I think the teeth/jaw issues are a matter of misuse not flawed design. The switch from hunter-gatherer diet to modern diet was too fast to blame hill-climbing evolution errors.

That distinction doesn't make any sense to me. The switch to a modern diet was ultimately a result of evolution. If evolution gave us the ability to radically switch diets, but didn't give us the ability to properly deal with the new diet, then that's an example of evolution producing something flawed.

I disagree that there is no cutoff point for what can be meaningfully blamed on evolution. Would you say that it is an evolutionary flaw that if we drink too much alcohol we get cirrhosis of the liver and die?

I would say that it's an evolutionary flaw that many humans want to drink so much alcohol that they die from it. Just like it's an evolutionary flaw that we like consuming much more food than is good for us, simply because that part evolved in a time when it was physically impossible to overeat consistently.

The article claims the problem is because our brains grew and pushed our teeth forward. Not because of diet.

I should have included this: <http://www.pnas.org/content/108/49/19546.abstract>. There is evidence that agricultural/industrial diet increases dental crownding.

The article included the line "These cusped grinders may have been useful before we learned to cook and process food." which for some reason made me think they were making the same argument.

I'm not sure "purchase one" and "be gifted one" count as "personal use". Purchasing, in particular is (I am guessing, I am not a lawyer) commercial activity.

I become the sole, lawful owner of the firearm in both scenarios.

The firearm itself serves no commercial purpose.

That is what I meant by "personal use."

Both activities are protected by the Constitution of the United States of America.

  You can't make a handgun with a lathe, though.

You can get pretty close with computer controlled mills that exist today, a lot closer than with the 3D printers that exist today.

And, you can put a bullet in the end of a pipe pretty easily. It doesn't have to be a good gun, after all.

If the quality of the gun was irrelevant to the effectiveness of the weapon, the military would be armed with homemade zipguns.

assassinations and such only require single uses.

different tools for different jobs.

We've been building decent guns for hundreds of years. You don't need computer controlled anything to make a working firearm for murder or self-defense.