Colorado law could force surveillance for 3D printers to prevent use for making gun parts — fourth state to propose new bans is expanding firearms laws to regulate digital files
Now, four states are pushing bills to outlaw 3D-printed guns, and your printer, too.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Colorado is joining the growing list of states attempting to crack down on the manufacture of 3D printed “ghost guns,” joining New York, Washington, and California on a quest to expand firearms laws to regulate digital files and potentially ban 3D printers that are not under its surveillance. Under these restrictions, 3D printers that are not online for surveillance would be illegal.
Preventing gun violence is a noble cause, but these proposed bills are no longer going after the criminals who do evil; they are going after the tools they could potentially use to create weapons. This attempt at public safety could usher in an age of proprietary ecosystems, with customers locked into branded slicers and limited filament choices.
Colorado’s HB26-1144, titled "Prohibit Three-Dimensional Printing Firearms & Components," seeks to close loopholes created by new technology. It defines “3D printing” to mean both additive and subtractive manufacturing, which would include CNC machines. It makes possessing “digital instructions” to program a 3D printer or CNC machine with the intent to make a firearm or firearm component, and the distribution of such files, a Class 1 misdemeanor on the first offense. Subsequent offenses are a Class 5 felony.
Article continues belowA Class 5 felony could result in 1 to 3 years in prison, mandatory 2-year parole, and fines from $1,000 to $100,000. Offenders would also lose the right to own or possess firearms.
The bill is sponsored by Democrat Representative Lindsay Gilchrist and Speaker Pro Tempore Andy Boesenecker. It passed the Colorado House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 18 and will now proceed to the House Floor.
“These ghost guns are increasingly found at crime scenes, making it harder for law enforcement to track down a suspect because the gun isn’t traceable. This bill would help keep these dangerous weapons out of our communities and save countless Colorado lives,” said Gilchrist in a press release.
The Democrats’ statement cited data archived by the National Library of Medicine, which noted the “ATF received approximately 45,240 reports of suspected privately made firearms recovered by law enforcement” between 2016 and 2021. Only 186 cases involved 3D printing, of which 14 were fully printed firearms like the Liberator. This specific data set was compiled by researchers who scoured public records, including news reports, social media, and forums like Reddit.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
The 3D printing community is trying to raise awareness of these bills and the potential harm they can accidentally inflict on manufacturing, STEM education, and the harmless hobby of 3D printing.
Prominent 3D printing YouTubers Joel Telling and Grant Posner have publicly invited lawmakers to visit their workshops to learn about the tech behind 3D printing. Telling is a resident of Washington, where State Representative Osman Salahuddin is sponsoring HB 2320 and HB 2321. Meanwhile, Posner is based in Florida, and though his state is not currently pursuing similar bans, Florida’s U.S. Representative Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) has introduced H.R. 4143, the “3D Printed Gun Safety Act of 2025”. H.R. 4143 would criminalize the online distribution of 3D printable firearm files nationwide.
“Come see the print farm in action. Come learn what 3D printing actually is, what it can do, and more importantly, what it cannot do,” Telling said in a recent YouTube video. “An STL file is just geometry, a list of points in space. A computer cannot look at a raw shape and know what it's for. The same cylinder could be a movie prop or a mechanical spacer or a tool handle.”
So far, no one has taken an interest in either invitation.
A grassroots initiative, Dont-Ban-3Dprinters.com, has been launched to track these bills, spearheaded by Yuto Horiuchi, the founder of the Japan RepRap Festival (JRRF). To alert the global maker community, the site is being translated into Chinese, Japanese, and Spanish, reflecting a growing fear that U.S. policy trends will ripple worldwide. 3D printing advocates from outside the US warn that if restrictions on software or firmware are forced into adoption, manufacturers may simply apply them across the board globally.
The website is packed with information, covering the ins and outs of the various bills, what they mean, how to contact lawmakers, and a sample script to help you outline your statement.
The 3D Printing Anti-Firearms Crackdown
While Colorado’s HB 26-1144 focuses on the possession of digital files, other states are moving toward a more dangerous "software-first" approach. Lawmakers are shifting from regulating criminal behavior to mandating surveillance within the 3D printers themselves.
The Federal Level: H.R. 4143, The 3D Printed Gun Safety Act of 2025, serves as the national template. Sponsored by Rep. Jared Moskowitz, it seeks to criminalize the online distribution of CAD files, effectively attempting to "remove the blueprints" from the internet entirely.
Washington’s HB 2321: Going a step further than Colorado, Washington is considering a requirement for all 3D printers sold in the state to include "blocking technologies." This would force manufacturers to bake scanning algorithms into their firmware to detect and reject firearm-related shapes.
New York’s S.9005: New York’s proposal mirrors Washington’s but attaches it to the state's executive budget. It would ban the sale of any printer that does not have a pre-installed "firearms blueprint detection algorithm."
California’s AB 2047: California is eyeing a "roster" system, where only printers that have been state-certified as "tamper-proof" can be legally sold. This would likely end the use of open-source, offline printers in the state.
Thingiverse:The world’s biggest file library, announced in 2025 that it would use AI to block the uploading of firearm files.
Fingerprinting Your Prints: A team of engineers at Washington University in St. Louis is exploring ways to embed traceable digital “fingerprints” into 3D printed objects.
3D Printing a Gun isn’t that easy: In 2023, we tried printing a pistol. It wasn’t very good.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Denise Bertacchi is a Contributing Writer for Tom’s Hardware US, covering 3D printing. Denise has been crafting with PCs since she discovered Print Shop had clip art on her Apple IIe. She loves reviewing 3D printers because she can mix all her passions: printing, photography, and writing.
-
QuarterSwede I don’t even like guns but this is just a waste of legislative time. Remember prohibition? How did that work out?Reply -
short-n-round As Reagan said - "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.".Reply
All's this will do is to turn hobbyists in to felons and drive things underground. Nothing will be solved.
Once again, government is looking at the wrong end to address issues. -
ezst036 Surveillance.Reply
They are creating a surveillance state. Nothing could go wrong. What could go wrong?
It will be perfect. -
Shiznizzle Reply
My old Lady Nancy is here to help as well on your television. "Just say, No!"...To drugs.short-n-round said:As Reagan said - "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.".
All's this will do is to turn hobbyists in to felons and drive things underground. Nothing will be solved.
Once again, government is looking at the wrong end to address issues.
She forget to mention that her helpful husband Ronald Reagan, was importing really nasty drugs into the US using the CIA and then selling them on the streets. All the while imprisoning those people for life in many cases.
Gotta love when you can actually get away with doing exactly that, then get caught after the fact and not do a single day in jail for your crimes.
Ronald got away with all that.
One law for little people and the rest can just print guns -
USAFRet Last time I will say this....Reply
I know it is hard with a topic like this, but no politics. And especially no personal attacks.
If we can't keep it to the technical aspects, this will simply be closed. -
PC Bottleneck Calculator Reply
Sir, you are absolutely right. We should focus on our topics.USAFRet said:People....lets at least attempt to keep it on topic. -
purposelycryptic I really don't get this movement - it is completely legal to make your own guns, whether that be using a 3D printer or parts from your local Home Depot. You just have to get the appropriate tax stamp and permanently place the serial number it is assigned on the receiver.Reply
There are types of guns that are prohibited by law - short-barrelled rifles and the like - but that applies to firearms in general, regardless of manufacturer or manufacturing method.
Besides, it's impossible to make a functional 100% 3D-printed gun. You are always going to need additional parts (spring and some form of firing pin at a minimum). All of the sensationalized coverage of them being a threat due to being "invisible" to metal detectors is baloney as well, since, no matter what percentage plastic your goofy gun is, bullets will always be metal, and without them, all you have is a useless lump of trash.
And unless you are using 3D-printing as one tool out of many, you will realistically be limited to a terribly inaccurate one-shot pop-gun with an unrifled plastic barrel that has a decent chance of exploding in your face when you pull the trigger.
Even if you are 100% committed to a single-use a surreptitious disposable weapon to commit heinous crime, you'd honestly be better off just using a shiv, sharpened length of rebar, or even a pointy stick, none of which will cover you in powder residue or have a chance of exploding on use. Or, you know, you could just go to Home Depot and spend $50 for the parts to put together a basic zip-gun or pipe rifle/shotgun.
Besides, this is the US - we have significantly more guns than people in this country already. You can illegally buy a real junk gun pretty much anywhere, simply remove the serial number, and just take it apart once you've finished. Stuff the barrel full of powdered aluminum and rust, light it, and behold, a few minutes later it's nothing but a warped blob of melted metal.
Anyone in a position to push for this sort of initiative should know full-well how silly the whole thing is (or certainly have a moral responsibility of educating themselves on it appropriately), and yet they keep doing it anyway, just to get people riled up over a non-issue. I don't care who they are or what their angle is - spreading misinformation to create a moral panic is wrong.
@USAFRet, I hope this comment isn't taken as a political statement, as I really could not care less about who is involved in it, or what their political, religious or sexual orientation is (if any). I just hate seeing people getting manipulated into supporting having their own rights infringed for no reason. I know people love to turn this sort of thing into a platform to attack Party X or Politician Y, but I just hate the concept in general. I hope that much is alright to say. -
purposelycryptic Reply
Mongol General: Hao! Dai ye! We won again! This is good, but what is best in life?PC Bottleneck Calculator said:Sir, you are absolutely right. We should focus on our topics.
Mongol: The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the wind in your hair.
Mongol General: Wrong! Conan! What is best in life?
Conan: To melt filament, see it driven before you, and watch it turn into whatever you desire!
Mongol General: That is good! That is good.
😋 -
USAFRet Reply
And that is precisely what we do not want here.purposelycryptic said:I know people love to turn this sort of thing into a platform to attack Party X or Politician Y, but I just hate the concept in general.
Discuss the tech aspects, sure.
When it descends into the political mudslinging...we have issues.