black" growth. While there are amusing takes on Christmas consumerism, I will talk on other aspects.

Christmas, however, existed long before then. It originated from a number of pagan and heathen Winter Solace-based celebrations around Europe. One was the Roman holiday of Saturnalia, a drunken festival. Another was the Norse Yule. In the Norse celebration, the chief god Odin (appearing as an old man with a beard and red outfit) would fly around hunting monsters in his Wild Hunt. Children left out their stockings with carrots inside for Odin's horse Sleipnir, in hopes the All-Father would leave them gifts.

When Christianity spread, missionaries would adopt local symbols, customs, and traditions to "convert" the locals. Witness Odin becoming Saint Nick. Often times, the best way to assimilate a conquered people is co-opting their own traditions. The current incarnation of Christmas, for instance, has become synonymous with gifts, snow, and Santa Claus around the world. From Spanish colonization of the New World to Christians sending armed missionaries to convert at sword-point in the Dark Ages to countless other instances, Christmas itself has potential for supervillainy. Just imagine a world ruled by Santa, perhaps getting in touch with his Norse roots.

Democratizing Defense

 “If you think of yourselves as helpless and ineffectual, it is certain that you will create a despotic government to be your master. The wise despot, therefore, maintains among his subjects a popular sense that they are helpless and ineffectual.” -Frank Herbert

Most of human history can be recorded as an oligarchy run by a small few. This may have its roots in early settlements, where a warlord of some sort provides protection in exchange for the labor of others. This arrangement is known as feudalism, and isn't a good model for those on the bottom. However, this stagnant structure was prone to catastrophic upheaval, often brought about by a change in technology. Either the warlords use them to solidify their control, someone else out-competes them (often instituting a larger model of "feudalism" in the process of empire-building), or the technology gives the peons more power to demand rights and bargaining conditions (thus forming the basis of citizenship).

The feudal arrangement only lasts as long as people feel secure under the status quo. When the balance of power is tilted in the citizens' favor, this leads to good things. The English peasants skilled with the longbow, for instance, are one reason the Magna Carta was signed into law, starting a tradition/social contract that was only recently revoked.

Warfare has become increasingly complex and specialized over the industrial revolution, meaning that an militia of musket-wielding farmers was no longer in the same league as a professional military. Muskets gave way to repeating rifles and the machine guns and assault rifles. Personal transport expanded from a soldier's own feet to motorized cavalry and mechanized infantry. To compete against a professional army in a conventional war without a similarly equipped army of your own became an increasingly suicidal endeavor. And even if you had an army, you had to constantly spend money to stay ahead. This Red Queen hypothesis meant that even a healthy lead in military tech could be maintained only by increasing amounts of funding.

Of course, plenty of forces lack the technologies, personnel, and gear to fight a conventional war. That is the reason for the rise of guerrilla tactics in brushfire conflicts across the world. The successful guerrilla does not try to kill or drive out the enemy, but instead cause them to overreact and overextend themselves. If a cheap $10 bomb causes $10000 worth of damage, that's a huge "return on investment." The overwhelming complexity of modern infrastructure is likewise at fault, presenting a "target rich environment." Such is the cold calculations of 4th Gen Warfare.

We are "fortunate" enough to witness the hollowing out of governments over recent decades. However, despite what you may think, individuals are not powerless. There are methods of fighting back that involve no violence, no sabotage, and are perfectly legal (for now). The kleptocrats (government or corporate brands are merely the same thing now) want to you be afraid of everything: guns, scientists, terrorists, your own shadows, while the things worth being concerned with are outright ignored (or worse). The methods they use are "security theater," a sort of pantomime routine to try to preemptively subdue unrest.

The battle of the 21st century is to build up  "open source" solutions against centralized incompetence and corruption. There is a philosophical background to such a strategy. If attacked politically/economically/physically (as can happen to anything truly new, potentially threatening, or successful), there should be a deterrent to such an attack. Lawyers are the current weapon of choice, as lawsuits and public relations battles can make/break political careers and stock prices. There is also opportunities for political judo/jujitsu, such as using an enemy's threats to sue against them.

Nukes and "weapons of mass destruction" may serve in a similar role for nation states. During the Cold War, "Mutually Assured Destruction" kept the missiles in their silos and troops on the borders. Likewise, there is the ancient Chinese philosopher, Mo Zi. A sort of forerunner to rationalists and consequentialis, the Mohists focused on defense and making warfare uneconomical. This was one method, they envisioned, for forming fraternity and brotherhood among mankind.

To accomplish this, they spread knowledge of defensive engineering, machines to break sieges (as in counter an enemy's siege engines), and generally make war too costly. The economics of guerrilla warfare likewise scale towards the guerrillas or "insurgency" (whether armed or not). Protestors demanding a dictator stand down can bring out riot cops and soldiers, but the operating costs of the riot control outweigh starving citizens with nothing to lose. What happens from there is up in the air.

There is another topic I would like to touch in, in the wake of recent tragedies in the US and China. The mass shooting in CT and the school stabbing in China presented examples of the pathetic, deranged behavior of spree killers. While laws may prevent these demented individuals from acquiring weapons through legal channels, those so inclined will still find a way. There's a few cases of individuals using legal weapons to stop spree killings. I hold that all have a right to self defense utilizing lethal force if required.

I believe the motivations behind spree killers may often be stress, a perverse desire for attention, and feelings of desperation. A missing social safety net (which has been thoroughly gutted) can prevent individuals from getting the mental health help they need. (Also, crime and weapons-related deaths may be significantly reduced if the Drug War was ended, but that's another topic.) Renaming those pathetic killers as "Idiot #6" or "Moron #32" may also dissuade those seeking infamy.

Regardless of motivations, I am highly skeptical of any political efforts arising from tragedies. Politicians will ride a tsunami of blood to prominence whenever they can, from the PATRIOT Act rammed through Congress after 9/11 to other ill-advised bills. Firearms and weapons bans, even if they pass, are likely to be ignored by such idiots, and the ease of manufacturing firearms will not go away anytime soon. The lethality of firearms also cuts the other way, with even the elderly and disabled able to employ them against a would be mass murderer. Spree killers are a statistical outlier in firearms deaths in the USA, as even drug gangs come in second being shot by the police.

I believe that self defense starts with oneself. Self protection, whether by weapon or martial art, is the last ditch effort if all others fail. Self defense is a variety of techniques one can use to prevent harm to oneself and one's body. Chief among them is common sense: be aware of your surroundings, don't walk into the bad parts of town at night, travel in groups, tell friends where you are going, and so on. Another one is that if you encounter such a situation where you are attacked, flee. Even if you have a weapon. Always assume your enemy has a better weapon and more skill with it, and he's got friends with weapons on the way. This is why "duty to retreat" makes sense tactically as well as legally. A method of self protection, whether a concealed pistol or krav maga, is for when running fails. This is one reason I practice parkour in addition to martial arts and shooting.

Knowledge, in the form of common sense and training, is the basis for a democratizing self defense. The protagonists of "Cryptonomicon" by Neal Stephenson create an online database on waging defensive warfare and the like. In an upcoming novel of mine, a character trains in the fictional discipline of EAST (Evasion-Assault Survival Training), a combination of parkour, krav maga/combatives, and combat shooting for when firearms are available. In the setting, it was developed by a group of Mohist-inspired martial artists and military vets. They post instructions and strategy online, free for all.

While one cannot always defend oneself in the manner one envisions (if ever), having skills and equipment and not using it is better that not having it at all. A smart self-defender will not go into a back alley and call out every shady character for a fist fight. That's behavior more worthy of a Darwin award than anything else. As the interests of the social/economic elite and general public begin to differ, we'll have to start doing more stuff on our own. So best get used to it now.

Return to Space

No supervillain blog would be complete without touching on space travel. While humanity took baby steps to the moon and sent a few robots across the Solar System, the end of the Cold War saw a decline in government-funded interest in space flight in favor of financial speculation. Despite the international economic corruption tumor, some billionaires and firms have good plans.

Elon Musk, for instance, wants to build a city on Mars. Advancement of 3D printing and similar technologies means that on-site manufacturing (e.g. sending robots to build a colony before people show up) are one thing that's improved since humanity's last trip into the void. Others have also announced a return to the moon. Some of the people involved were involved in the Apollo program, so they have experienced individuals there.

Whether these efforts will get off the ground, or be dragged down by a society increasingly wracked with collapsing infrastructure and poverty, remains to be seen. I wish them luck. We've spent far too long wasting our non-renewable resources on suburban sprawl and financial fraud. Let's get back up there. Our species depends on it. Besides, what evil overlord can resist a lunar death ray?