American Thinker

by Trish Randall

    As President Trump is doing so much to make it possible for America to make things again -- manufacturing, energy, Artificial Intelligence -- there’s a portion of our nation’s innovative and entrepreneurial inspiration and activity that is under serious threat.

    At approximately $16 billion a year, it’s not one of the biggest industries, but for imagination and creativity, and inspiring the next generations of American producers, it’s huge.

    We’re talking about 3D printing.

    Use of 3D printers has brought joy to users creating items that are decorative, entertaining, and useful. Many a home business has developed following the purchase of a home 3D printer. Even more important for our nation’s future innovation, many young people have developed real skills in computer-aided drafting and open-source software design via 3D printing.

    Last week, Gavin Newsom signed a law designed to severely restrict use of 3D printers. The stated goal is to prevent 3D printers from producing any print that could be used as a component of a firearm. All machines in California homes, libraries, and schools -- and businesses -- will be forbidden from initiating any print unless the government decides the proposed print cannot possibly be usable as a firearm component. There is an exception for prop guns for entertainment (possibly to convince the big movie companies not to flee his communist hellhole ).

    There are so many ways this action is anti-American. It’s restricting one activity to restrain another activity, which is unconstitutional under the Supreme Court ruling in Bruen. It’s illegal to enact prior restraint on software code, as per the Ninth Circuit’s Bernstein v. US decision. California would treat use of a tool, the 3D printer, as guilty unless the government declares each and every use to be innocent. It violates the American spirit of ingenuity and invention to impose odious restrictions on millions of law-abiding Americans just in case some criminal might try to create plastic parts for a weapon.

    The estimated 45,240 guns with some 3D parts fabricated over a five-year period must be a tiny fraction of items 3D printed by Americans. While I couldn’t find even an estimate of items printed per year, especially by individual creators in their homes, or made by businesses for in-house use, there is data suggesting hundreds of millions of 3D prints are produced by Americans each year. There are many sites where 3D print files can be downloaded or purchased. Designs from just one such source, MakerWorld, generated an estimated 290 million hours of printing in 2025. An estimated 37 million 3D-printed consumer products were sold in 2023, up 22% from 2022.

    In the name of “common sense gun control,” every time a Californian wants to print a vase, a figurine, or a replacement for a broken tool handle, they will be required to seek prior government approval.

    Such restrictions are not only anti-American, but also silly. While a gun can be made with only metal parts, it’s not possible, nor legal, to make an all-plastic gun with no metal parts. The plastic printed parts can’t function without installing purchased metal parts. If a state wants to restrict weapons that include 3D printed parts, restrictions on kits containing those parts would be more logical and possibly less unfair.

    These restrictions on a tool, the 3D printer, exceed those that government may impose on actual weapons. It would be like having to submit a request for prior approval before every visit to a gun range.

Washington State’s proposed “common sense gun control” restrictions on 3D printers (that cannot fire bullets) would exceed constitutional gun restrictions. Every 3D printer in Washington would be connected to the internet at all times. Every time the user wants to print something, the design file would have to be uploaded to a state website to get the okay to print. Who would bet money a state would resist the opportunity to archive all the data on the person, IP address, and the proposed print

    New York State is contemplating a requirement for in-person sales for every 3D printer.

    States acting to impose prior restraint on 3D printing are contrary to your administration’s efforts to support 3D printing through the National Science Foundation and the Department of War.

    The craziest thing is that legislators imagine a nonexistent technology that will distinguish between a tube useful for repairing an HVAC system and one intended as a gun barrel. For details on the many ways this can’t work, I suggest this article: “3D Printers Cannot Effectively Screen for Gun Parts.” (A plastic-only gun barrel is not only not legal, but not smart.)

    The 3D printing space is more than just individuals producing items in the garage, businesses prototyping new products rapidly and at low cost, or creating products impossible to manufacture via injection molding. The 3D printing space includes individuals who create designs on computer-aided drafting software, often posting their designs online for others to download and print, and even modify. Gridfinity is a set of free downloadable designs for workshop storage to which multiple creators have contributed.

    Others in the 3D print space develop or modify open-source programs, improving printer functionality. This year, two open-source creators developed a method called Full Spectrum that allows 3D printers using four colors of filament to generate finished prints featuring dozens of colors.

    Manufacturers of 3D printers running open-source programs have made a lot of money selling machines without owning patents on the software. There are plenty of customers for machines, filaments, and accessories. This demonstrates that open-source innovation can drive successful market activities which are especially welcoming to small-scale innovators.

    The 3D printing space is an important educational and inspirational opportunity for children. To imagine an item, create the design, and see it built is exciting, even among adults who have used 3D printers for several years. American children have been able to engage with 3D printers in homes, schools, libraries, and maker spaces -- igniting the imaginations and creativity of the next generations of inventors and producers.

    Small-scale 3D printing is a resource that has too many positive implications for the future to be constrained by people who fail to understand the technology and would treat the use of tools in our homes and businesses as a crime unless the government decides to declare the use innocent.