Currently it's much easier and cheaper to build a zipgun/saturdaynight special/junkgun with parts from the hardware store and regular shop tools than it is to make 3D printed gun. And that's not even mentioning that the non-printed one will probably be more accurate and durable. What the fuss is really about is idiots panicking and trying to make a scene.
If someone wants to bring up the supposed skill gap, it's pretty much an illusion. Anyone that has the most basic tool use skills could make a zip gun of one form or another. Heck, my mom could make one if she wanted to. As to knowledge of guns, it's not exactly an industrial secret, and besides, at it's most basic, it's a tube with a round inserted in one end with the bullet facing the other, and held steady while a firing pin forcefully smacks the middle of the round, and some kind of grip so it's easy to hold and not get burned. For that matter, the basic principles of guns along with basic descriptive drawings or photos of it's workings are easily attainable on the internet or any dead tree format library. Heck, even the Japanese could get that info, and I'm sure you've heard how anti-gun their government is.

I merely see the 3d printed guns as a representative of the fantastic and wide ranging possibilities for 3d printing in the future. Someday they may be a near virtual Aladdins Lamp. (Combine an ability to use many different materials simultaneously with a recycling/material bank restocking ability, and the sky's the limit.)

It is a historical and precedent setting object, not to mention an interesting design. That definitely makes it of value to a Museum of Art & Design. Heck, just about any museum except those that are really specialized.

It was, and those often get mixed in with my normal USB cables (thanks for cleaning up honey), and aren't properly marked or identified. (grumble)

Not to mention going way outside their area.
If it's not being done on/with school computers, they shouldn't have anything to do with it.
They are supposed to be educators, not full time nannies/social police.

He did. He stated what happened, and the only statement FB has given, he refuted. Everything else is opinion due to a lack of information and dialog. FB decided to take his ball and go home, and won't answer the door or the phone. Not a lot of options left there pal, so him and his buddies are trying to gather together on the nearby sidewalk and get someones attention. Metaphorically speaking of course.

As far as I can tell, FB doesn't listen to what the users want or like, it just follows along with it's own plans for us, and when we complain, it just whistles louder to itself.

I'm betting that he pissed someone off because he's making FB better and giving users what they want better than FB can.

I honestly had no idea it was legal to have a real explosive grenade in the first place.
Fakes, Inerts, Props, Water Balloon, and Cap grenades, sure, but an actual real world blow up your face and splatter it on the wall grenade? I wonder what the rules are on those. For that matter, what the hell would you use it for? You can't hunt or fish with it (legally), and area effect explosives in close proximity and enclosed places is just another form of suicide, not to mention a sure fire way to trash what you might be trying to protect.

Of course, covering up for someone elses criminal act is itself a criminal act.
I think that legally opens up 'conspiracy' charges as well, but ianal, so that's just a guess on my part.

They don't want a Free Market, they want a Free For Them Market, screw everyone else.

Also, with how I saw Red McCombs screwing around San Antonio while I lived in Texas, it doesn't surprise me one bit.

I always thought it was standard practice for everyone's embassies to include an entire electronics communications suite usable for both 'secure' communications and 'accidentally' listening in on host nation broadcasts.

Heck, if the Germans didn't know about any visible gear by now, their spy boss is an incompetent buffoon and needs to be shipped back to whatever cave he crawled out of.

I don't really think naming celestial bodies after victims is a good idea.
Astronomers usually want to inspire hope, and looking up at things named after victims just doesn't seem right.

Keeping a patent in the lockbox is one thing, but if it's used by the industry, there are some rules they have to follow.
Nobody is ever allowed to do anything they want.

As far as I'm concerned (ianal), the "I have a dream" speech was a historical, public, and defining of an important part of our society. It can't be copyrighted. Any lowlife trying to capitalize on that should be thrown in jail.

They have plenty of Lithium.