Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
Directly quoted from reddit, so there is no confusion. There will be a few edits in parenthesis where pertains to the forums;
Post is from one of the Prusa Reddit mods and Prusa staff member, Tommy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey everyone,
Just jumping in here to let you know that we are definitely seeing the reports on the proposed California legislation (AB-2047) and we’re monitoring the situation closely.
At Prusa, safety is obviously the highest priority. We want everyone to have a safe experience in this hobby, but at the same time, we have always been firm believers in the "right to repair" and the right for you to use the machine you bought however you see fit. We’ve built our community on open-source principles and the idea that your printer is a tool for your own creativity, not a device that should be locked down or surveilled.
We’re keeping a close eye on how this develops and will update the community if there’s anything concrete to share. In the meantime, let's keep the discussion here focused. To keep the sub (and forum) from getting cluttered, future threads (and posts on this topic that don’t have any new info might be closed and redirected so we can keep all the resources in one place. (I omitted the last line as it was more in regards to reddit).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The post is here for anyone who wants it
https://www.reddit.com/r/prusa3d/comments/1r9jjza/comment/o6dvb1i/
Currently (as of Feb 23rd 2026) there are 5 bill in regards to 3d printing, (following info provided by Chat GPT)
California — AB 2047 (printer-level “blocking technology” / roster-style approval concepts).
Washington — HB 2321 (requires “blocking technologies” / firearm blueprint detection algorithms for 3D printers).
New York — S.9005 / A.10005 (budget bill includes “firearm prevention technology requirements” for 3D printers + additional provisions around 3D printing/ghost guns).
Colorado — HB26-1144 (prohibits 3D-printing firearms/components and criminalizes certain possession/distribution of digital instructions used to program 3D printers/CNC).
Texas — SB 1711 (creates offenses related to 3D-printed firearms and distribution of “digital firearm schematics”).
Links are provided for the exact bills.
Now this is me, Shane, the moderator talking as a member of the community, these are my own views, thoughts, opinions or anything else that can fall under those categories.
As far as what the company will do outside of the statement above, honestly, it's way to soon to say. Unfortunately, it is going to be one of those cases where we (the company) has to wait and see what is passed, what is not, and what those requirements will be. We could say or do one thing or another and instead of helping, we could be hindering things and making it worse, so we have to let things play out and see what the American people and their lawmakers want.
As far as the 3D printing community can do, there is a good number of things; (Also the following info was provided by ChatGPT)
Submit written testimony / position letters into the official record
This matters because it becomes part of what committee analysts and staff summarize.
California: Individuals can submit position letters through the official CA Legislature portal.
Also note: some committees publish letter deadlines (often the Friday before a hearing for inclusion in analysis)
https://acom.assembly.ca.gov/letter-support-or-opposition-rules
Washington: Anyone can testify (live/remote) or submit written testimony through WA’s process; there’s also a Committee Sign-In system for registering and submitting positions.
https://leg.wa.gov/bills-meetings-and-session/session/how-to-testify-at-a-committee-meeting
New York: Live oral testimony is sometimes invitation-only, but written testimony is often accepted and encouraged for hearings (varies by hearing/type).
https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?sh=hear
Reach out to your local lawmakers and tell them your concerns.
Joel Telling put out a good video inviting lawmakers to his studio to educate them on 3D printing, help share the word on that.
Those options are up to the individual themselves.
For here, on the forums, you are welcome to discus things, BUT I would like to remind people to please, be respectful to others and also please try to be as non-political as possible (yes I know, it's difficult when it comes to laws and government). Just keep things respectful and civil. Same if you are going to contact lawmakers.
Thanks 🙂
Shane
Shane (AKA FromPrusa)
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
I've spoken to people (in the kn0w) and California — AB 2047 has almost no support in the legislature. None of these are laws yet. Most of the YouTube videos come across (to me) as hyberbolic click-bait.
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
The California bill link is broken, but for the rest of them - the Washington bill seems to be recently introduced into committee (and could very well die there), and the Colorado bill is a little farther ahead (but not much), and the Texas bill is attempting to outlaw the printing, without requiring "blocking software" on the printer. These worry me less than the NY bill, which seems like it is trying to sneak 3DP regulations into an omnibus spending bill (grr). It seems like whoever drafted that text is hedging on "feasibility" - which tells me there is some disagreement amongst the people who made the draft as to whether this is even possible. Thank you for posting this - I'll watch this thread.
4 Prusa Core One + (formerly MK4S w/ MMU3, MK4 / MMU3, MK3S+/MMU2, MINI+), Octoprint, ASA, PETG, PVB, (some) PLA.
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
The Washington bill passed and is now law. So this is happening.
Prusa Core One
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
I don't think it will pass constitutional scrutiny. The problem is that it is not feasible with the technology in the old printers. It would also be exhaustively expensive to implement.
The Washington bill passed and is now law. So this is happening.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
The only measure they could take to stop 3d printing gun parts is make gcodes and stl/step files illegal (like cp). there is no way a firmware could determine what you are printing and why that cant be trivially bypassed. and again, its legal to produce them if you have the correct licenses. so this doesn't make too much sense in enforcement either way.
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
I have thought about this a lot in the last 24 hours. The only feasible way to prevent the printing of gun parts is to prevent the design in CAD software. I do not think it is possible to put enough code in the printer to pick up gun parts without making them bloated and unusable.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
I'll just leave this here. https://printandgo.tech/blog/3d-gunt-solution-to-prevent-3d-printed-ghost-guns
Prusa Core One
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
Also illegal in the US, you can’t demand that companies use a commercial product that picks winners and losers in the economy. The GOV can’t direct business to one propriety company.
I'll just leave this here. https://printandgo.tech/blog/3d-gunt-solution-to-prevent-3d-printed-ghost-guns
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
I'll just leave this here
So: to comply with a local law in a distant corner of the US require every 3D printer manufacturer globally to pay for and install firmware locked to a cloud based AI driven database forcing every user on the planet to pay a monthly minimum $20US subscription fee to another corner of the US to use their own machine ...
I suspect the most likely response will be to refuse to sell to anyone with a Washington State address and if the administration tries to enforce the global aspect of their law, stop supplying the USA entirely, oh, and the manufacturers will cease attending any US events or even holidaying there.
In the meanwhile those desiring 'Ghost Guns' in Washington State will continue to import them by the truckload from the next state over and file off the serial numbers. The dedicated will set up lathe in the garage...
It is somewhat ironic that a country that refuses to implement even the mildest gun controls should attempt to destroy a technology with huge constructive potential in case it adds a fraction of a percent to their out-of-control weapons issue instead of simply outlawing the worst examples.
Cheerio,
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
The only measure they could take to stop 3d printing gun parts is make gcodes and stl/step files illegal (like cp). there is no way a firmware could determine what you are printing and why that cant be trivially bypassed. and again, its legal to produce them if you have the correct licenses. so this doesn't make too much sense in enforcement either way.
Majority of a 3d printed gun that does the firing isn’t 3d printed. Regulate the parts as well as the entire firearm but that’ll never happen
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
The people (term used lightly) in the Washington legislature do not care what is put before the voters, they are doing their level best to remove the any choice that the voters has. whether this amounts to total control or stupidity is an exercise for the reader, for my choice I chose to move out of state and let them move further into the quagmire.
Master of Wood Disaster
Charter member of the woodturners funnel club
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
The only measure they could take to stop 3d printing gun parts is make gcodes and stl/step files illegal (like cp). there is no way a firmware could determine what you are printing and why that cant be trivially bypassed. and again, its legal to produce them if you have the correct licenses. so this doesn't make too much sense in enforcement either way.
Majority of a 3d printed gun that does the firing isn’t 3d printed. Regulate the parts as well as the entire firearm but that’ll never happen
Yup. I have not seen one that is 100% 3d printed.
The people (term used lightly) in the Washington legislature do not care what is put before the voters, they are doing their level best to remove the any choice that the voters has. whether this amounts to total control or stupidity is an exercise for the reader, for my choice I chose to move out of state and let them move further into the quagmire.
I try to avoid politics, but some of the US states do not think through their laws before passing them and if they are, they have a serious intellectual deficiency.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
That is why it won’t pass muster in the US when it is reviewed by a court.
I'll just leave this here
So: to comply with a local law in a distant corner of the US require every 3D printer manufacturer globally to pay for and install firmware locked to a cloud based AI driven database forcing every user on the planet to pay a monthly minimum $20US subscription fee to another corner of the US to use their own machine ...
I suspect the most likely response will be to refuse to sell to anyone with a Washington State address and if the administration tries to enforce the global aspect of their law, stop supplying the USA entirely, oh, and the manufacturers will cease attending any US events or even holidaying there.
In the meanwhile those desiring 'Ghost Guns' in Washington State will continue to import them by the truckload from the next state over and file off the serial numbers. The dedicated will set up lathe in the garage...
It is somewhat ironic that a country that refuses to implement even the mildest gun controls should attempt to destroy a technology with huge constructive potential in case it adds a fraction of a percent to their out-of-control weapons issue instead of simply outlawing the worst examples.
Cheerio,
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
Majority of a 3d printed gun that does the firing isn’t 3d printed. Regulate the parts as well as the entire firearm but that’ll never happen
Regulating the parts to that degree will never happen in the US, because they are simply replacement parts for existing, legal firearms that millions of US citizens own and use every day. Even if they could, it wouldn't matter because there are other designs already available that can be built without using any dedicated "gun" parts, including barrels and bolts. There is even a DIY method for electro-chemically milling rifling into a steel tube in a bucket or bathtub. And for those with a little basic equipment (drill, hydraulic press, etc), rifling buttons are readily available from ebay and elsewhere. It's literally impossible to stop. Lathes and milling machines are cool, but not at all necessary. They can't stop the signal no matter how much they may wish to.
And as CWbullet points out, eventually this is going to get smacked down in court, at least here in the US. WA state falls under the 9th Circuit court, so it might persist a little longer there than in other parts of the US, but there is already precedent that computer code is (or at least, can be) free speech protected under the First Amendment. In this arena, the fact that Colorado is also pushing to restrict 3d printing is actually a gift to the pro-rights side in this fight. Colorado falls under the 10th circuit court of appeals, which is generally a more conservative, right leaning court than the notoriously liberal 9th circuit, or the 2nd circuit that covers New York. If Colorado passes a ban, when it is fought in the courts, there will likely be a circuit split which will force SCOTUS to rule on the issue.
RE:
Yup. The courts are already looking at the Washington law to strike it down on the basis of:
- 3D design is free speech, and it might be struck down as a violation of the First Amendment.
- Vagueness and overreach
- Right against self-incrimination - it shifts the burden of proof to the user
- Technologically impossible without the use of third-party software, which opens up additional risks to the user
- Second Amendment violation
- Burden on interstate commerce
I am sure there will be more. These are the ones I could quickly find.
I actually agree that rules need to be developed, but the risk of a 3d printed gun is small. A 100% 3D-printed gun is only gonna fire a single shot. I have seen a few of these, and most have metal parts. I have yet to see one that can get through metal detectors, and even if they exist, they are already illegal under the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988.
Majority of a 3d printed gun that does the firing isn’t 3d printed. Regulate the parts as well as the entire firearm but that’ll never happen
Regulating the parts to that degree will never happen in the US, because they are simply replacement parts for existing, legal firearms that millions of US citizens own and use every day. Even if they could, it wouldn't matter because there are other designs already available that can be built without using any dedicated "gun" parts, including barrels and bolts. There is even a DIY method for electro-chemically milling rifling into a steel tube in a bucket or bathtub. And for those with a little basic equipment (drill, hydraulic press, etc), rifling buttons are readily available from ebay and elsewhere. It's literally impossible to stop. Lathes and milling machines are cool, but not at all necessary. They can't stop the signal no matter how much they may wish to.
And as CWbullet points out, eventually this is going to get smacked down in court, at least here in the US. WA state falls under the 9th Circuit court, so it might persist a little longer there than in other parts of the US, but there is already precedent that computer code is (or at least, can be) free speech protected under the First Amendment. In this arena, the fact that Colorado is also pushing to restrict 3d printing is actually a gift to the pro-rights side in this fight. Colorado falls under the 10th circuit court of appeals, which is generally a more conservative, right leaning court than the notoriously liberal 9th circuit, or the 2nd circuit that covers New York. If Colorado passes a ban, when it is fought in the courts, there will likely be a circuit split which will force SCOTUS to rule on the issue.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
I'll just leave this here
So: to comply with a local law in a distant corner of the US require every 3D printer manufacturer globally to pay for and install firmware locked to a cloud based AI driven database forcing every user on the planet to pay a monthly minimum $20US subscription fee to another corner of the US to use their own machine ...
I suspect the most likely response will be to refuse to sell to anyone with a Washington State address and if the administration tries to enforce the global aspect of their law, stop supplying the USA entirely, oh, and the manufacturers will cease attending any US events or even holidaying there.
In the meanwhile those desiring 'Ghost Guns' in Washington State will continue to import them by the truckload from the next state over and file off the serial numbers. The dedicated will set up lathe in the garage...
It is somewhat ironic that a country that refuses to implement even the mildest gun controls should attempt to destroy a technology with huge constructive potential in case it adds a fraction of a percent to their out-of-control weapons issue instead of simply outlawing the worst examples.
Cheerio,
Can you give us some examples of “mildest gun controls” you think the US should implement?
The US doesn’t have a out of control weapons problem we have a no consequences for your action problem in cities run by Socialists. Chicago has some of the strongest gun laws in the country and they average 1 or 2 murders per day. Guns are just tools like knives and cars. We need to stop blaming the tool and punish the people who are using the tool illegally.
Socialists don’t care if their laws are enforceable or not because their only going to use them against people they don’t like. Its all about control. If you’re a gunsmith in Washington and have a 3d printer you might want to think about moving to a different state.
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
Ed, please keep politics out of this forum.
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
Ed, please keep politics out of this forum.
No politics just truth.
If what Diem said isn’t political then my response isn’t.
RE: Current "stance" on several proposed several US states laws in regards to 3D Printing.
Ed, please keep politics out of this forum.
No politics just truth.
If what Diem said isn’t political then my response isn’t.
No, it's your "truth" not mine. It's politics and it doesn't belong here. I 100% disagree with your statement above but if I write a response based on what I really feel it will just inflame the conversation. Therefore, it doesn't belong. This is a 3D printing forum not a forum on the 2nd amendment or MAGA dog whistles.