California’s new bill requires DOJ-approved 3D printers that report on themselves targeting general-purpose machines.
Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan introduced AB-2047, the “California Firearm Printing Prevention Act,” on February 17th. The bill would ban the sale or transfer of any 3D printer in California unless it appears on a state-maintained roster of approved makes and models… certified by the Department of Justice as equipped with “firearm blocking technology.” Manufacturers would need to submit attestations for every make and model. The DOJ would publish a list. If your printer isn’t on the list by March 1, 2029, it can’t be sold. In addition, knowingly disabling or circumventing the blocking software is a misdemeanor.
Sorry, I’m just a guy from overseas trying to understand why, in a country where 1 out of 4 people possess weapons, the 3D printer is the problem. I mean, there are companies selling industrial-grade firearms—why the heck is the 3D printer the target?
Because it makes firearms available to people without having to jump through hoops the government can track, but they can make a machine that makes flexi-dragons into a boogyman, so they throw a “protect the children” in the bill and it automatically passes.
Because it makes for a good distraction from actual problems that they don’t care to solve because those problems would require them to heavily tax millionaires and billionaires.
Because our government is run by old dumbasses.
If they were smarter, which they are not, they would look to place restrictions on the slicer software. I doubt the printers even have the capability to recognize what is being printed. Most of them are like move left 3 steps, extrude .1mm of filament, move right 1 step…. yada yada yada.
This is just insanely dumb. They are essentially trying to regulate technology they know very little about.
Frankly it seems more like a mild inconvenience then actual prevention. I don’t really care how smart a software gets, it can’t predict and prevent all possible configurations of prints that could possibly be used to create functioning guns without being so overly restrictive that even perfectly innocent prints would get flagged constantly in which case they simple won’t sell to normal users.
It would be a constant game of whack a mole with new creative designs, using multiple printers or with non-printed parts in the design. But no hardware or software that a smart enough engineer has their hands on is impervious to mods either, especially if they’re motivated like someone seeking to produce firearms would be.
It’s an overreaching law that will likely solve little to nothing, but might make 3d printers in general a bit more annoying to work with. “Sorry, you can’t make your dice tower because there’s a 16 percent change that it could be capable of firing an RPG out of the dragon’s mouth. Please make your design at least 12 percent less gun-ish and try again.”
Wow. I hadn’t even thought about some of these ways around this. Excellent points!!
They are essentially trying to regulate technology they know very little about.
That’s not surprising, that’s just what politicians do. Especially politicians who are 65+ years old and completely out of touch with technology.
I am reminded of a senator from Alaska trying to describe the internet as a series of tubes.
That was way more accurate and intelligent than this. Like orders of magnitude.
Sen Ted Stevens, rest in piss.
This is why politicians should be automatically retired at 65. We shouldn’t be allowing people who grew up without seatbelts to make any decisions involving technology.
So in other words, what else is new?
The danger if this passes isn’t that someone will be able to successfully implement some manner of system for identifying gun parts which will, apparently, rely on pixie dust and magic. In reality this will effectively prohibit 3D printer sales in California entirely because compliance is literally impossible. And it’ll and give overreaching cops and prosecutors yet another nonsense charge they can arbitrarily slap people with over “circumventing” this mystical technology which does not in fact exist if they, ye gods forbid, build their own printer.
It’s the same horseshit rationale as the spent casing “microstamping” fantasy that legislators have been salivating about for decades. It doesn’t work, it’ll never work, but that’s not going to stop them from wishing it does and therefore turning it into a defacto ban.
Keep in mind, California also has the precedent of their infamous approved handguns list, which notoriously does things like arbitrarily declaring that the black version of some model of gun is legal, but possession of the stainless version of the exact same gun is a felony. We’re not dealing with people in possession of any type of rationality, here.
I was just talking with a friend about the microstamping idea. I’d never heard of it before.
They are essentially trying to regulate technology they know very little about.
You’re surprised that law makers are trying to regulate things they know nothing about? Oh…oh I have like 2000 years worth of news for you…
Not surprised. Just frustrated.
This is coordinated. Multiple states at the same time.
I don’t think it has anything to do with guns. Middle of the bell curve, most people aren’t using these for guns. They’re using these for right to repair. They’re using these for garage businesses. Shop businesses. Small businesses. (See: not corporate USA). Or for making/creatimg.
I’ve no doubt there are people sitting on some small slice of a tail on the bell curve who do print gun parts, but this is about corporate America.
It’s also a foot in the door dig on free and open source software.
It’s a way to block individual and small business from horning in on corporate America’s profit for a comparably tiny slice of their own.
Printing a knob to replace a broken on/off switch instead of buying a whole new item? Worse, selling that item or even just posting the pattern for free? We can’t have that.
Now, you’re bypassing my item’s proprietary system by printing…
Wait. I was able to sell threaded hand screw knobs for $5 each. Now you’re all just printing them? And the pattern is up there for free?
We need a law.
It is nothing less than, I say without exaggeration, a war on property rights as a whole.
Great points, I think you’re on to something.
I think the old saying “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity” doesn’t apply when malice and corporate interests are in alignment. Now I’m curious to dig into who actually wrote the bill, and who are they financially supported by…
This is stupid.
You easily tell who is 3D printing guns because they have one hand and bits of plastic barrel stuck in their faces.
“3d printing guns” isn’t about the pressure holding parts, it’s about the traceable serial number holding parts. On most firearms the “lower assembly” or “receiver” (frame, trigger group, feeding assy) is legally considered the firearm and is what bears the serial. Most of those can be printed and use off the shelf hardware to work, albeit with a much lower lifespan.
Pressure containing wear parts that are meant to be exchanged (barrel and breech bolt) typically do not carry serials and are thus not normally traceable. If you eliminate the serialized, traceable part of the firearm, then any collection of parts could be used.That said, eliminating an entire hobby and industry because gun serialization laws haven’t been updated in a hundred years is probably not the right way to do it.
Unless I am missing something obvious, the simplest solution is to require both uppers and lowers to be stamped. As far as I can tell, this would only be a burden to manufacturers unless there are some weird interactions with the idiotic “stamped part is gun” definition of a firearm.
Is printing a lower less illegal than removing the serial number? Must be, otherwise what’s the point other than cost?
Yes. In most of the US removing a serial is explicitly illegal, while manufacturing a firearm for personal use (the serialized part is legally the firearm, but most places don’t require you to serialize personally manufactured firearms) is completely legal.
I believe it’s a federal felony to remove the serial.
That’s what I thought, but I wasn’t positive and I didn’t want to provide incorrect information.
Serialized parts have their purchases recorded and restricted, other parts are (usually) unrestricted.
How would they connect a serialized part to a purchase if the serial number is completely gone? I guess 3d printing would also allow those who are unable to legally buy the parts to get them too.
They can’t definitively pin a particular purchase to a particular serial-defiled firearm, but the fact that the government knows that you purchased a firearm on such and such date is probably enough of a concern for a lot of people. It’s a lot easier to gather a stockpile of parts without drawing much attention.
If there’s a record of you purchasing X gun, and they find you have that same model with the serial filed off, 99% chance you filed the serial off your gun.
Because to get the serialized part, you still have to be approved for the purchase through background checks, which will go live on the state police database, and then the police can check that database to see recently acquired firearms if something happens. Chances are the list of a specific type of firearm with the serial ground off is going to be pretty short.
And yes, the being able to obtain it with no background checks at all is the other big key.
Because to get the serialized part, you still have to be approved for the purchase through background checks
Unless you get it secondhand. Then you just kinda… Skip all that. Legally.
That doesn’t make much sense as a law against printers, since it’s far easier and just as illegal to grind off the serial numbers on a gun.
'Kay. They do know these things are barely capable of being networked, right?
Which unfortunately means the base price for a California-legal 3d printer is going to be exorbitant.
Just build your own with a kit. Hell, call it a CNC filler. This was a DIY hobby from the start. I don’t see how this can be regulated.
I don’t see how this can be regulated.
That’s the neat part: it can’t. Which means attempting to do so anyway basically abolishes all property rights.
And thus the true purpose of the legislation is revealed.
- The printer doesn’t know what it is printing, the slicer does, and at that point just use an open source slicer
- Just drive to Arizona, Nevada, or Oregon, buy a printer, and drive back, The MicroCenter in Phoenix just opened up.
Just when I think California couldn’t possibly come up with dumber laws, they deliver yet again.
There’s genuine concerns they could be addressing but instead go after something that’s going to be near impossible for them to enforce.
Blueprints for homemade 3D printers exist that can be built with a pretty short list of parts from Digikey.
It’s not law yet, and may never be.
I was going to say, I thought open source 3D Printer designs/kits have been a thing for awhile. My friend just built his own last year using his original 3D printer to help in the process, lol
The entire hobby is built on open source, it’s only very very recently that commercial hobby level printers were worth a damn
…And even then, they’re leveraging the open source under the hood. Even your locked-down Bambu piece of shit uses slicing software based on Slic3r.
I could make a working metal gun in a day with hand tools and a trip to home depot. Guns aren’t magical complicated devices. It’s a handle and a tube and a pin that smacks a bullet.
This bill is the epitome of stupid and one of the reasons the left has had so many issues becoming the party leaders. Stop trying to play “big brother” and stop trying to fuck with the 2nd amendment.
Shovel AK is still a thing, but this is not about guns. That is just the cloak of fear (ie - protect the children!) for legislating away your right to own things. Corpos are pissed you can make and/or repair the things they’d rather you buy again.
What are they going to do? Put IoT DRM in every stepper motor?
Wait so far these things are relatively trivial pieces of equipment in terms of software, no? Read instructions, move stepper motors/control heating elements.
So realistically what we’re looking at is hash based block lists for known firearm and parts designs, which would be trivial to circumvent by adding the equivalent of noop instructions to the .gcode files 🤷♂️
No, realistically what we’re looking at is a full ban on 3D printing as a whole because anything the printer does “might” be a gun part.
And then shortly after, a ban on property rights as a whole, because anything you own with a circuit board or a stepper motor in it “might” be modified to create an illegal 3D printer.
They’ll do anything but adopt firearm laws that are relevant and sensible.
HEY CALIFORNIA DO YOU KNOW WHO IS LEADING THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RIGHT NOW??? WHY ARE YOU COMING UP WITH THIS AT ALL, LET ALONE WITH THIS ADMINISTRATION IN POWER???
Oh wait, Gavin Newsom is the governor, that explains everything. Of course the DINO who’s only mad at Trump for stealing his spotlight would try to push a stupid law like this.
But….if someone sold a manually operated plastic extruder, that’s fine?
And if someone separately sold CAM software that’s fine too?
Just sayin’
Already contacted my assembly person to oppose it. I get the intent behind it, but theres no way im going to ask the government for permission to use my own hardware.
I dont even own a 3D printer yet, but I wouldn’t want to be subject to such a bad and dumb law if and when that changes.Some poor government employee is going to see loooots of dildos
Oh boy, what’s a good not too expensive 3d printer to buy right now, preferably all FOSS? It hasn’t been on my short term shopping list but I figure if I’m ever likely to want one, better get it now. I remember the original RepRap. I think modern stuff is a lot better, but might have more closed source software.
Prusa or Qidi. Avoid Bambu.
You can still get an Ender 3 (essentially the end result of RepRap). Every vendor has their own.
That said? If you buy a printer in 2025 (let alone 2026) and it does not have an integrated enclosure, you are opening yourself up to a world of hurt. The price difference isn’t that much anymore and even just having a box to hold the waste heat in solves like 90% of print problems.
Bambu are, above and beyond, the best bang for your buck. They ALSO are ahead of the curve on locking things down to support only their networked slicers. Which… is a huge concern with stuff like this.
Personally? I love the Qidi printers. I have a Q1 something or another and convinced a friend to get a different model. They use a semi-open fork of Klipper so you can theoretically make something work when it is abandoned. Which is good because the various CoreXY printers are no longer all based on the same standard so part kits aren’t (easily) interchangeable. And, of course, you can use Orcaslicer or whatever else you want.
Keep in mind that is all FDM. For Resin (SLA?), the ship has already sailed and people are genuinely happy to run slicers with literal fucking ads in them. Assuming the vendor doesn’t lock them out of even that garbage.
