New York and California are considering a novel approach to gun control: requiring 3D printers sold for home and business use to incorporate technology that prevents them from printing firearms. This initiative targets the equipment used to manufacture untraceable “ghost guns,” which are increasingly appearing in criminal investigations.
This legislative effort distinguishes itself by focusing on the production tools rather than the individuals making the firearms. Approximately one-third of U.S. states have already enacted bans or regulations on self-made firearms lacking serial numbers and evading standard background checks. The potential for these requirements in New York and California could establish industry-wide standards for 3D printer manufacturers, potentially influencing regulatory efforts in other states.
Three-dimensional printers have become more prevalent in recent decades. Global sales have grown from an estimated 30,000 printers in 2012 to over 3 million, with the industry's value expanding from approximately $2 billion to $26 billion annually, according to Bill Decker, executive chairman of the Association of 3D Printing. While high-end printers can cost thousands of dollars, lower-cost models are now available for several hundred dollars.
These devices are capable of producing a wide range of items, from toys and prosthetic limbs to airplane parts. They can also be used to create firearms or their components using digital designs obtained online. Guns produced this way, often without serial numbers, are difficult for law enforcement to trace.
Ghost Guns in Crime
Firearms manufactured using 3D printers are reportedly being used with greater frequency in crimes. A U.S. Department of Justice report indicated that the number of privately made firearms recovered in criminal incidents and submitted to federal authorities surged from about 1,600 in 2017 to nearly 27,500 in 2023, although the report did not specify the exact number produced by 3D printers. In a notable case in New York, authorities suspect a 3D-printed gun was used in the fatal shooting of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare in early 2024.
The proposed legislation in New York and California would establish panels of experts tasked with developing standards for algorithms designed to detect firearm blueprints. These technologies would analyze submitted 3D printing designs, compare them against a digital library of firearm parts, and reject those deemed similar.
Implementation of this blocking technology is slated for 2029, with New York's timeline potentially extending further if the expert panel deems it not yet feasible. The concept is analogous to a smartphone application that identifies objects from uploaded images, according to Solomon Diamond, an associate engineering professor at Dartmouth College.
One potential technical method involves using geometric analysis of shapes, dimensions, and structural features to identify and reject designs resembling firearm parts. Julian Chultarsky, a technical account manager at Physna, a company developing such technology, stated that geometric search is a mature and deployable technique applicable to this problem.
Industry and Rights Concerns
The Association of 3D Printing supports the legislation but expresses skepticism about its effectiveness. Decker described it as more of a political statement, suggesting that determined individuals will find ways to circumvent the restrictions by altering designs or using alternative printing methods.
Concerns have also been raised regarding the potential for over-blocking lawful items. Rory Mir, director of open access and technology community engagement at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, noted that aggressive blocking algorithms could mistakenly flag harmless objects, such as pipes or wall hangers, that might share characteristics with firearm components. Mir also pointed out that such censorship algorithms could impede the sharing of lawful content.
Furthermore, if design instructions are processed through cloud-based artificial intelligence for analysis, it could pose risks to the privacy of users' creative and proprietary designs, according to Mir.
Gun safety advocates argue that 3D printers provide a means for individuals legally prohibited from acquiring firearms, such as convicted felons or minors, to obtain them. Everytown for Gun Safety reports that eleven states already prohibit 3D-printed guns, and six additional states mandate that they be serialized.
Blocking the actual printing of firearms is seen by proponents as a measure to enhance the enforceability of existing gun laws. Samuel Levy, director of policy advocacy at Everytown for Gun Safety, described 3D printing as the "new frontier of the fight against ghost guns."
Conversely, the National Rifle Association voiced opposition, characterizing the measures as restrictive to law-abiding citizens. John Commerford, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, stated that "homemade firearms are nothing new—they are a proud, time-honored American tradition dating back to the founding of our Republic," and that these proposals infringe upon constitutionally protected activities for responsible Americans.