- The ban, if implemented, would mean that any printer without this firearm-blocking technology could not be legally sold or transferred in California
- The move still awaits Senate review before being passed into law
- This could mean that 3D printers could become more expensive or more restrictive for in-state users in the near future as manufacturers pass on additional compliance costs to users
The state of California is moving toward banning the sale of 3D printers that lack a built-in algorithm that prevents users from producing ‘ghost weapons’ on a whim.
The controversial bill passed last week and awaits Senate confirmation before ultimately reaching California Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk, where it still needs to be signed.
The move remains controversial, with critics arguing that it directly inhibits innovation and consumer rights, and could lead to other forms of government-mandated censorship and control over what users do with their purchases.
A piece of legislation that can be difficult to implement
California’s AB-2047 law has been the subject of controversy since it was first introduced to the Assembly by member Rebecca Bauer-Kahan on February 17, 2026.
It aims to set legal requirements, including mandating that government-approved algorithms be included in 3D printers (at the firmware or application level), which would make it impossible for users to print untraceable 3D-printed firearms.
It places the burden on manufacturers, who must submit documentation indicating that their printers contain the “firearm blueprint detection algorithm.”
The bill recognizes the limitations of the current task, and states that a California DOJ-mandated “acceptably low level of evasion” will serve as a benchmark for such measures.
The performance standards for the bill have yet to be drafted, and the bill says the DOJ or an ‘appropriate agency’ will publish said guidelines no later than January 1, 2028.
Critics point out that this may be an exercise in futility, however, as in reality users should be able to use open source slicers to bypass such restrictions simply by using a VPN, even if such a restriction were implemented via geolocation, for example.
Supporters of the regulation point out that the rules will strengthen security by closing a longstanding loophole that has allowed commercial 3D printers to produce untraceable weapons.
They also cite United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson’s murder, allegedly with a 3D-printed weapon by Luigi Mangione in 2024, a case that attracted national attention as a key example of how the technology can be easily misused.
Many remain skeptical of the practical enforcement of the legislation, which may be easier to pass than to implement, due to a mix of legal challenges, industry opposition and courts that have historically treated 3D gun files as a First Amendment right.
Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews and opinions in your feeds.
