3D Printing Guns: The New Dimension for Gun Control
By Jason Brown | 02/24/2013 | In-Depth, Legislation, Safety, Science, Technology | 6 CommentsAs the gun control debate heats up in Washington, advocates for reform now face a new challenge as 3D printing becomes a more affordable hobby. This is because 3D printers are now capable of making firearms – including the infamous AR-15 semi-automatic rifle – for any consumer willing to spend a few hundred bucks on a modern three-dimensional printer.
For those not familiar with this engineering revolution, 3D printing is the art of turning digital models into real objects. The process today is now simplified with open-sourced schematics that are available online for free, which includes hundreds of thousands of objects that range from shoes to clocks.
After downloading one of these objects’ blueprints, a person only needs to add raw materials into a 3D printer (like plastic resin or aluminum dust) and click ‘print’. Depending on the quality of the printer and complexity of the item, what you see on the computer screen could become a tangible reality within minutes.
Proving, however, that printing a functional, plastic AR-15 isn’t a work of science fiction, the non-profit group Defense Distributed has published videos online to show otherwise.
In a video from December, the group printed and tested an AR-15 receiver (the main body and federal definition of this gun), which fired several shots before having problems. Last month, Defense Distributed unveiled the “Cuomo”, a 30-round AR-15 magazine named after outspoken gun control advocate and current Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo.
The 3D printed magazine demonstrated that it could fire hundreds of bullets without fail, leading to its blueprints being downloaded hundreds of thousands of times by people all across the world.
According to Defense Distributed’s website, the goal of the organization is to continue designing components and prototypes under what they call the “Wiki Weapon Project.” The project has raised tens of thousands of dollars in donations and has had companies publicly offer 3D printing equipment and space for testing future ‘wiki weapon’ guns.
The success and popularity of 3D printing guns and components has drawn some concern from gun control supporters in Washington, particularly from Representative Steve Israel (D-NY). Following the “Cuomo” magazine test video – posted on YouTube in January – Rep. Israel responded by saying:
“Background checks and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print high-capacity magazines at home. 3D printing is a new technology that shows great promise, but also requires new guidelines. Law enforcement officials should have the power to stop high-capacity magazines from proliferating with a Google search.”
In order to halt future production of 3D printed guns and magazines, Rep. Israel is seeking to renew the Undetectable Firearms Act, the federal ban on plastic guns that is set to expire at the end of the year. He also supports Senator Dianne Feinstein’s gun control bill, which bans the sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.
While the advent of 3D printing technology is scary, especially the thought of criminals making guns in their living rooms, it is important to understand its limits.
Most 3D printers for home use are limited to using plastic as its polymer, thus making 3D printed guns and components terribly impractical for customary use. This is highlighted in one of Defense Distributed’s videos, which shows the AR-15 break in half after shooting six rounds.
Of course, with any emerging technology, there is a double-edged sword to progress: a maxim that is undoubtedly applicable to the revolution of 3D printing.
What computers and the Internet have done for this generation, 3D printing will do for the next; inspiring innovation and creating jobs in vital fields such as medicine, science, logistics, education, and engineering.
Yet, just like we see with today’s technological cornerstones, 3D printing will provoke fear and trepidation. The good news, however, is that this trend seems to be working, at least for technologies similar to 3D printing such as robotics and synthetic biology.
So, if history is any indicator, we should continue to foster this innovative technology while addressing the inherent concerns with 3D printing guns.






Leave Your Comment →
6 Comments
Larry Trump
02.24.2013
@larry_trump
Can copyright play a role in this situation?
Normal gun manufacturers have their designs patented already. Are new laws needed to protect their rights?
Gary Lovins
02.25.2013
@glovesan
This is ridiculous! As someone that has one of these printers it is very unrealistic to think that this will become commonplace. My printer was $30K, and a machine with a build area large enough to make most of these would be even more than that. The material is expensive. They must have good 3D data to do this. What about heat? A cheap zip gun is what the bad guys will still make. Any government regulation on these printers is just about protecting patents, that’s all. It will do nothing but slow the advancement of this technology and protect corporate profits.
Super Mega
02.25.2013
@super_mega
NO….You are what is ridiculous. You are just an old guy who is not aware of new trends. Your attitude on what you wrote even reflects this. Go on http://www.kickstarter.com and see the development that is going on with 3D printers. Trust me…they are doing a lot more work than you could ever do in your life. You have nothing to offer so you chose to become a crab in a barrel. Maybe one day you will do something as cool as these guys, until then, have fun being a crab.
Amytheengineer
02.25.2013
@amytheengineer
I’m getting my PhD in 3D printing (technically known as additive manufacturing). I can tell you that the machine used to create the Wiki weapons is not something someone would have in their basement. These machines cost tens of thousands of dollars – a significant investment for a garage criminal. Also, the material properties of the photopolymers used in this process are terrible, i.e., not suited for guns. Yes, you can make a magazine, but beyond that you would need a $1M titanium printer to make actual gun parts. The material properties just aren’t there yet.
Jason Brown
02.25.2013
@jasonbrown
To Larry, good question: There is a lot of debate and fear amongst hobbyists right now that Washington will either ban certain blueprints from being proliferated, i.e. the “Cuomo” magazine schematic, or allow corporations to get their hands on patenting rights (something rare, if at all right now within the microcosm of 3D printing communities/websites). But I believe that as unpopular as SOPA and PIPA was, there is no way lawmakers would be able to pluck these designs from the internet. Patent rights, however, may be something to look out for because you think Colt, for example, is going to let their patented AR-15 Rifle be freely printed at the house? Probably not.
To Amy and Gary, I’m sorry to say that you guys are wrong. The 3D Printer that Defense Distributed uses is around $500-$600 and the plastic resin they use cost, according to several sources, around $30 for each component/magazine print – which is expected to go down even further as the hobby continues to flourish.
The revolution of 3D printing has nothing to do with the invention of additive engineering (because it was invented decades ago) rather the revolution is in its mobility and cost today, comparative to the cost 10-15 years ago. A high-end, home-use 3D printer doesn’t cost any more than $2000-$3000, and some now go as low as $400. Go to Kickstarter.com and see for yourself.
Now, as clearly stipulated in my article, we are talking about printers that use plastic as its polymer not Titanium as suggested (does NASA even have one of those?). Let’s be clear who we are dealing with here, Defense Distributed is a group of six people, many of which are full time students. And these guys do not have a lot of money, their Kickstarter goal last year was only 20k (which they exceeded), but have suspended (I believe) any donation campaigns because they are pursuing a Federal Firearms Distribution License.
And finally, to repeat myself from the article, the Wiki Weapon so far consist of components and accessories to modern weapons like the AR-15, but the federal definition of an AR-15 is the receiver because its where they print the Serial Number. So, yes, this group, or any for that matter, has yet to make a functional, plastic AR-15 barrel or stock; however I do believe that this will come in the next few years if the tech continues to augment at the rate it has been, you just won’t see me shooting one anytime soon :)
Bill Harrison
02.27.2013
@shitsnacks
DefDist Printed AR Lower – Part III —– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAW72Y_XPF4
SLA and FDM. Does not fail from firing stresses. 600+ rounds (.223).
Hahahahaha, Burn