> A sufficiently large quantitative change is a qualitative change
True, but I submit this is not a sufficiently large quantitative change.
> Also the debate is ultimately not about this one thing today, but about a future in which one can download and print an open-source AK-47-equivalent with only slightly more difficulty than printing a picture.
I humbly suggest there is more to it than that, and will still be more to it than that in a future in which 3D printers can print composite materials strong enough to survive the extreme pressures of a 7.62x39mm cartridge firing a bullet down a long rifled barrel. Even if that were possible, the result of the AK-47 print job would be a whole mess of parts, including tiny pins, springs, etc. With the exception of the lower receiver, all of these parts can be bought (in the US at least) online with no government oversight or regulation. Once the parts are obtained, they must be assembled, which is not difficult for the mechanically inclined, but is considerably more difficult than printing a picture.
So, before this quantitative change:
* Obtain AK-47 spec and assembly instructions
* Obtain necessary tools for assembly
* Order AK-47 parts kit online
* Buy AK-47 lower receiver from firearms dealer, or assemble yourself from sheet metal
* Assemble AK-47
Legally I don't see any sticky issue here, and if there's an ethical dilema I don't see it. Having said that, I agree with the general proposition that the law has not kept pace with technological innovation, and that there are areas in which this lag has serious consequences.
True, but I submit this is not a sufficiently large quantitative change.
> Also the debate is ultimately not about this one thing today, but about a future in which one can download and print an open-source AK-47-equivalent with only slightly more difficulty than printing a picture.
I humbly suggest there is more to it than that, and will still be more to it than that in a future in which 3D printers can print composite materials strong enough to survive the extreme pressures of a 7.62x39mm cartridge firing a bullet down a long rifled barrel. Even if that were possible, the result of the AK-47 print job would be a whole mess of parts, including tiny pins, springs, etc. With the exception of the lower receiver, all of these parts can be bought (in the US at least) online with no government oversight or regulation. Once the parts are obtained, they must be assembled, which is not difficult for the mechanically inclined, but is considerably more difficult than printing a picture.
So, before this quantitative change:
* Obtain AK-47 spec and assembly instructions * Obtain necessary tools for assembly * Order AK-47 parts kit online * Buy AK-47 lower receiver from firearms dealer, or assemble yourself from sheet metal * Assemble AK-47
After this quantitative change:
* Obtain AK-47 spec and assembly instructions * Obtain AK-47 3D printer files * Obtain assembly tools printer files * Print AK-47 parts * Print AK-47 lower receiver * Assemble AK-47
Hardly a revolutionary shift.
Legally I don't see any sticky issue here, and if there's an ethical dilema I don't see it. Having said that, I agree with the general proposition that the law has not kept pace with technological innovation, and that there are areas in which this lag has serious consequences.