Both makers and lawmakers around the world have taken notice of 3D printed guns. Regardless of intention, their efforts to stifle the use of 3D printed firearms have given rise to a number of difficult questions.
Should someone with the files for a 3D printed gun be charged with the same crime as someone that actually has the gun? Has the media sensationalized the rise of 3D printed guns? What’s the best way to regulate 3D printed weapons? And most importantly, should you fear 3D printed guns?
To answer these questions, we will examine the reasons why you should and shouldn’t fear the 3D printed gun, explain the history, and then go over the laws that have been put in place to stop them.
It’s hard to keep up with the latest news and updates on 3D printed guns — that’s why we’ve compiled a list of the bigger news items below. Keep an eye on this space as it is updated regularly.
A 26-year-old student in London, UK was convicted of 3D printing a firearm, the Guardian reports.
Tendai Muswere pleaded guilty to the charge on June 19 and is believed to be the first person in the UK to be convicted for the crime.
Police in London searched the student’s home in central London in October 2017 with a drug warrant and found parts of a 3D printed gun. Muswere said the weapon was for a university project on a “dystopian film”, but couldn’t provide additional details on the project.
Muswere also said he wasn’t aware the gun could actually fire, but his Internet search history showed he’d watched videos on how to print firearms that could fire live ammunition.
A further search by police the following year turned up more firearm parts.
Police were clear that this is not a widespread problem.
A professor and graduate student of the University of Mississipi have created a way to trace 3D printed guns, reports the Clarion Ledger.
Unlike traditional guns, which have serial numbers and require buyers to get a background check, 3D printed guns fly under the radar — mostly.
James Cizdziel, an associate professor, and Oscar “Beau” Black, a graduate student, found a way around this by collecting traces of the polymers used to print the guns and then identifying them using mass spectrometry.
The researchers put the different polymers used to print guns in a database to help forensic experts identify whether a crime was committed using a 3D printed gun.
Cloaked in the anonymity of the Internet, gun activists are building up a decentralized network where they share print files and advice, reports Wired.
“If they were to come after me, they’d first have to find my identity,” says Ivan the Troll, a member of the group, to Wired. “I’m one of many, many like-minded individuals who’re doing this sort of work.”
The members share videos online, showing off their 3D printed handguns and the production process, along with CAD models and other gun-related files. They discover the group primarily through Reddit and online forums.
Though they aren’t all ideologically alike, many of them share the same views on anarchy, freedom of speech and a right to bear arms. And unlike other gun advocates, like Cody Wilson, who used to run Defence Distributed until he was charged with sexual assault against a minor, this group (Deterrence Dispensed) doesn’t care about whether it’s legal or not to 3D print guns.
This rampant, flagrant, anonymous file sharing makes it difficult for law enforcement to keep up.
On Tuesday, a federal judge in Seattle delivered a temporary restraining order to stop Defense Distributed from releasing the 3D printable gun files. US district judge Robert Lasnik, who issued the restraining order, shared his concerns about the matter:
“There is a possibility of irreparable harm because of the way these guns can be made.”
Shortly after, Defense Distributed took the downloadable models off of the website and issued its own statement on the homepage:
“This site, after legally committing its files to the public domain through a license from the U.S. Department of State, has been ordered shut down by a federal judge in the Western District of Washington.”
Although Wilson initially appeared to accept the judge’s ruling and take the blueprints down, it turns out that the models were just moved from the Defense Distributed website to a new home: CodeIsFreeSpeech.com.
The organization released a statement explaining the concept behind the new platform. The website includes various download links for the Liberator and other 3D gun models, a list of pro-gun rights organizations and excerpts from the United States Constitution.
The organization originally agreed to publish the files on August 1, 2018, but a handful of DIY firearm blueprints appeared on the Defense Distributed website five days early. According to Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, it’s estimated that more than 1,000 people had already downloaded 3D plans for AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifles.
Sen. Edward Markey (D-Massachusetts) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) filed legislation to attempt to prohibit 3D printable digital firearm files publication from going online. They also submitted another bill that would require all guns to have at least one non-removable component made of metal. The latter is intended to stop undetectable weapons from being slipped past metal detectors and other security measures.
The Ministry of Public Safety in Canada also stated that citizens who make their own 3D printed guns without a license will face mandatory jail time. “It is illegal to manufacture or possess a firearm without the appropriate license and applicable registration certificate,” said Jean-Philippe Levert, a spokesperson for Public Safety Canada.
Nine different states have joined together to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration for its decision to allow 3D printable guns back onto the internet. The suit aims to block the distribution of plans for 3D printed weapons by Wilson and Defense Distributed, and was signed on by the state of Washington, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Maryland, New York and the District of Columbia.
“I have a question for the Trump Administration: Why are you allowing dangerous criminals easy access to weapons? These downloadable guns are unregistered and very difficult to detect, even with metal detectors, and will be available to anyone regardless of age, mental health or criminal history,” Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a statement released on Monday.
The newly filed legal complaint argues that once the 3D printed weapon blueprints are online, it will become “a bell that cannot be un-rung.” Wilson has already responded to the proposed lawsuit on Twitter, stating “I am now being sued by at least 21 state attorneys general. If you want your Second Amendment online, THIS is the fight” and asking people to join his organization to fight back.
In addition to the lawsuit, 21 different Attorney General from various states have sent a letter to the US State Department and the Department of Justice, asking for an immediate block on sharing 3D printed gun plans. You can read the full letter here.
Although the firearm designs were scheduled to go up on the Defense Distributed starting on August 1, the organization’s website already contains around 10 3D models for different weapons and firearm parts. Since the blueprints leaked early, thousands of people have already started downloading the plans for the AR-15 rifle, causing some states to block the website completely.
On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump came out with a statement (via Twitter) about the controversy surrounding 3D printed guns:
I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn’t seem to make much sense!
Whether the joint lawsuit will be successful or not remains to be seen, but Wilson and Defense Distributed are clearly intent to move along with their plan to make DIY weapons accessible for all. It seems odd that Defense Distributed decided to undercut the August 1 start date and upload the models a few days early. Perhaps the multi-state lawsuit and global criticism has caused Wilson and his organization to jump the gun?
Concerns surrounding the rise of 3D printed guns have been brewing for over five years now, but the issue seems to have really blown up last year. The initial threat of DIY firearms had initially simmered down once the US government forced crypto-anarchist and guns right activist Cody Wilson and his organization Defense Distributed (more about them in our History of the 3D Printed Gun section) to take down 3D gun models from their website in 2013. However, a recent court settlement between Wilson and the Trump administration has created a new legal precedent for the blueprints to legally go back online.
The court settlement states that the ban on these CAD files was in violation of the First Amendment and that the government has been unlawfully censoring Defense Distributed’s right to expression. It was also decided that “non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber” are “not inherently military,” opening the door for DIY firearms like the popular Liberator to return to the public eye.
“Not only is this a First Amendment victory for free speech, it also is a devastating blow to the gun prohibition lobby. For years, anti-gunners have contended that modern semi-automatic sport-utility rifles are so-called ‘weapons of war,’ and with this settlement, the government has acknowledged they are nothing of the sort,” Alan Gottlieb, founder and Executive Vice President of the Second Amendment Foundation, said in a press release on the matter.
Shortly after the settlement, Defense Distributed announced that they would relaunch its 3D firearm model repository on August 1, 2018. The website will host the designs of the Liberator pistol, AR-15 frames, and other DIY semi-automatic weapons. Wilson also hopes that the platform will eventually become a space for other users to upload their own gun blueprints. Defense Distributed is also responsible for manufacturing the Ghost Gunner, which is a desktop CNC milling machine capable of turning 80-percent lower receivers into functional and untraceable weapons.
Despite the initial victory for Wilson and Defense Distributed, it could be cut short by Democratic members of U.S. Congress and gun control activist groups that are pushing back on the court’s decision. The first public retort from the Senate came from Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY- D), who denounced the settlement and raised concerns about how DIY firearms are both untraceable and undetectable. He was also joined by a handful of other Democratic Senators in a call for an extension to prevent the 3D gun models from going online.
“We are looking at a world in which anyone with a little bit of cash can bring an undetectable gun that can fire multiple bullets anywhere — including planes, government buildings, sporting events, and schools. 3D printers are a miraculous technology that has the potential to revolutionize manufacturing, but we need to make sure they are not being used to make deadly, undetectable weapons,” Sen. Schumer said during the press conference.
The settlement has also received pushback by gun safety groups, some of which have banded together to stop Defense Distributed. In July, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence announced that they are planning to take legal action to prevent the U.S. State Department from allowing the 3D printed gun models online.
“[T]his settlement is far from ordinary. It is dangerous, irreparable and – as the government itself has emphatically argued for years – raises issues of national defense and national security of the highest order. It is also, we believe, illegal,” the gun safety organizations wrote in a joint amicus letter.
As the world waits for Defense Distributed to upload and share the 3D gun models to the public, each country will be tasked with figuring out how to tackle the issue. While gun laws are more lax in the United States, these files could likely be accessed in regions with stricter gun control laws, such as Europe, Australia, and Asia.
We’ll be sure to continue updating our 2019 3D printed gun digest as more news comes to light. So stay tuned…
Editor’s note: Prior to the court settlement between Wilson and the U.S. Government was reached, the debate on whether we should fear 3D printed guns or not has been a heated source of debate. To help get you up to speed with the history regarding Wilson and Defense Distributed, DIY weapons, the criminals who have been caught with them and laws that have been created to combat the rise of 3D printed guns, be sure to scroll on through the rest of our extensive 2019 3D printed gun digest.
There are valid arguments for why you should and shouldn’t fear 3D printed guns, making this quite the loaded issue. To offer a fair and balanced view on this controversial topic, we’ll offer reasons on both sides of the 3D printed gun debate to help you decide for yourself.
Perhaps what stirs this fear isn’t the functionality of these homemade weapons, but the ease of creating one without anyone knowing. Many states in the U.S. and other countries throughout the world have strict gun control laws. Generally speaking, those who are allowed to own a firearm must have it registered. But with 3D printed guns, people fear that criminals and other unstable people will be able to produce firearms at home and commit crimes with it.
The commonly used term for a 3D printed firearm is “Ghost Gun”, which refers to the fact that these firearms are 3D printed without serial numbers and are virtually untraceable by the government.
Although the current state of desktop 3D printing doesn’t necessarily allow high-quality firearms to be manufactured at home, this could also change as the technology advances. For instance, as metal 3D printing becomes more affordable and accessible, the potential to create higher-grade weapons could grow.
Another valid fear is that 3D printing could lead to cheap firearm factories for criminals. But again, having a gun 3D printed in metal would cost thousands of dollars, making it more convenient for criminals to wade through other illegal channels to find one.
Needless to say, it’s not a 3D printed gun that should be feared. If anything, it’s the idea of being able to manufacture firearms unchecked that really drives this frenzy forward.
It’s quite easy to produce a plastic firearm with the proper 3D files and desktop printer. But this homemade 3D printed gun is far from reliable when it comes to functionality. In fact, police testing has proven that a 3D printed gun could endanger the shooter as much as anyone else.
A firearm produced with ABS material could break apart or even potentially explode in the hands of the user when fired. Softer PLA will likely cause the parts to bend or deform after firing.
Realistically, neither ABS or PLA is ideal for producing firearms. While most plastic 3D printed guns are made using ABS, chances are only a single shot will be able to be fired before it either breaks or fails. The reason for this is because the act of firing a bullet simply exerts too much power for most thermoplastics to withstand.
Some gun enthusiasts have created hybrid 3D printed guns, consisting of traditional metal components and thermoplastics. In theory, these firearms should offer much better functionality than an ABS-based weapon. But again, building a hybrid 3D printed gun seems counterproductive to just finding an actual one.
Lastly, metal 3D printing can and has been used to produce a fully functional firearm. There’s no denying this. But, these type of prints are extremely costly, and it makes no sense for a criminal to go to a metal 3D printing service instead of finding a cheaper and more discreet way on the black market.
This also helps to quell the fear that a 3D printed gun would be able to slip through a metal detector, seeing that at least a metal firing pin would be needed to make the makeshift firearm functional. 3D printed guns that are comprised primarily of thermoplastic are extremely ineffective and thus aren’t worth the trouble of manufacturing cases where they will be used in a menacing way.
Essentially, there is no reason to fear a 3D printed gun any more than you would a traditionally manufactured one. In fact, in many regions of the United States, these firearms are easier to get and are much more lethal. There are approximately 300 million firearms spread across the U.S., making the fears of a potential 3D printing gun epidemic pretty baseless.
As you will see later in this article, the threat level of a 3D printed gun is much higher in places with strict gun control, especially in Australia.
The world’s first functional 3D printed gun was designed back in 2013 by Cody Wilson, a crypto-anarchist and the founder of the Texas open source gunsmith organization Defense Distributed. The 3D files for this one-shot pistol were the first to be released into the world. They sparked an unprecedented controversy that still looms over the 3D printing community to this very day.
After the files for the Liberator were downloaded over 100,000 times in two days, the US Department of State compelled Defense Distributed into taking the model down. This demand has sparked an ongoing legal battle between the techno-anarchist and government.
Most of the 3D printed guns that have surfaced thus far are in the form of a pistol. But 3D printable parts for semi-automatic weapons have been released by Defense Distributed – and confiscated by police.
As 3D printed gun blueprints are distributed by the internet, they have been found across the world, from Australia to Japan, Europe to the Americas. These makeshift firearms have found their way into the hands of police, criminals, and libertarians alike.
Since the release of the Liberator, many government bodies have been scrambling to impose laws that would strictly prohibit 3D printed guns, and in some cases even 3D models of firearms.
Nowadays, additively manufactured weapons remain an unknown threat, but countries like Australia and the United States are not wasting any time in fear-mongering and passing laws.
Most 3D printed guns are based off previously existing designs. Most of them are freely available to download, but also hard to find due to increasing illegality. But when Defense Distributed’s Liberator first hit the scene, it proved that a firearm could be produced almost entirely out of thermoplastic material.
Every component of Wilson’s Liberator was 3D printed except for the metal firing pin and the actual bullet. The Defense Distributed founder has also created an automatic weapon that is not fully 3D printed but is equipped with additively manufactured components, in the past.
Since then, Wilson has continued on his campaign to put DIY firearms in the spotlight. After his 3D model was forced off the internet, Defense Distributed released the Ghost Gunner, a desktop CNC milling machine designed to manufacture guns. At first, the machine was only capable of producing the lower receiver component for an AR-15. However, Wilson has since upgraded the Ghost Gunner software to make it capable of creating the aluminum frame of an M1911 handgun.
While Wilson believes that he is advocating for gun rights by making firearm production more accessible and undetectable, others have grown worried about this technology getting into the wrong hands. Across the world, countries are passing laws that equate 3D printed guns with traditional firearms. In some places, even having the 3D model for a firearm would be considered possession of an illegal weapon.
Nevertheless, the recent court settlement between Wilson the U.S. Government could make it difficult for other countries to prevent 3D printable guns from being produced within their borders. Now that we’ve shared a brief history of 3D printed guns with you, let’s take a look at the laws that have been drawn up to prevent people from 3D printing their own firearms.
Prior to the settlement victory for Wilson, the U.S. Government had pushed back hard against 3D printable gun models. After the Liberator was deemed in violation of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), Wilson filed a federal civil suit against the State Department.
In September 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected Wilson’s preliminary injunction request, claiming that national security concerns outweigh Defense Distributed’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
Even though the State Department has succeeded to keep 3D gun files illegal in court, Wilson’s design and a handful of others have seeped through the cracks of the internet. There have been a number of instances where 3D printed guns have been confiscated by police the US.
In August 2016, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at the Reno–Tahoe International Airport found a 3D printed gun and five .22-caliber bullets in a passenger’s carry-on bag. The year prior, two felons in Oregon were caught with an assault rifle that had a 3D printed lower receiver attached to it.
It is illegal under the Undetectable Firearms Act to manufacture any firearm that cannot be detected by a metal detector. 3D printed guns are usually made from PLA or ABS and are therefore not allowed in the US, as legal designs for firearms require a metal plate to be inserted into the printed body.
Some states that allow firearm ownership have taken up the issue of 3D printed guns themselves. For example, California passed a law that requires a 3D printed gun to be properly approved and registered. But with relatively lax gun laws already existing in a number of US states, 3D printed guns have proven to be more of a glaring problem in Australia, which has much stricter anti-gun legislation.
3D printing isn’t the only manufacturing method being used to create gun parts under the radar. In February 2017, a California man known as “Dr. Death” was arrested and sentenced to three and a half years in prison for using CNC milling to manufacture and sell firearms. This traditionally industrial technology has also become more accessible over the years and is considerably more of a threat due to its ability to work with metal.
Now that Defense Distributed is legally allowed bringing their DIY firearm blueprints back online, it will be interesting to see how each state decides to handle the situation.
All in all, when it comes to producing or obtaining weapons in an unlawful manner, 3D printing is far from preferable, at least in the current state of the technology. Criminal organizations may look towards 3D printing more often as the technology advances, but for now, most of the fear seems unjustified. At the end of the day, where there’s a will, there’s a way.
No country has encountered as much legal trouble with 3D printed guns as Australia has. Their strict firearm legislation has limited the access to traditional weapons. So some have turned to 3D printing to help circumvent the law.
In November 2016, Gold Coast police discovered a highly sophisticated weapons production facility that used 3D printers to produce machine guns. A month later, a collection of 3D printed firearms were seized in Tasmania, but the manufacturer was let off with a warning. Police in what could be Australia’s most concerning case linked the discovery of 3D printed guns in Melbourne to the Calabrian mafia.
To combat the rise of 3D printed guns, New South Wales passed a law equating possession of 3D gun files to actual possession of a 3D printed gun. Some of Australia’s Senate members have their doubts about 3D printed guns being an imminent threat, and that further restrictions would hinder 3D printing innovation overall. The country’s Green Party has been a staunch opponent to 3D printed guns, citing the growth of the technology as proof that 3D printing will be capable of producing more dangerous weapons soon.
In 2013, New South Wales police tested out a 3D printed gun. With this handgun, they were able to fire a bullet 17 centimeters into a standard firing block, but the plastic exploded when the bullet was discharged.
In 2015, the county amended its firearms act to include a clause that says “A person must not possess a digital blueprint for the manufacture of a firearm on a 3D printer or on an electronic milling machine… [or face a] Maximum penalty: imprisonment for 14 years.”
But the situation in Australia is trickier than most. The glaring amount of confiscated 3D printed weapons seems to be linked to the country’s strict laws, making traditional metal firearms much more difficult to come across than they are in the US. It’s important to note that while a plastic 3D printed gun poses a minimal risk, most Australian legislators fear the increasing accessibility and affordability of metal 3D printers will come back to haunt them.
Contrary to Australia, the strict gun control laws in Europe have reduced the threat of 3D printed guns. Still, when you look at the regions that downloaded the Liberator files the most, you’ll find that most of the leading countries are located in Europe. During the two initial days Wilson’s infamous 3D printed gun was available online, it was downloaded the most in Spain, followed by the US, Brazil, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom has been particularly concerned with the rise of 3D printed guns, calling them a threat to national security. In 2013, the UK Home Office introduces stricter regulations on 3D printed guns or gun parts, making it highly illegal to create, buy, or sell them in Great Britain.
Thus far, the threat of 3D printed guns in Europe has mostly been confined to television. In the recent past, the Italian crime TV series Gomorra has depicted a RepRap 3D printer being used to create a 3D printed gun.
The 3D printed gun controversy isn’t just restrained to the Western world. Shortly after Wilson’s design surfaced, Japanese citizen Yoshitomo Imura designed and printed a six-shot revolver known as the ZigZag. The government ended up sentencing him to two years in prison for 3D printing guns and also instructing others.
In Singapore, possession of a 3D printed gun is punishable by death, even if it’s an air pistol.
China has also taken extreme measures to monitor and prevent 3D printed guns and other weapons from surfacing. Police in Chongqing are requiring all companies with 3D printers to register themselves as “special industries”, asking for the equipment in use, the security measures they have in place, and even information on all employees.
While police in China certainly fear the potential rise of the 3D printed gun, other citizens feel that the law is an overreaction. According to Kwok Ka Wai, assistant professor in the mechanical engineering department at the University of Hong Kong, there are practical limitations on using 3D printing to manufacture weapons or other items protected by copyright.
“There are a lot of tools that you can use to make bad things, but they are not tailor-made for that purpose,” he says.
Although they’re the most focused on, 3D printed guns are far from the only weapon that 3D printing can potentially be used to manufacture. Concerns have also mounted in the Middle East over the possibility that ISIS is using 3D printing to produce bombs.
With the distribution of 3D gun models illegal across the world, these 3D gun models have found a home on the darknet. Sold alongside traditionally manufactured firearms and other black market weapons, 3D printable gun designs are being distributed more and more through the deep web.
A recent study from the non-profit research organization RAND Corporation discovered a startling rise in 3D gun models. While looking at the entire darknet market for weapons, the researchers found that 11 of the for-sale items were CAD files for firearms.
Now, it’s clear that CAD models are still way less threatening than the physical firearms sold on the black market, but the mere presence hints at a potentially dangerous situation in the future. What stood out the most to the RAND research team is the average cost of 3D gun models. While the average gun costs $1,200 on the darknet, a price for a 3D printable gun design averages out to $12.
Not only is the cost for these CAD models extremely low, but such files can be sold over and over again. Therefore, if and when the day comes where metal 3D printers become more affordable, it’s possible that this minor issue could start to loom larger.
There’s no denying that 3D printed guns are being discovered in different parts of the world. They are getting more popular in Australia and the U.S. But are these makeshift weapons really the treat the media portrays them to be? Ultimately, the answer seems to be yes, but more so no.
The current lack of access to affordable metal 3D printing makes producing a functional 3D printed gun solely with plastic difficult. But for most firearm components, this emerging technology could soon become a viable option for gunsmiths, gun advocates, and even criminal organizations. Also, the materials you can 3D print with are getting better and better.
At this point, there have been no violent crimes attributed to a 3D printed gun. But still, a more realistic threat will likely arise when access to metal 3D printing increases in the near future.
It might seem easy to dismiss anti-3D printed gun legislation as overreaching and embellished. But that doesn’t mean the various laws preventing the production and sharing of 3D printed guns don’t have any merit. Just as with any other youthful technology, 3D printing will continue to advance and become more affordable. If you couple this with recent court settlement allowing Wilson and Defense Distributed to upload 3D printed gun models online, there certainly a slight reason to be concerned about the future of Ghost Guns.
However, for the time being, the fear-mongering campaign on 3D printed guns is a bit overblown. While this emerging technology is providing incredible benefits to the medical, industrial, and consumer sectors, the mainstream media only seems interested in 3D printing when it seems like weapons are falling out of your 3D printer’s extruder.
At the end of the day, there’s no reason to fear a 3D printed gun any more than you would a conventionally manufactured or CNC milled firearm. Most desktop 3D printers are not capable of creating a lethal and fully functional weapon on their own, and metal 3D printed guns are far too expensive to appeal to the average criminals.
There’s a reason that no violent crimes involving 3D printed guns have been reported. They’re unreliable, difficult to produce, and in most places, are harder to come across than black market firearms. But, recent developments in both 3D printing technology and the law could make 3D printed guns a more imminent threat in the near future, so it’s pertinent that we keep an eye on this space to see how things change.
License: The text of "2019 3D Printed Gun Digest – Everything You Need to Know" by All3DP is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.