For a good understanding of 3D printing, it’s probably easiest to watch a video demonstration. For those of you short on time, however, it’s what those in the biz refer to as additive manufacturing technology. A machine uses a schematic from a computer to lay down material, layer upon layer, and “print” a product – from the bottom up. Until recently the costs have been prohibitively expensive, but as they fall the market for personal use is developing. So why is this of legal interest? Two reasons. First, we have the First Amendment. Second, we have the Second Amendment. Not only do Americans have the right to own guns, they have the right to possess and distribute the schematics required to build them. Add the internet and 3D printing and we have the potential for weapons you can print from home.
However, what seems a startling revelation is not without its reservations. Immediately, one wonders: Would the gun even function? Is it legal to build your own gun? Just how accessible is this technology, and how big of a nerd do I need to be to use it? Maybe after some thought, the astute among you realize that perhaps this is not truly a novel problem.
The first question is easily addressed. Does it work? Yes. That’s an AR-15, by the way – essentially a civilian version of the US Army M-16. A caveat is necessary, here, as the entire gun is not printed – just one part, the receiver. This is of little relevance, however, as it is that piece which is legally considered a “firearm” and subject to the regulations on firearms (e.g., purchasing restrictions). For all other parts, you can buy a kit on the internet. Additionally, yes, you have the right to build your own gun (subject to certain restrictions).
It’s also necessary to discuss cost. For example, the printer used in the video above (printing a wrench, of all things) is allegedly priced between thirty and forty thousand dollars. Gulp. That’s obviously not accessible to your average American, and certainly not going in my living room. However, there are less costly versions available. One is rumored to retail at under $1,000 and the other at around $4,000. Shockingly, some Americans can afford that – they may not want to print parts for a gun on it, but it proves a point. Prices are dropping, and as technology improves, so will quality. This isn’t a realistic concern today, but it will be someday.
How big of a nerd do you have to be to use a 3D printer? Not very. It must be admitted that 3D modeling on a computer is not for the faint of heart, and in theory would preclude a large portion of the population from taking advantage of 3D printers. There are two responses. First, it seems inevitable that companies will include certain schematics with the sale of these printers. Probably not guns, but that’s my second point – we have the internet. I can’t explain to you why, but people love to put a lot of hard work into something and share it for free on there (here?). The schematic necessary to print a receiver for an AR-15 is already available online.
Lastly, perhaps this is not as novel of a legal issue as it seems. Indeed, the video linked above demonstrating the use of an AR-15 with a plastic receiver was in no way related to 3D printing technology. Further, there are existing federal regulations governing the personal manufacturing of firearms. To view this idea in such a fashion is insufficient, to say the least. The problem doesn’t truly lie with the personal manufacture of weapons, but with the ease and accessibility of doing so coupled with the difficulty of enforcement. The advent of 3D printing makes it easier to obtain the regulated pieces in what may one day be a widely available fashion. The current laws seem to create (from an admittedly quick review) a system which relies entirely on self-reporting. Ultimately, as the number of individuals producing weapons cheaply, quickly, and, in a sense, anonymously rises, the number of people who do not self-report will naturally also rise.
Currently, this isn’t a problem, but it may be one day. There are of course a variety of solutions which may or may not work in this scenario, such as requiring 3D printers to refuse gun schematics, much like Photoshop does with U.S. currency. More interesting, however, are the variety of other issues which may arise with 3D printing.
Which can you think of?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57524063-76/report-3d-printed-handgun-project-faces-setback-with-revoked-printer-lease/