UMVA has learned that a growing number of states are taking drastic measures to restrict the creation and possession of 3D-printed firearms, sparking a fierce debate over Second Amendment rights and public safety.
The surge in 3D-printed guns, often referred to as "ghost guns" due to their lack of serial numbers, has prompted lawmakers in at least 16 states to enact laws regulating their manufacture and possession. This year alone, seven states have introduced significant legislation to curb the spread of these untraceable firearms.
According to information obtained by UMVA, states such as Colorado, New Jersey, and New York have implemented various restrictions on weapons manufactured without serial numbers, with some laws requiring 3D printer manufacturers to install technology that blocks the printing of firearms. California has also bolstered its existing laws, advancing a bill that would mandate 3D printer manufacturers to equip their devices with this technology.
New York lawmakers have taken a similar approach, incorporating a law into the state's budget that will take effect by mid-June, which will prevent 3D printers from producing firearms. This move has been likened to laws that prohibit commercial printers from producing U.S. currency, highlighting the gravity of the situation.
The push to restrict 3D-printed guns has gained momentum in recent months, particularly in light of a significant rise in the number of these firearms recovered at crime scenes. Data reveals that over 27,000 3D-printed ghost guns were seized in January 2023, a staggering increase from the mere 1,600 recovered in January 2017.
Proponents of stricter gun laws argue that the proliferation of 3D-printed weapons poses a significant threat to public safety, particularly in American communities. As 3D-printing technology becomes more accessible and affordable, there is a growing concern that young people may manufacture their own firearms without adult supervision, potentially leading to devastating consequences.
However, opponents of these restrictions argue that they infringe upon Second Amendment rights and do little to address the root causes of gun violence. They contend that the focus should be on the individual committing the crime, rather than the firearm itself, and that bans on 3D-printed guns are unlikely to have a significant impact on public safety.
Several states that have implemented restrictions on 3D-printed guns are now facing constitutional lawsuits, with some cases already making their way through the courts. In a significant ruling, a three-judge panel upheld a lower court decision that affirmed a cease and desist order against a company distributing 3D-gun blueprints to unlicensed individuals, dealing a blow to the argument that such restrictions violate Second Amendment rights.
