This is an incorrect assumption. We absolutely have a segment of the membership that do exactly that. Managing them is the hardest part of the job for officers and volunteers.
There is truth to this, however there is also a disincentive to work on guns because no one else is.
Similar to the van life problem. When we got rid of the people living behind the space our time and effort managing the van life trouble makers went way down.
Are you saying firearms owners are problematic? Public research suggests otherwise. At least in terms of Texans that carry.
Use that as a requirement to further limit liability if you want. It would be motivation for more people to get licensed. 
No, he is saying that the segment of members that exist are the problem. They suck up the most time spent dealing with rules issues. Just because it’s not documented publicly didnt mean someone didnt spend an hour or 3 dealing with it.
Freddy summed up my statement.
But you should also understand my experience with firearms. My father’s friend was murdered with one. My sister lost a former student to the parkland shooting. My niece lost a friend in that shooting as well. I myself have had guns pulled on me twice (florida and jamaica) and once even had a police officer threaten to shoot me for asking how to get to the perot museum.
I grew up around guns, and recently inherited several pistols and a shotgun. And yet, in no way can I say guns have made my life better. No good day of sporting clays can ever outweigh what I’ve already experienced.
Gun enthusiast generally fall in two categories when I have to deal with them:
The second group is far more common than the first, and that’s what worries me.
I am not anti-gun, but I find the denial of the risk associated tiresome. If we can’t be realistic about the risks associated then we will never get to a point where we can have meaningful progress in the discussion.
If we want to allow this sort of work it would be helpful to have some examples of how other gun specific clubs handle their safety, enforcement and insurance. It will be easier to build off of an established model than try to invent one and stay in the good graces of every regulatory body and insurance company we deal with.
And how do other large maker/hacker spaces handle users working on firearms?
The proposed rules cover most of the same ground. There are generally more rules elsewhere but that’s because they’re a shooting range and we’re not. I’m not aware of any organizations like DMS but if someone finds one I’m curious.
https://www.eaglegunrangetx.com/about-lewisville-based-eagle-gun-range/range-rules/
I’m not aware of any that either explicitly allow or deny the activity. Much like DMS before the ATF exchanges. There simply weren’t any rules one way or another and people did what they thought was appropriate.
Out of curiosity, I looked up my local space in Sunnyvale, CA, and they have a blanket ban on projects that include “firearms, parts of firearms and other prohibited weapon parts.”
An example in Texas might be more culturally fitting than California. Since we’re in Texas. For example this makerspace in the Houston area that forbids storing firearms and ammo and has no other rules pertaining to firearms.
Well, I don’t know if “cultural fit” is an appropriate question. DMS can and does choose how to shape its culture.
But with our two examples, I think we’ve established that there are a wide range of approaches on this. Going with the crowd may not be the easy solution.
That’s an excellent point and why I brought this up. I think the current rules are out of sync with the culture. The organization chose to limit work on firearms out of fear that the ATF would shut us down. Not for any of the other reasons raised in this thread. Though things change and might’ve changed.
Based on the responses in this thread it seems there are a fair number of people on the same page, wanting to see the return of some firearms related work, and there’s a smaller but adamant opposition (for reasons I appreciate and respect even if I don’t agree or fully understand the experiences of others). Where it lands? Probably nowhere is my guess. The status quo is easier. Figured it was worth a shot regardless of what happens with it.
it should also be pointed out that a LOT of growing makerspaces mirrored our rules to start their own spaces, so they could just be following suit
Probably just throwing some eye roll in the discussion. It would be worth someones time to reach out to Nation of Makers - not that they are all-knowing or really all that “far reaching” of an organization - but it might be worth seeing if they would be willing to conduct a poll of makerspaces to see how the thoughts/uses of firearms within a makerspace is trending.
Yes, we are individual.
Yes, we create our own understandings and rules and cultural standards.
It would be interesting to see how this entire community of “disconnected but similar focuses” concern themselves with this broader…downright limitless discussion concerning firearms…because it’s important and because we can’t be alone in this debate.
I belonged to two larger makerspaces in Detroit: Techshop (when it was in business) and I3-Detroit which was more like our own organization although a little smaller (but Detroit’s a smaller Metro also). Their rules prohibit work on Autos, Firearms and Brewing. The autos things may seem weird but the city has it’s own weird rules about working on Autos that we do with spray painting - the city goes berserk so we didn’t allow it. The brewing rule was a weird contractual thing from who we rented the building from (oddly enough a meadery). The firearms rules were actually broader than DM and I wouldn’t call Michigan a liberal paradise…
https://www.i3detroit.org/wiki/Standing_rules under prohibited items.
Their rule on the page you linked to is actually inline with what I’m proposing. They don’t prohibit working on firearms outright which is pretty much where we are right now. I think this is a great example.
I would suggest having a minimum age limit and requiring completion of a firearms safety course. Perhaps one specific to DMS defining what is allowed, and what is not.
We could piggy back on the laws for purchasing firearms like 18 for a rifle and 21 for a handgun and use those at the space. I’m on the fence regarding the safety class requirement because there are lots of things at the space that go underutilized because not enough people are willing to train others. I think a YouTube video or PDF could convey the same information without the same bottlenecks.
With a quiz. Must score 100%. Open book okay.
I was thinking that veterans, peace officers and concealed carry permit holders could be considered as meeting the safety requirements . Just something to indicate that the member is unlikely cause problems.
Nah I just read their rules:
Prohibited Activities…
These rules would allow working on virtually any firearm part, though for clarity the gun would want to be disassembled and the parts worked on separately. For example, threading a barrel would be permissible under this rule, though I’m not sure that was their intent.
This is what happens when wanna-be lawyers write laws. Then they say, “Well you know what we meant!” as they try to ban you.
More concerning to me than that is the more specific we have to get with the rules the harder it is to manage and enforce them.
We sometimes can’t even get people to wear their damn clothes at the space. Enforcing comprehensive rules around firearm safety and legal repairs and modifications is likely to be impossible.
