Washington State May Mandate 'Firearm Blueprint Detection Algorithms' For 3D Printers (adafruit.com)
- Reference: 0180655982
- News link: https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/26/01/26/0035209/washington-state-may-mandate-firearm-blueprint-detection-algorithms-for-3d-printers
- Source link: https://blog.adafruit.com/2026/01/25/washingtons-3d-printing-bills-are-bad-for-stem-bad-for-business-and-bad-for-open-source-3d-printing/
> Washington State lawmakers are proposing bills (HB 2320 and HB 2321) that would require 3D printers and [2]CNC machines to [3]block certain designs using software-based "firearms blueprint detection algorithms ." In practice, this means scanning every print file, comparing it against a government-maintained database, and preventing "skilled users" from bypassing the system.
>
> Supporters frame this as a response to untraceable "ghost guns," but even federal prosecutors admit the tools involved are ordinary manufacturing equipment. Critics warn the language is overbroad, technically unworkable, hostile to open source, and likely to push printing toward cloud-locked, subscription-based systems—while doing little to stop criminals.
[1] https://slashdot.org/~ptorrone
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_numerical_control
[3] https://blog.adafruit.com/2026/01/25/washingtons-3d-printing-bills-are-bad-for-stem-bad-for-business-and-bad-for-open-source-3d-printing/
Sounds great (Score:2)
Until someone asks an AI to iterate on a firearm design that doesn't trigger the detection algorithm. Government is ran by incredibly ignorant people. Maybe they're well meaning, but they're not going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.
What is possible is we can investigate the sale and transport of firearms. And prosecute people who do this at a large scale for organized crime.
Re: (Score:2)
And prosecute people who do this at a large scale for organized crime.
Is this actually happening though?
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty standard practice in my state to bust groups that are known to be selling firearms in the area. Bust the people who are caught committing crimes with them, and work your way up the supply chain. In a way the ability for small operations is very limited to hide a very local presence when it is within the jurisdiction of state and local agencies.
There will certainly be new challenges. But we already have gun dealers in every city that resell stolen fire arms. The same channels are going to be selling g
Re: (Score:3)
> Until someone asks an AI to iterate on a firearm design that doesn't trigger the detection algorithm. Government is ran by incredibly ignorant people. Maybe they're well meaning, but they're not going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.
Plenty already manufacture AR lowers that are 80% machined, meaning they are semi-finished blanks that require additional machining. I'd imagine it's even easier to 3D print a part rough enough to bypass any "firearm" detection and then use that newfangled technology hundreds of years old (sandpaper) to finish it.
> What is possible is we can investigate the sale and transport of firearms. And prosecute people who do this at a large scale for organized crime.
America did do that. We found out who was running the guns during operation Fast 'N Furious and realized it was rather difficult to arrest the President at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
And for those in draconian states, some even offer [1]zero-percent lower receivers! [80percentarms.com]
[1] https://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-ar-15-lower-receiver/
Re: Sounds great (Score:2)
Are they having a laugh or is this a real thing? (Not American)
Re: (Score:2)
Both! IIRC they started a while ago; 80% has always been legal (it seems counterintuitive to those not in the U.S. or heavily involved in firearms, but manufacturing your own firearms for personal use has always been legal) but some states started freaking out about it, so they started offering 0% to mock idiot politicians. They'll sell them--they're just the blanks for their 80% offerings--but it's mainly mockery.
Re: Sounds great (Score:2)
Brilliant haha! Thank you for explaining!
Re: (Score:2)
> Plenty already manufacture AR lowers that are 80% machined, meaning they are semi-finished blanks that require additional machining. I'd imagine it's even easier to 3D print a part rough enough to bypass any "firearm" detection and then use that newfangled technology hundreds of years old (sandpaper) to finish it.
> Those 80% lower projects can be pretty fun to build. And they used to be legal in my state. You had to add your own serial number (could be pretty much anything that was non-repeating). But you couldn't legally sell the firearm you built.
Re: (Score:2)
Laws being made by the ignorant is most true in 2 realms: Technology and firearms. But what can be expected when it's the same generation of folk who have been in power and won't give it up for 50 years.
Media and gov't ignorant on most topics (Score:1)
> Laws being made by the ignorant is most true in 2 realms: Technology and firearms.
Nope. The truth seems to be that a person who is well informed on nearly any realm will find the media and gov't poorly informed.
Re: (Score:2)
> Maybe they're well meaning, but they're not going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.
You certainly know that professional printers (e.g. bizhub) refuse to scan or print banknotes. Many countries have laws that say print shops cannot copy books. None of that stops organised crime (which can be done at home using consumer equipment), but they are still necessary. Like "murder is not allowed" law, which does not stop motivated murderers but it still necessary to have in the book.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you like to explain what your actual point here is? Or is it just to be contrarian? If not, you need to provide some serious context around how you equate homicide laws to ill conceived tech illiterate headline grabbing.
Turn it around, ML system to detect firearm parts (Score:1)
> Until someone asks an AI to iterate on a firearm design that doesn't trigger the detection algorithm.
The gov't will hire folks to develop a ML system for detecting firearms parts. Sure the person trying to print replacement parts for a 1930s/40s typewriter might have some problems, but no one in gov't will care. (FYI - subtle joke there, guess what IBM manufactured for the gov't during WW2 since it was within the capabilities of their existing factories?)
> Government is ran by incredibly ignorant people.
That's why they farm out a lot of work to the private sector. And there are plenty in the private sector that believe in banning civilian ownership of fir
Re: (Score:2)
> That's why they farm out a lot of work to the private sector. And there are plenty in the private sector that believe in banning civilian ownership of firearms.
I work in the private sector. The private sector is good at completing government contracts to the letter, but not the spirit. It's about getting paid. The private sector is also good at getting our buddies in politics and the bureaucracy to direct those contracts to us, with things as simple as tips on the bidding in order to win the contract.
You can expect a savvy private company to provide an excellent sales pitch. But after the first year or two, pull most of the R&D staff off a project and onto ano
Network connection required (Score:2)
This proposal requires that the printers have an active network connection. What's going to happen when the printer isn't connected to the network, or isn't allowed access beyond the local network? I consider blocking printers and other devices not intended for remote use from having Internet access a minimum precaution against botnets searching for devices to compromise.
Re: (Score:2)
A free network connection with the purchase of every 3D printer!
how do they expect to implement this? (Score:3)
I'm just... absolutely fascinated by the kind of thinking that imagined that this was something that was possible in any meaningful way.
Re: (Score:3)
What can I say, you're not wrong... It's a really weird approach in a country where it's legal to machine your own gunbarrels on a lathe provided you don't intend to sell them.
Re: (Score:2)
What kind of "gunbarrel" are you producing on a lathe? Is possible, but not practical. That's just not how rifled barrels are manufactured.
Re: (Score:2)
Pistol barrels, which are the most likely to be use in crimes.
Making pistol-calibre barrels at home is a solved problem. This is why the rebels in Burma use 3D-printed semi-auto 9mm carbines when they can't acquire anything better.
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is this bill not only covers 3d printers (additive manufacturing) but also subtractive manufacturing aka CNC, mills, lathes, etc. You better go get an old analog human input mill or lathe.
Re: (Score:3)
You'd be surprised to find out just how ignorant the average Representative or Senator is, especially Representatives.
These are people who for the most part couldn't manage regular gainful employment so they ended up going into preaching or politics- the two jobs where you can be as dumb as a bag of hammers and still succeed beyond your wildest dreams.
Many of them are genuine idiots but they can be glib and charming when it's needed, and often that's enough.
No more cosplay (Score:2)
If this is left to some algorithm, this will likely prevent any cosplay guns like the Star Wars stormtroopers, etc.
Utterly stupid pretense (Score:3)
It's an utterly stupid pretense that's being used as the opening move to regulate, tax, and control a broad range of hobbies.
Eventually it'll subject you to FFL-style rules. If you have an FFL (a Federal Firearms License), the BATF has the right to show up at any time of day or night and search the premises, go over the books, tear the place apart, etc. That includes your home, cars, etc as well as any store or business.
The one thing I don't see being discussed is that it's 100% LEGAL to make your own guns at home , no license or permission needed. You can't sell or transfer your basement boomtube, but it's completely legal to cobble some parts together and make a working firearm.
Print a bible verse on it (Score:2)
They can't limit speech or religion, so make it both.
Re: (Score:2)
"Thou shalt not kill"
Re: (Score:2)
> "Thou shalt not kill"
Perhaps with an asterisk against the "not".
Ban it all (Score:1)
Just about anything you can think of, from lunch trays to toenail clippers, can be misused by bad actors to cause real world harm.
Ban it all!
Even your bare hands can be instruments of death. Amputations for all!
Re: (Score:2)
It's worth noting that the first really-usable 3D-printed gun was developed in Europe despite all those regulations. The developer couldn't acquire barrels, bolts or ammunition legally but found ways around all of it.
Practical mandates will be on the cloud (Score:1)
It's impossible to force a filter on slicers, most are open source and restrictions would just be forked out. Printers and CNC machines themselves are just robots moving how they're told. It's as impractical to make user's hardware scan files for forbidden content as it is to look for CSAM material on a phone or desktop. And as invasive. However the cloud is fair game. Anything created or stored in the cloud like Tinkercad or even a Dropbox folder unencrypted could be scanned for. The legal leverage is much
Idiots at work (Score:2)
Neither feasible nor if it were feasible, enforceable. Blithering idiots at work.
Looks like another example of... (Score:2)
...intelligence tests for lawmakers
They always fail
They falsely believe that all problems can be solved by passing a law
2nd Amendment (Score:2)
> [...] being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms [...]
In case the government goes rogue on the people.
Just in case that ever happens.
Good luck with that (Score:3)
Nothing will prevent a "skilled" user bypassing something like this. There's too many choices of vendors for 3D printers most aren't cloud based lock-ins. Can't control hardware that doesn't need to communicate with a server already. Given how many people are building their own 3D custom printers the barrier to bypassing the locks is so much lower than a printer.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and I'd like to know how they're going to regulate interstate travel in that regard, as far as ordering a 3D printer from China and expecting it to have this restriction.
The thing with so many of these gun laws is they're going after more "exotic" or esoteric things, when the vast majority of gun deaths are from run of the mill pistols that are everywhere.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not just a thing with firearms, it's a thing with any kind of "weapon". And I quote that because, for example. look at the way California regulates the balisong. They are and always have been utility knives. Hollywood created the fantasy that they're some kind of macho weapon that they're not, mostly because the way they open looks flashy and nice for photography. But in a tactical situation, any knife that opens that way is a liability. But for non-tactical, i.e. strictly utility, they're pretty nice
Re: (Score:2)
In soviet Russia, the law makes an example of YOU.
Re: (Score:2)
My printer isn't even connected to the internet. I slice, save to a thumb drive, print. Now that the NFA tax has been zeroed, I can even legally print suppressors now! This, like NY's (NYC's? I forget) proposal a week or two ago, is completely unenforceable and likely unconstitutional.
Re: (Score:2)
Most likely the detection routines would be built into the slicer and it would refuse to spit out gcode for a "prohibited part" Most 3rd printers run off micro controllers and have no where near the compute horsepower to do the detection in the printer. Course if they build this into the slicer people can just use old slicers or people will just start passing around gcode files for the most dominant 3rd printer brand/models.
A matter of degree (Score:2)
They could mandate closed source, internet connections, signed bootloaders, and microcontroller fuses which prevent erasure of the bootloader.
Of course, there is plenty of open source 3D printer firmware out there which could be run on a homebuilt 3D printer, so all of those technical measures would be ineffective against 3D printers built by the people who want to print gun parts.
For that matter, you'd need to license lathes, milling machines, and sheet metal stamping machines as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been unable to figure out how my 1946 soutbend could connect to the internet. I'll keep it that way.
The printer hardware and software upgradable (Score:1)
> Nothing will prevent a "skilled" user bypassing something like this.
We are dealing with a technical niche that is pretty much designed to prevent such things.
The printers can print parts to upgrade themselves, to add new functionality and capability. And the source code for the software tools tend to be open source.