Consumer Rights Wiki - User contributions [en]

User:Louis/3D-printed firearms and the technical basis for printer mandates

2026-06-02T05:42:25Z

185.217.168.75: Emboldened important points concerning the definition of firearms by current legislature as well as points about how all fully printed firearms in the police database were only ever seizures, never used to harm.

Every 3D-printed firearm tied to a killing has been a hybrid, a plastic frame bolted to metal barrels and slides bought online; in the academic record, guns printed in full turn up only as seizures, none of them fired.<ref name="forensic" /><ref name="wired" /> The frame is the part a consumer printer makes, and federal law counts that frame as ''the gun'' even though it holds back none of a fired cartridge's pressure.<ref name="vanderstok" /><ref name="smallarms" /> The metal parts that contain the explosion are not themselves firearms under federal law,<ref name="usc921" /><ref name="oig" /> and they are bought online as ordinary gun parts.<ref name="wired" /> '''[[New York 3D printer blocking technology mandate|New York]] and several other states have answered the spread of printed firearms by regulating the printer, the machine that makes the frame rather than the metal parts that bear the pressure of a shot.'''<ref name="bill-pdf" />

==Governor Hochul and Everytown's case for the mandate==

Governor Kathy Hochul's office announced the FY2027 budget provisions under the banner ''"Advances First-In-The-Nation Law To Crack Down on Illegal Homegrown 3D-Printed Guns,"'' describing the package as ''"cracking down on the scourge of illegal 3D-printed ghost guns and DIY machine guns."''<ref name="gov" /> The release stated that the budget would ''"Require first-in-the-nation minimum safety standards for 3D printers sold in New York to be equipped with basic technology that prevents the unlicensed, illegal production of lethal firearms and firearm parts."''<ref name="gov" />

The gun-safety group Everytown for Gun Safety promoted the budget under the headline ''"New York Shuts Down the 'Plastic Pipeline'"'' and wrote that the state was ''"addressing the 'Plastic Pipeline' head-on."''<ref name="everytown" /> Everytown framed the threat in its own voice: ''"By bypassing traditional background checks with the simple click of a 'print' button, 3D-printed firearms and gun parts are putting the safety of communities across New York at risk."''<ref name="everytown" /> Everytown's president, John Feinblatt, said that ''"it's no surprise that 3D-printed guns and do-it-yourself machine guns are increasingly turning up at New York crime scenes."''<ref name="everytown" />

==What 3D printing can and cannot make==

A firearm concentrates the force of a fired cartridge in a small set of parts. The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute sets the maximum average pressure for the 9mm Luger cartridge at 35,000 pounds per square inch.<ref name="saami" /> The barrel, chamber, bolt or breech face, and slide face need to withstand that pressure for every round fired. The frame or lower receiver, which houses the trigger group and magazine and keeps the metal parts aligned, does not.

The Small Arms Survey, in an assessment of 3D-printed firearm components, described the division of labor inside a typical design: ''"In the AR-15 design, for example, the thermal and mechanical stresses of firing are borne mainly by the barrel, bolt, and upper-receiver assemblies. The lower receiver is primarily intended to ensure the correct alignment and interface of the operating parts of the firearm, and to house the trigger and fire selector and safety mechanisms."''<ref name="smallarms" /> Consumer fused-deposition thermoplastics can make that low-stress frame. They cannot make a barrel or chamber that survives a centerfire cartridge, which is why printed firearms recovered in the field pair a printed frame with commercially made metal pressure-bearing parts rather than printing the whole gun.

The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point drew the same distinction in its survey of printed firearms used by extremists. It described hybrid designs as weapons that ''"incorporate 3D-printed components with readily available and unregulated components such as steel tubing, metal bar stocks, and springs that are designed to withstand the pressure of a discharge more efficiently and thus generally make for a more reliable and durable firearm."''<ref name="ctc" /> A 2024 study in ''Forensic Science International: Synergy'' that catalogued 186 law enforcement encounters with 3D-printed firearms recorded only 14 involving fully printed guns, and noted that such weapons are ''"considered less reliable and durable."''<ref name="forensic" />

==Mangione's printed frame and purchased metal parts==

The firearm allegedly used by Luigi Mangione in the December 4, 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson became the most examined 3D-printed gun in recent reporting. WIRED's Andy Greenberg built and test-fired a clone of it for a May 19, 2025 teardown, and his account itemizes which parts a build like it prints and which it buys.<ref name="wired" />

Greenberg wrote that only the central part is printed: ''"only the central component of a firearm onto which all its other components are attached, known as the lower receiver for an AR-15 or the frame for a Glock-style handgun, is regulated as the gun."''<ref name="wired" /> The pressure-bearing parts were ordered as finished metal components. He listed the cost of the build as ''"$200 for the slide, $35 for the barrel, $21 for the components of the trigger mechanism, and just $650 for a printer,"'' and described ''"the slide and the barrel sitting on the table in front of us, the very gun-like components that actually hold the round and contain the explosive forces that propel a bullet."''<ref name="wired" /> The frame was based on a printable Glock-pattern design released by an online group called the Gatalog.<ref name="wired" />

The printed suppressor needed reinforcement before it could be fired. Greenberg wrote that the plastic suppressor ''"still needed to be epoxied into a carbon-fiber tube for additional reinforcement."''<ref name="wired" /> When he fired the weapon in 9mm, it functioned but cycled poorly, and he attributed the trouble to the purchased slide rather than the printed frame: ''"None of these issues, in other words, had anything to do with the 3D-printed frame."''<ref name="wired" /> The build eventually fired more than 50 rounds.<ref name="wired" />

==Federal firearm definitions and the regulated component==

Under federal law the regulated part is the frame or receiver, not the metal parts that contain the firing pressure. Title 18 of the U.S. Code defines a firearm at 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3) to include ''"(B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon."''<ref name="usc921" /> The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives defines a handgun frame at 27 CFR § 478.12(a)(1) as ''"the part of a handgun, or variants thereof, that provides housing or a structure for the component (i.e., sear or equivalent) designed to hold back the hammer, striker, bolt, or similar primary energized component prior to initiation of the firing sequence."''<ref name="cfr47812" /> The Supreme Court, upholding the agency's 2022 frame-or-receiver rule in ''Bondi v. VanDerStok'' on March 26, 2025, restated the statutory scheme: ''"Under subsection (B) of §921(a)(3), 'the frame or receiver of any such weapon' covered by subsection (A) is itself treated as a 'firearm.' Effectively, that means a frame or receiver is, even when sold separately, subject to the Act's requirements."''<ref name="vanderstok" />

The barrel and slide carry no such status under those provisions.<ref name="usc921" /><ref name="cfr47812" /> The federal Office of the Inspector General, in an estimate reproduced in California's Assembly Bill 1089 analysis, put the cost of building a printed handgun at ''"around $700"'' for ''"3D printing a 9 millimeter handgun frame and adding unregulated firearm components (such as the barrel, trigger, slide, magazine, etc.)."''<ref name="oig" /> '''The serialized, regulated firearm is the frame the printer makes, while the metal parts that contain the explosion are sold as unregulated components.'''

The Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that a scanning mandate aimed at the printer therefore misses the harder bottleneck, calling the requirement ''"an unfeasible tech solution"'' and campaigning against the New York proposal on the ground that it ''"surveils every print."''<ref name="eff" />

==Hybrid builds versus fully printed guns==

The reporting record distinguishes sharply between fully printed firearms and hybrid builds. The ''Forensic Science International: Synergy'' study recorded that, among its sample, '''the fully printed firearms appeared as seizures rather than as weapons used to wound:''' ''"Cases in which 3D-printed firearms, firearm parts and equipment were recovered by the police and law enforcement services were labelled as Seizure ... No discharged firearms were reported among them."''<ref name="forensic" />

The harm tied to printed firearms runs through hybrids. The Mangione weapon was a hybrid. So was the weaponry used in the October 9, 2019 attack on a synagogue in Halle, Germany; ''The Guardian'' described the attacker's homemade weapons as including ''"some that were 3D-printed."''<ref name="guardian" /><ref name="ctc" /> At the scale of national tracing data, the Department of Justice reported in January 2025 that ''"Between 2017 and 2023, 92,702 suspected PMFs, untraceable 'ghost guns' that are obtained without background checks and do not contain serial numbers, were recovered and reported"'' to the ATF.<ref name="doj-pmf" />

==Conversion devices==

The one category in this area with a large, quantified harm record is the machine-gun conversion device, and it is largely a metal-parts problem rather than a printing problem. Federal law at 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) defines a machinegun to include ''"any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun,"'' so the device itself is a machinegun whether or not it is attached to a gun.<ref name="usc5845" /> A pistol converter, often called a Glock switch, alters the fire-control geometry so the pistol fires automatically.

The ATF reported in its National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment that recoveries of conversion devices rose from 814 in the 2012 through 2016 period to 5,454 in 2017 through 2021, a 570 percent increase.<ref name="nfcta" /><ref name="nfcta-news" /> The ''Washington Post'' reported that these devices reach the street through more than one supply chain: ''"The devices can be made of metal or plastic, and authorities believe some are imported from China and sold on the streets. But 3D printers also have been used to make"'' them.<ref name="wapo" /> A 3D printer is one way to make a conversion device, not a precondition for one. New York's budget reflected the seriousness of this category by making it a class D felony, effective May 31, 2027, for a dealer or gunsmith to sell, transfer, or ship a convertible pistol, under Penal Law § 265.10(10).<ref name="bill-pdf" />

==How broadly the law defines a 3D printer==

New York's statute defines the regulated machine in two prongs, reaching ''"any machine capable of rendering a three-dimensional object from a digital design file using additive manufacturing"'' and ''"any machine capable of making three-dimensional modifications to an object from a digital design file using subtractive manufacturing."''<ref name="bill-pdf" /> Writing in ''Techdirt'', Karl Bode argued that the text as drafted would reach open-source printer firmware projects such as Marlin, Klipper, and RepRap, offline office printers, and CNC milling equipment.<ref name="techdirt" /> The breadth of the regulated category sits opposite the narrowness of what a printer contributes to a working firearm: the non-pressure-bearing frame, the part federal law already regulates.

==See also==
*[[New York 3D printer blocking technology mandate]]
*[[Right to Repair]]
*[[Digital rights management]]
*[[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]]

==References==
<references>
<ref name="gov">{{Cite web |url=https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/keeping-new-yorkers-safe-governor-hochul-signs-legislation-strengthen-public-safety-and-make |title=Keeping New Yorkers Safe: Governor Hochul Signs Legislation to Strengthen Public Safety |publisher=Office of Governor Kathy Hochul |date=2026-05-27 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="everytown">{{Cite web |url=https://www.everytown.org/press/new-york-shuts-down-the-plastic-pipeline-governor-hochul-and-lawmakers-pass-nation-leading-measures-to-stop-the-spread-of-diy-machine-guns-and-3d-printed-firearms-in-fy27-budget/ |title=New York Shuts Down the 'Plastic Pipeline' |publisher=Everytown for Gun Safety |date=2026-05-21 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="saami">{{Cite web |url=https://www.outdoorlife.com/guns/what-is-p-ammo/ |title=What Is +P Ammo? |author=Outdoor Life staff |publisher=Outdoor Life |date=2021-06-01 |access-date=2026-06-01}} States the SAAMI maximum average pressure of 35,000 psi for the 9mm Luger cartridge.</ref>
<ref name="smallarms">{{Cite web |url=https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/resources/SAS-OP32-Behind-the-Curve.pdf |title=Behind the Curve: New Technologies, New Control Challenges (Occasional Paper 32) |author=N.R. Jenzen-Jones |publisher=Small Arms Survey |date=2015 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="ctc">{{Cite web |url=https://ctc.westpoint.edu/printing-terror-an-empirical-overview-of-the-use-of-3d-printed-firearms-by-right-wing-extremists/ |title=Printing Terror: An Empirical Overview of the Use of 3D-Printed Firearms by Right-Wing Extremists |publisher=Combating Terrorism Center at West Point |date=2024-06 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="forensic">{{Cite web |url=https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10998078/ |title=The emergence of 3D printed firearms: a forensic and criminological overview |publisher=Forensic Science International: Synergy |date=2024 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="wired">{{Cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/story/luigi-mangione-ghost-gun-built-tested/ |title=We Built the Ghost Gun Luigi Mangione Allegedly Used, and Tested It |author=Andy Greenberg |publisher=WIRED |date=2025-05-19 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="usc921">{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921 |title=18 U.S.C. § 921, Definitions |publisher=Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School |date=2024 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="cfr47812">{{Cite web |url=https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-27/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-478/subject-group-ECFR0f9b5e597e57820/section-478.12 |title=27 CFR § 478.12, Definition of frame or receiver |publisher=Code of Federal Regulations |date=2022 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="vanderstok">{{Cite web |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-852_c07d.pdf |title=Bondi v. VanDerStok, No. 23-852 |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States |date=2025-03-26 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="oig">{{Cite web |url=https://apsf.assembly.ca.gov/sites/apsf.assembly.ca.gov/files/AB%201089%20PCA%20Revised%20Version%20Final%20PDF.pdf |title=Assembly Bill 1089 committee analysis (citing U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General cost estimate) |publisher=California State Assembly Committee on Public Safety |date=2023 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="eff">{{Cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/stop-new-yorks-attack-3d-printing |title=Stop New York's Attack on 3D Printing |author=Rory Mir and Nathan Sheard |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |date=2026-04-16 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="guardian">{{Cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/dec/07/gun-control-is-dead-and-we-killed-it-firearms-that-can-be-printed-at-home |title=Gun control is dead, and we killed it: the rise of firearms that can be printed at home |publisher=The Guardian |date=2024-12-07 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="doj-pmf">{{Cite web |url=https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-atfs-publication-final-volume-national-firearms-commerce-and |title=Justice Department Announces ATF's Publication of the Final Volume of the National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment |publisher=United States Department of Justice |date=2025-01-16 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="usc5845">{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845 |title=26 U.S.C. § 5845, Definitions |publisher=Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School |date=2024 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="nfcta">{{Cite web |url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/national-firearms-commerce-and-trafficking-assessment-nfcta-crime-guns-volume-two |title=National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment (NFCTA): Crime Guns, Volume Two, Part III |publisher=Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives |date=2023 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="nfcta-news">{{Cite web |url=https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2023/02/14/atf-number-of-confiscated-illegal-machine-gun-conversion-devices-jump-570-in-5-years/ |title=ATF: Number of confiscated illegal machine gun conversion devices jump 570% in 5 years |author=Erik Avanier |publisher=News4JAX (WJXT) |date=2023-02-14 |access-date=2026-06-01}} Reports the ATF NFCTA figures of 814 devices confiscated 2012 to 2016 and 5,454 in 2017 to 2021, a 570% increase.</ref>
<ref name="wapo">{{Cite web |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/12/06/with-conversion-switch-devices-machine-guns-return-us-streets/ |title=With 'conversion switch' devices, machine guns return to U.S. streets |author=Tom Jackman |publisher=The Washington Post |date=2023-12-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250723040301/https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/12/06/with-conversion-switch-devices-machine-guns-return-us-streets/ |archive-date=2025-07-23 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="bill-pdf">{{Cite web |url=https://assembly.ny.gov/2026budget/2026_bills/enacted/A10005c.pdf |title=Enacted text of A. 10005-C / S. 9005-C, FY2026-2027 budget, Part C |publisher=New York State Assembly |date=2026-05-27 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="techdirt">{{Cite web |url=https://www.techdirt.com/2026/02/19/new-yorks-new-3d-printing-law-as-written-is-extremely-harmful-and-annoying/ |title=New York's New 3D Printing Law, As Written, Is Extremely Harmful And Annoying |author=Karl Bode |publisher=Techdirt |date=2026-02-19 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
</references>

New York 3D printer blocking technology mandate

2026-06-02T02:05:27Z

185.217.168.75: Bolded important topics concerning the way the mandate was signed in and how it cannot work with offline printers.

{{#seo:
|description=New York's FY27 budget will require 3D printers sold in the state to carry blocking technology that scans print files against a firearms-blueprint library.
}}

'''New York's 3D printer blocking technology mandate''' is a state law that, once its rules are written, will prohibit the sale or delivery of any 3D printer in New York unless the machine is equipped with blocking technology that refuses to run a print job until the file has been checked by a firearms-blueprint detection algorithm against a state-maintained library of gun blueprints.<ref name="bill" /> The provision was enacted as Part C of the FY2026-2027 budget bill S. 9005-C / A. 10005-C, signed by Governor Kathy Hochul on May 27, 2026.<ref name="gov" /><ref name="bill" /> The device-sales requirement is not yet in force: it takes effect one year after the Division of Criminal Justice Services promulgates performance standards, which cannot happen until an expert working group reports, and a feasibility clause lets the working group defer the mandate if it finds the scanning technology is not technologically feasible.<ref name="bill" /><ref name="bill-pdf" />

==Background==

The law responds to firearms that can be produced from digital design files on consumer additive-manufacturing hardware, including untraceable ghost guns and pistol-conversion devices that turn a semi-automatic handgun into a machine gun. Governor Hochul's office presented the budget measures as a response to illegal 3D-printed ghost guns and do-it-yourself machine guns, pairing the 3D-printer rules with new criminal penalties for digital gun files.<ref name="gov" /> The gun-safety group Everytown for Gun Safety characterized the package as shutting down what it called the ''"plastic pipeline"'' of do-it-yourself firearms.<ref name="everytown" />

'''Rather than moving as a standalone firearms bill with its own floor debate, the measure was enacted inside the Public Protection and General Government article of the state budget''', as Part C of S. 9005-C / A. 10005-C.<ref name="bill" /> Part C is split into Subpart A, which adds the criminal-law definitions and file offenses, and Subpart B, which creates the working group and file library in Executive Law § 837-aa and the device-sales requirement in General Business Law § 396-eeee.<ref name="bill" /><ref name="bill-pdf" /> The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action objected to the use of the budget as the vehicle, calling it a ''"strategic move to put divisive legislation into an all-or-nothing budget bill"'' rather than passing the measure as a standalone bill subject to its own debate.<ref name="nra" />

==What the law requires==

The operative command sits in the new General Business Law § 396-eeee (1):

<blockquote>''No person, firm, partnership, association, or corporation shall sell or deliver any three-dimensional printer in the state of New York unless such printer is equipped with blocking technology.''</blockquote><ref name="bill" />

Executive Law § 837-aa (1)(b) defines that blocking technology as hardware, software, firmware, or other integrated measures that keep a printer from running any print job ''"unless the underlying three-dimensional printing file has been evaluated by a firearms blueprint detection algorithm and determined not to be a printing file that would produce a firearm or illegal firearm parts."''<ref name="bill" /> The detection algorithm itself is defined in § 837-aa (1)(c) as a software service that evaluates printing files, ''"whether in the form of stereolithography (STL) files or other computer aided design files or geometric code,"'' and flags any file that could produce a firearm or illegal firearm parts.<ref name="bill" />

To supply the data those algorithms check against, § 837-aa (3)(b) authorizes the Division of Criminal Justice Services to build and maintain a library of firearms blueprint files and illegal-firearm-parts blueprint files, ''"including scans of seized firearms."''<ref name="bill-pdf" /> The statute directs that the library be made available to printer manufacturers, software-development vendors, and experts in computational design or public safety, for building and improving the blocking technology and detection algorithms.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

The device requirement carries a narrow exception. Under § 396-eeee (5), the blocking-technology mandate does not apply to a sale or delivery to a buyer who holds both a New York gunsmith license under Penal Law § 400.00 and a federal firearms license, but only after that buyer submits a written request to the Attorney General and the Attorney General verifies the licenses and issues written authorization.<ref name="bill-pdf" /> Enforcement is civil and runs through the Attorney General: a gun-industry member who violates § 396-eeee is liable to the people of New York for a flat civil penalty of $5,000 for each qualified product unlawfully sold, transferred, imported, distributed, manufactured, marketed, or offered for sale, and the Attorney General may also sue to enjoin violations and obtain restitution.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

==Implementation timeline==

The signing on May 27, 2026 did not switch on the device requirement. The § 837-aa working group and file-library provisions took effect on enactment, but the § 396-eeee sales prohibition is gated behind a chain of contingent steps and will not bind printer sellers for years.<ref name="bill" /><ref name="bill-pdf" />

Under § 837-aa (2), within 90 days of the section's effective date the Division of Criminal Justice Services, the Department of State, and the State University of New York will convene a working group of experts in additive-manufacturing technology, artificial intelligence and digital security, firearms regulation, public safety, and consumer product safety.<ref name="bill-pdf" /> No later than one year after it convenes, the working group is to recommend minimum safety standards for blocking technology.<ref name="bill-pdf" /> The Division then has, under § 837-aa (3)(a), up to nine months after receiving those recommendations to promulgate performance-standard rules. Subpart B's effective-date clause provides that the § 396-eeee sales requirement takes effect one year after those rules are promulgated.<ref name="bill-pdf" /> Stacked end to end, those statutory intervals place the earliest possible effective date for the device-sales requirement more than two years after enactment.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

That chain can also stop entirely. The statute carries a feasibility escape hatch in § 837-aa (2):

<blockquote>''[I]f the working group determines that it is not technologically feasible to require three-dimensional printers sold in the state of New York to include blocking technology, the working group shall so report, and no regulations shall be required to be promulgated pursuant to this section, until such time as the working group determines that it is technologically feasible.''</blockquote><ref name="bill-pdf" />

If the working group makes that finding, no rules issue and the sales requirement never takes effect, deferred indefinitely until a future finding of feasibility.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

==Scope and definitions==

The reach of the mandate turns on how broadly the statute defines a 3D printer. Penal Law § 265.00 (38), mirrored in Executive Law § 837-aa (1)(a), defines the term in two prongs:

<blockquote>''"Three-dimensional printer" means: (a) any machine capable of rendering a three-dimensional object from a digital design file using additive manufacturing; or (b) any machine capable of making three-dimensional modifications to an object from a digital design file using subtractive manufacturing.''</blockquote><ref name="bill" />

The statute does not separately define ''"additive manufacturing,"'' ''"subtractive manufacturing,"'' or a CNC machine, and it contains no carve-out for machine size, intended purpose, or consumer use.<ref name="bill" /> Writing in Techdirt, Karl Bode argued that the law as drafted would reach open-source printer firmware projects such as Marlin, Klipper, and RepRap, offline office printers with no network connection, and CNC milling equipment.<ref name="techdirt" />

Under the statute, the minimum performance standards for blocking technology are left to the working group and the rules that follow, rather than written into the law itself.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

==Criminal provisions==

Subpart A adds new digital-file offenses to the Penal Law, alongside a new definition of ''"digital firearm manufacturing code"'' in § 265.00 (39) covering computer-aided design files or other code that can program a 3D printer or CNC milling machine to produce a firearm, ghost gun, unfinished frame or receiver, silencer, rapid-fire modification device, or major firearm component.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

Penal Law § 265.10 (11) makes it a class A misdemeanor to knowingly sell or distribute digital firearm manufacturing code to a person who lacks both a New York gunsmith license and a federal firearms license, subject to good-faith, out-of-state, and licensed-recipient exceptions stated in the text.<ref name="bill-pdf" /> Section 265.10 (12) makes it a class A misdemeanor to possess such code with intent to illegally manufacture a firearm or to distribute the code to a prohibited or unlicensed New York person.<ref name="bill-pdf" /> Both file offenses are misdemeanors, not felonies; the enacted text caps them at a class A misdemeanor.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

The one felony in Subpart A targets conversion devices rather than printers or files. Under § 265.10 (10), a dealer or gunsmith who, on or after May 31, 2027, sells, transfers, or ships a ''"convertible pistol"'', which the statute defines as a semi-automatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be converted into a machine gun by attaching a pistol converter, commits a class D felony.<ref name="bill-pdf" />

==Technical feasibility criticism==

The central technical objection is that no detection algorithm can reliably separate gun-part geometry from ordinary mechanical geometry. Phillip Torrone of Adafruit, whose critique Techdirt reproduced, argued that such a system would have to identify every possible firearm component from raw STL and G-code files without flagging the pipes, tubes, blocks, brackets, gears, and other common shapes that share geometric properties with gun parts, which he framed as a classification problem carrying high false-positive and false-negative rates.<ref name="techdirt" />

Slicing software converts a 3D model into machine instructions (G-code) that describe tool paths, not labeled parts, so the file a printer executes does not announce what object it builds. '''Many machines also run offline, and much of the firmware that drives consumer printers is open source, which means a scanning requirement cannot be enforced on a printer that never contacts the state library or that runs community firmware the mandate does not reach.'''<ref name="techdirt" /> The Electronic Frontier Foundation summarized the technical bet as ''"an unfeasible tech solution."''<ref name="eff" />

==Consumer-rights and surveillance concerns==

The consumer-rights objection is that the mandate puts a state-defined filter between owners and hardware they bought. The Electronic Frontier Foundation described print-blocking as ''"censorware,"'' software that it said ''"surveils every print,"'' and framed the requirement as surveillance of lawful printing carried out on the owner's own machine.<ref name="eff" />

A blocking-technology requirement is a manufacturer-side technical control fixed to hardware the buyer already owns. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has framed print blocking as anti-consumer for the same reason, treating a mandated filter on an owner's machine as a restriction on lawful use of property.<ref name="eff-permission" /> The group compared the requirement to [[Digital rights management|DRM]], calling manufacturer-provided software restrictions ''"an old tactic from the DRM playbook"'' and tracing the approach to the [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]], which it said made bypassing DRM a federal crime.<ref name="eff-permission" /> Techdirt noted that much of the firmware running consumer printers, including open-source projects such as Marlin, Klipper, and RepRap, would not ship with a state-compliant detection algorithm, so a scanning requirement could push owners toward proprietary, locked-down machines.<ref name="techdirt" />

==Comparison to other states==

New York's measure is one of several state efforts in 2026 to regulate 3D-printed firearms through the printer rather than only the file. Washington's House Bill 2321, titled ''"Requiring three-dimensional printers be equipped with certain blocking technologies,"'' would require printers sold in the state to carry blocking features tied to a firearms blueprint detection algorithm.<ref name="wa-bill" /> The bill was prefiled on January 8, 2026 and referred to the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee, where it remained as of June 1, 2026; it has not been enacted.<ref name="wa-bill" /> As reported by Tom's Hardware, the bill would prohibit sales after July 1, 2027 and set penalties as a class C felony carrying up to five years in prison and a $15,000 fine.<ref name="toms-wa" />

California's Assembly Bill 2047, authored by Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, would require 3D printers sold in the state to be equipped with firearm blocking technology and would add Penal Code § 29187 to make it a misdemeanor to knowingly disable, deactivate, uninstall, or otherwise circumvent firearm blocking technology installed in a 3D printer with intent to manufacture firearms.<ref name="ca-bill" /> The Assembly passed the bill, last amended on May 18, 2026, and sent it to the state Senate, where it was pending as of June 1, 2026.<ref name="toms-ca" />

The underlying question of whether firearm code is protected speech has been litigated separately. In February 2026, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a challenge by Defense Distributed and the Second Amendment Foundation to New Jersey's restrictions on distributing 3D-printed gun code, holding that purely functional code with no expressive use is not protected speech and affirming dismissal because the plaintiffs had not pleaded that their files were expressive.<ref name="ca3" /><ref name="courthouse" />

==Reactions==

On the gun-safety side, the Governor's office presented the law as setting ''"first-in-the-nation minimum safety standards for 3D printers sold in New York to be equipped with basic technology that prevents the unlicensed, illegal production of lethal firearms and firearm parts,"'' and directed the Division of Criminal Justice Services to lead the expert task force.<ref name="gov" /> Everytown for Gun Safety praised the budget as nation-leading action against do-it-yourself machine guns and 3D-printed firearms.<ref name="everytown" />

On the maker and digital-rights side, the Electronic Frontier Foundation campaigned against the proposal under the banner ''"Stop New York's Attack on 3D Printing,"'' arguing the approach burdens lawful makers and rests on technology that does not exist.<ref name="eff" /> Technical writers at Techdirt, drawing on analysis from the open-source hardware company Adafruit, focused on the classification problem and the breadth of the printer definition rather than the policy goal, arguing the text as written reaches far beyond firearms and is unworkable as a scanning mandate.<ref name="techdirt" />

==See also==
*[[Right to Repair]]
*[[Digital rights management]]
*[[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]]
*[[Planned obsolescence]]
*[[Bambu Lab]]

==References==
<references>
<ref name="bill">{{Cite web |url=https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/S9005/amendment/C |title=Senate Bill S9005C, FY2026-2027 budget (Public Protection and General Government), Part C |publisher=New York State Senate |date=2026-05-27 |access-date=2026-06-01}} The two-prong three-dimensional printer definition, the § 837-aa(1)(b) blocking-technology definition, the § 837-aa(1)(c) firearms blueprint detection algorithm and STL/CAD/geometric-code clause, and the "Signed by Governor on May 27, 2026 (signed as Chapter 55)" status appear on this page.</ref>
<ref name="bill-pdf">{{Cite web |url=https://assembly.ny.gov/2026budget/2026_bills/enacted/A10005c.pdf |title=Enacted text of A. 10005-C / S. 9005-C, FY2026-2027 budget, Part C |publisher=New York State Assembly |date=2026-05-27 |access-date=2026-06-01}} Full Part C provisions cited here (the § 396-eeee(5) exception, the § 396-eeee $5,000-per-product civil penalty and Attorney General injunction/restitution authority, the § 837-aa(3)(b) "scans of seized firearms" library clause, the § 837-aa(2) feasibility clause, the 90-day / one-year / nine-month / one-year-after-rules effective-date chain, and the criminal subdivisions at Penal Law § 265.00(39) and § 265.10(10)-(12) with the May 31, 2027 convertible-pistol date) appear in the enacted text.</ref>
<ref name="gov">{{Cite web |url=https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/keeping-new-yorkers-safe-governor-hochul-signs-legislation-strengthen-public-safety-and-make |title=Keeping New Yorkers Safe: Governor Hochul Signs Legislation to Strengthen Public Safety |publisher=Office of Governor Kathy Hochul |date=2026-05-27 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="everytown">{{Cite web |url=https://www.everytown.org/press/new-york-shuts-down-the-plastic-pipeline-governor-hochul-and-lawmakers-pass-nation-leading-measures-to-stop-the-spread-of-diy-machine-guns-and-3d-printed-firearms-in-fy27-budget/ |title=New York Shuts Down the 'Plastic Pipeline': Governor Hochul and Lawmakers Pass Nation-Leading Measures to Stop the Spread of DIY Machine Guns and 3D-Printed Firearms in FY27 Budget |publisher=Everytown for Gun Safety |date=2026 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="eff">{{Cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/stop-new-yorks-attack-3d-printing |title=Stop New York's Attack on 3D Printing |author=Rory Mir and Nathan Sheard |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |date=2026-04-16 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="techdirt">{{Cite web |url=https://www.techdirt.com/2026/02/19/new-yorks-new-3d-printing-law-as-written-is-extremely-harmful-and-annoying/ |title=New York's New 3D Printing Law, As Written, Is Extremely Harmful And Annoying |author=Karl Bode |publisher=Techdirt |date=2026-02-19 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="eff-permission">{{Cite web |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/04/print-blocking-anti-consumer-permission-print-part-1 |title=Print Blocking is Anti-Consumer: Permission to Print Part 1 |publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation |date=April 2026 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="nra">{{Cite web |url=https://www.nraila.org/articles/20260527/new-york-gov-kathy-hochul-signs-gun-ban-in-state-budget-process |title=New York: Gov. Kathy Hochul Signs Gun Ban in State Budget Process |publisher=NRA Institute for Legislative Action |date=2026-05-27 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="toms-wa">{{Cite web |url=https://www.tomshardware.com/3d-printing/washington-state-proposes-new-3d-printed-gun-controls-with-blocking-features-and-blueprint-detection-algorithm-proposal-would-carry-sentences-of-five-years-in-prison-usd15-000-fine-for-violation |title=Washington state proposes new 3D-printed gun controls with blocking features and blueprint detection algorithm |author=Stephen Warwick |publisher=Tom's Hardware |date=2026-01-19 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="wa-bill">{{Cite web |url=https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2321&Year=2025 |title=HB 2321 - Requiring three-dimensional printers be equipped with certain blocking technologies |publisher=Washington State Legislature |date=2026 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="toms-ca">{{Cite web |url=https://www.tomshardware.com/3d-printing/california-assembly-passes-3d-printer-bill-that-would-criminalize-bypassing-mandated-gun-blocking-software |title=California Assembly passes 3D printer bill that would criminalize bypassing mandated gun-blocking software |author=Luke James |publisher=Tom's Hardware |date=2026-05-30 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="ca-bill">{{Cite web |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB2047 |title=AB-2047 Firearms: 3-dimensional printing blocking technology |publisher=California Legislative Information |date=2026-05-18 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="ca3">{{Cite web |url=https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/233058p.pdf |title=Defense Distributed v. Attorney General New Jersey, No. 23-3058 |publisher=United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit |date=2026-02-12 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
<ref name="courthouse">{{Cite web |url=https://www.courthousenews.com/third-circuit-backs-new-jerseys-crackdown-on-3d-printed-gun-code/ |title=Third Circuit backs New Jersey's crackdown on 3D-printed gun code |publisher=Courthouse News Service |date=2026-02-12 |access-date=2026-06-01}}</ref>
</references>

[[Category:Legislation]]
[[Category:Right to Repair]]
[[Category:Digital rights management]]