New York 3D printer blocking technology mandate: Difference between revisions
"gun safety" is a misnomer here; it's a rebrand by gun control groups to frame criticism as being anti-safety. |
knowing the four rules, wearing eye and ear pro, and using both hands is gun safety. everytown is gun control. |
||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
==Reactions== | ==Reactions== | ||
On the gun | On the gun control 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, which had urged the legislature to adopt the measure, praised the budget as nation-leading action against do-it-yourself machine guns and 3D-printed firearms.<ref name="everytown" /> In written testimony to the Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and Means committees on February 12, 2026, Everytown policy counsel Elisabeth Ryan urged lawmakers to support Part C of the budget bill, which she said would ''"require that all 3D printers sold in the state be equipped with technology that will block any files designed to produce firearms, their parts, and illegal accessories."''<ref name="everytown-testimony" /> | ||
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" /> | 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" /> | ||