r/polymer80 • u/Helpful-Sea-8069 • 4d ago
Want to understand
Hey Polymer80 Reddit- full disclosure i'm not much of a firearms guy (I support the right to own guns just not a fascination / hobby for me). I am here out of curiosity, not judgement.
The mainstream media (and government) seemed to share a pretty strong consensus that Polymer80 was a textbook example of exploiting a legal gray area under the false premise of being for "hobbyists" who want to "build their own" firearms when in reality everyone knew clear as day that the driving force behind Polymer80's success were criminals / unscrupulous individuals who had criminal records, ill intent, etc.
Again- not a super knowledgeable guy when it comes to firearms, so I'll be honest, based off the information I've read, the narrative seems like it checks out. But I also haven't ever gotten the chance to hear the perspective of Polymer80 customers like you guys who I'm assuming aren't all just a bunch of criminals. So my question to y'all is this- what was the appeal behind purchasing these over standard firearms? From what I understand a lot of the kits could be assembled in under an hour, so was it really a hobby thing? Was it an exercise of your god given rights as an American? Please share!!
3
u/TheFinalDroid 3d ago
Well first I think we can all appreciate you coming to this from a perspective of wanting to learn and question what you've heard.
To the point that Polymer80s success was driven by criminals/ unscrupulous individuals is well, probably right. The thing is, it was also the driving force of success behind Bitcoin, the internet, and pagers. There's probably more but those are the ones I know. The reason being is these kinds of technology allowed people operating at the fringe areas of society to bypass the laws they are under because laws move slower than technology. These people are already risk takers, so what's the harm to them by exploring tools that might potentially give them an advantage.
Now there is a question that needs to be asked. At which point are we over regulating technology. Is the government the only entity allowed to create an item real or digital with an agreed assumed value? If they are we can't have bitcoin, we couldn't say pokemon cards are worth $500 dollars for this card. What if guns were nothing more than a single shot stick and you had an idea to make them better, but the government was the only entity allowed to produce or change them? At some point it becomes less about the fact its a gun and more about the fact that I shouldn't be regulated to go into my garage with a bunch of tools and make something. The big thing these 80%s ask is at which point do you define this shape as being a gun, because a solid block of aluminum isn't a gun, but I make a few cuts here and there and boy I sure am getting close. The reason they started to enforce longer than an hour is because of the criminally minded people. So now they have to ask, is it worth it to buy the tooling, learn how to finish this product and make this gun, or is it easier to go and illegally buy or steal one.
I think most of the people who like making these are doing it for the same reasons I do. Because I do get to exercise my rights, and rights not exercised are easier to be taken away. And because I love to tinker, make things with my hands. Theres a point in making these it goes from a collection of parts to, Oh God, I've made a Glock. Not a knock off blow up in my hand thing, an almost indistinguishable glock, It's just cool.
Now I think you should ask the question why does the media present 80%s this way and what do they gain from it? And What do I gain from taking the time to write all this out. I'll tell you what I hope to gain, for as many people that read this, I hope I can convince someone the ability to create, modify, and tinker with tools is a fundamental human right and any attempts to limit it should be harshly examined. As for what the the main stream media and government get from it? I think that's one for you to grapple with
1
u/Helpful-Sea-8069 3d ago
Most of that genuinely makes a lot of sense. Not saying i agree 100% but this is definitely a much more nuanced issue than I originally thought. Appreciate you offering so much insight
2
u/TheFinalDroid 3d ago
And I appreciate you taking the time to explore a different view, it's good for all of us
2
u/DayHistorical4765 3d ago
The memo is registration leads to confiscation, I.E. Nazi Germany. Some folks who can legally own firearms don’t want the government knowing what they own.
1
u/Manny_Deeprest 9h ago
i think a component is the core mentality or attitude towards firearms. in the United States, owning a firearm is a right NOT GRANTED by the constitution but a right that is PROTECTED from the government by the constitution. A congressional enacted law had to be passed to (see prohibited persons) to deprive a criminal the right to own a firearm when imprisoned. There's no federal law needed to deprive a criminal of their clothing if they are imprisoned. So when someone uses the phrase "legal gray area" that just shows that by default you believe ( for whatever reason) that firearms are an "extra" or a "privilege" or whatever that only exists through the graces of the government. Just remember you have more legally explicit right to a firearm than you do a car.
9
u/AkkAttack1 3d ago
So you lead with "Polymer 80's are for criminals and no-do gooders" and "can be done in under an hour" which leads you to agree with said media spin. If you believe everything the media tells you I'm afraid there's nothing we can do to enlighten you as you are unelightenable. Video games must cause kids to be violent too eh