lower receiver is the part of a gun that actually makes it a gun, at least in the eyes of the law. It's this part that handles the ammunition intake and the trigger system and it's this part that requires a gun license to own. Apparently every other part can be bought separately by anyone without any restriction or regulation.
I'm an idealist and society should ideally have no regulations whatsoever. However, when it comes to gun regulation, i'm in favour of it. A civilised society has no use for a tool that is designed to end life. I'm also bound by the principle that censorship has far worse long term effects than the short term positives it may bring (if any).
Where then, do i stand on the issue of 3D printed lower receivers where gun regulation and censorship come together? Principles are hierarchical and the principle with greater impact supersedes the lesser principle. In the case of killing people versus the free flow of information, which one takes precedence?
It might seem obvious that gun control is the more important one but i have a no compromise attitude towards censorship. A society that is expected to be mature and responsible should be treated as such. More importantly however; a responsible democratic society needs to be informed, completely and without bias. Censorship of any kind prevents that.
3D printing (decentralised manufacturing) is a major step towards building a self sufficient, democratic society. I will always fight for your right to make lower receiver's but i will not respect your desire to own one.
This post is a response to the following video on 3D printed guns.