Three states, California, Washington, and New York, are considering bills that would empower the government to from 3D printing whatever they could get away with banning. The purported reason is to ban the 3D printing of gun parts. They will do this by requiring 3D printers sold in their respective states be able to block illegal 3D printer files that the government identifies.
The New York law, proposed in the budget proposal, S9005/A10005, in part says:
§ 396-eeee. Three-dimensional printers. 1. No person, firm or corporation shall sell or deliver any three-dimensional printer in the stateof New York unless such printer is equipped with blocking technology, and except as provided in subdivision two of this section, no such sale or delivery shall be permitted unless the transferee meets in person with the transferor to accomplish such sale or delivery. As used in this section, the terms “three-dimensional printer” and “blocking technology” shall have the same meaning as such terms are defined in subdivision one of section eight hundred thirty-seven-aa of the executive law.
Washington’s proposed law goes further and requires proactive submission by sellers of 3D printers, under penalty of perjury, that the 3D printers are compliant. Furthermore, the bill would require that the 3D printer’s algorithm be updatable according to the dictates of the state’s Attorney General. HB 2321 says, in part:
The database of disallowed firearms blueprint files that an algorithm uses must be able to be regularly updated, to an extent and with a frequency to be determined by the attorney general by rule or regulation that accounts for the rate of innovation in commonly available disallowed files.
But topping even that, California’s proposed law, AB 2047, will prohibits the disabling of this feature and bans anyone from selling or transferring a printer without that feature, so if you have one already, you can’t sell or even give it away within the state. To make matters worse, they will require companies to submit their software and hardware for testing and certification by the state, not dissimilar from it’s “safety” requirements for handguns sold in the state. The bill says, in part:
3273.634.
(d) For purposes of evaluating applications for certification, the department or other relevant state agency evaluating applicants shall require applicants to provide software and hardware, as applicable, for testing by regulators, as well as schematics or other detailed explanation of their technology sufficient for the department to evaluate its suitability for certification.
(e) The list of software controls processes that have received certification as meeting or exceeding performance standards shall be made publicly available on the internet website of the department or other relevant state agency issuing certification.
(f) The department or other state agency that issued certification shall revoke certification for a software controls process if, at any time, it fails to meet the performance standards for certification. In that case, the department or other state agency that issued certification shall notify relevant printer manufacturers with printer models known to use that software controls process that a software controls process they have deployed is no longer certified, and the manufacturer shall have a reasonable period, not less than three months, to update their model and resubmit their attestation of use of certified blocking technology, as described in Section 3273.636.
This is but another example of Leviathan wanting to control what you do or do not do with your own electronics and computers. Once the technology is there, it can be exploited to ban printing of doublepluungood guns, they can ban anything, be it a “hate symbol” or simply spare parts.
What business that uses 3D printers would want to set up in a state that could ban them from printing anything, and do so on a whim?
The New York bill can be read here, or below:
New York S9005 A10005 (2026) by ThePoliticalHat
The Washington bill can be read here, or below:
Washington HB 2321 (2026) by ThePoliticalHat
The California bill can be read here, or below:
