3D-printed “ghost guns” spark safety crisis! U.S. man arrested for illegally manufacturing them; multiple states enact legislation to strictly control the source of these devices.
2026-02-02
Recently, police in Minnesota, USA, uncovered a case involving the illegal 3D-printing of firearm parts. A 32-year-old man, Patrick M. Dotty, was arrested at his home for manufacturing unmarked firearm components and now faces felony weapons charges. This case once again highlights the growing threat posed by “ghost guns”—unmarked, untraceable firearms—printed via 3D technology in the U.S. Currently, New York State and Washington State have successively introduced legislation aimed at curbing this issue, shifting the focus of regulation from the firearms themselves to the source—the 3D printers. However, the aggressive nature of these proposed regulations has sparked controversy within the industry, with many arguing that such measures would be extremely difficult to enforce. By contrast, China has consistently maintained a strict stance on firearms control. Regardless of the manufacturing method, illegally producing or possessing firearms is explicitly prohibited and strictly punishable by law; anyone caught violating these rules will face serious legal consequences.
One, Case Details: Man Faces Felony Charges for 3D-Printing Gun Accessories at Home
According to investigative information released by the Minnesota police, the individual apprehended in this case is Patrick M. Dotty, age 32, who was found to have been secretly manufacturing 3D-printed firearm components in his own apartment for an extended period of time.
During the search of the crime scene, the police seized a variety of specific items, including two unmarked metal silencers, two unmarked 3D-printed silencers, and 11 unmarked 3D-printed lower receivers—lower receivers, as core components of firearms, are highly regulated firearm accessories. The unmarked design renders these parts impossible to trace through normal channels, making them typical “ghost gun” accessories. Meanwhile, the police also seized at the scene a 3D printer used to manufacture these components, as well as three computer systems containing relevant design and manufacturing documents, providing crucial evidence for the classification of the case.
The digital forensic findings further confirmed Patrick’s illegal manufacturing activities: The computer systems involved stored a large number of design drawings and manufacturing parameters for 3D-printed firearms and silencer components. Combined with the seized finished and semi-finished parts, this evidence clearly demonstrates that his activities were ongoing and systematic, rather than merely accidental attempts.
Currently, Patrick M. Dotty has been charged by local police with a felony weapons offense for illegally manufacturing firearm components. The case is still under further investigation, and the final verdict will be determined based on factors such as the scale of his manufacturing activities and the degree of harm caused. This case has become yet another recent example in the U.S. of an illegal incident triggered by 3D-printed “ghost guns,” once again sounding an alarm about firearm safety.
II. Legislative Shift: Multiple U.S. States Target the Source of “Ghost Guns” and Tighten Controls on 3D Printers
In fact, this case is far from an isolated incident. In recent years, 3D-printed “ghost guns” have continued to spread across the United States. These firearms require no registration and carry no serial numbers, making them extremely difficult for law enforcement to track. Moreover, the barrier to entry for manufacturing them is remarkably low—only a 3D printer and the relevant design files are needed to complete the process. As a result, they have become a significant threat to public safety. Against this backdrop, several U.S. states have begun experimenting with legislative measures aimed at curbing the manufacture of ghost guns at the source. The focus of control has gradually shifted—from traditional firearms themselves to the 3D printers and related design files.
1. New York State: Clearly declares that 3D-printed firearms and related documents are illegal.
Previously, we reported on New York State’s legislative initiatives: The state has introduced Senate Bill S00227A and Assembly Bill A01777A. Both bills explicitly stipulate that manufacturing firearms or firearm components using 3D printing technology is illegal. Additionally, distributing or selling digital design files intended for the 3D printing of firearms will also result in legal liability.
New York State’s legislation focuses on “prohibiting the illegal manufacture and distribution,” aiming to curb the emergence of “ghost guns” at the behavioral level. However, it has not yet imposed mandatory regulatory requirements on 3D printing equipment itself, representing a relatively mild approach to control.
2. Washington State: Radical Legislation Directly Regulating 3D Printer Equipment
Following New York State, Washington State recently introduced House Bill 2321, raising the level of regulatory control to a new height by directly focusing regulation on 3D printers themselves—a provision that is remarkably aggressive.
According to the requirements of this bill, 3D printers sold and used in the state of Washington must possess three core functions:
First, the interception function can automatically identify and block the printing of firearms and related components.
Second, the database access feature requires that printer firmware and slicing software connect to the “Prohibited Firearms Blueprint” database, established and regularly updated by the State Attorney General’s Office, to perform real-time comparisons of printed files and prevent the printing of prohibited components.
Third, a software verification mechanism ensures that only authorized slicing software can be used in conjunction with the printer, preventing unauthorized software from circumventing control measures.
The bill further clarifies the penalty measures:
Selling or offering 3D printers in Washington State that lack the aforementioned features is illegal and carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a fine of up to $15,000—far stricter enforcement than in New York State.
Three, Industry Controversy: The implementation of the regulatory bill is extremely difficult, and mainstream manufacturers have explicitly stated they will not accept it.
From an overall trend perspective, the original intention behind some U.S. states passing legislation to strengthen source control over 3D-printed “ghost guns” was to safeguard public safety and address the security risks posed by the proliferation of these weapons. However, from the perspective of the 3D printing industry, these regulatory measures—especially the stringent provisions enacted in Washington State—are extremely difficult to implement and virtually impossible to put into practice.
First, there are numerous technical challenges:
There are numerous types of firmware and slicing software available for 3D printers, and compatibility varies significantly among devices from different brands and models. To achieve unified access to the official “prohibited firearm blueprint” database, all manufacturers would need to cooperate in carrying out technical upgrades. This not only requires substantial R&D investment but also faces challenges such as inconsistent technical standards and delayed database updates. Furthermore, there are many ways for illicit users to circumvent controls—for instance, by modifying printer firmware, cracking slicing software licenses, or altering prohibited design files—thus bypassing the device’s interception and verification functions and severely undermining the effectiveness of regulatory measures.
Finally, compliance costs are excessively high. For 3D printer manufacturers, modifying their equipment to meet regulatory requirements will significantly increase production costs and reduce product competitiveness.
Based on this, the industry generally believes that Washington State’s regulatory provisions are overly aggressive and do not reflect the actual conditions of the industry. We have good reason to believe that none of the world’s leading 3D printer manufacturers—including Tech3D and Creality—will accept these stringent requirements. Not only would these requirements increase manufacturers’ operating costs, but they would also restrict the normal application and innovation of 3D printing technology in legitimate areas.
Returning to the practical level, the safety risks posed by 3D-printed firearms do indeed exist objectively and urgently need to be managed through appropriate measures. However, the relevant legislation must strike a balance between public safety and industry development, further refining its technical feasibility and practical enforceability to find an equilibrium between safety and innovation. Moving forward, we will continue to closely monitor the progress of related legislation in various U.S. states and promptly share the latest developments with you.
Four, China’s Crackdown: Zero Tolerance! The illegal manufacture and possession of firearms are absolutely off-limits.
Finally, regarding gun control in China, there’s actually no need for much elaboration—our country has always maintained the strictest regulatory regime for firearms. Regardless of the manufacturing method used, illegally manufacturing or possessing firearms is a clearly prohibited offense, and the law adopts a “zero-tolerance” stance toward such violations.
According to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Administration of Firearms, anyone who illegally manufactures, sells, transports, mails, or stores firearms, ammunition, or explosives shall be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of no less than three years and no more than ten years. In cases involving serious circumstances, the offender shall be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of more than ten years, life imprisonment, or death. Likewise, anyone who unlawfully possesses or secretly stores firearms and ammunition in violation of firearm management regulations shall also be held criminally liable in accordance with the law.
This means that even if gun parts are manufactured using 3D printing technology—and even if the firearms themselves have not been fully assembled—simply possessing controlled firearm components already constitutes a violation of the law. Likewise, illegally holding such components will also subject you to legal sanctions. China’s stringent regulatory measures effectively curb the security risks posed by 3D-printed firearms right from the source, and they also draw a clear red line for the lawful and healthy development of 3D printing technology.
Conclusion: Uphold the legal bottom line.
3D printing technology, originally a key driver of innovation in fields such as manufacturing and design, has been exploited by criminals to produce “ghost guns,” posing a serious threat to public safety. Legislative efforts in multiple U.S. states demonstrate a strong determination to curb such illegal activities; however, the more stringent provisions still need to be refined and optimized in light of industry realities.
Meanwhile, in China, the stringent gun-control system has long since closed off any legal loopholes for the illegal production of 3D-printed firearms. We would also like to remind everyone that, both domestically and internationally, the application of 3D-printing technology must strictly adhere to legal boundaries. Any act of using this technology to engage in illegal or criminal activities will ultimately be met with severe legal punishment.
Historical article:
About Us
Emake3D specializes in the R&D and production of medical high-precision 3D printing equipment and new materials, serving the fields of oral medical care, jewelry, industrial prototypes, etc., and provides professional and mature overall application solutions for the above industries.
Contact Us
Add: 3rd Floor, Building 3, No. 20-2, Longling South Road, Pingdi Sub-district, Longgang District, Shenzhen
HotLine: +86 135 5495 1300
E-mail: official@emake3d.com
Related News
Message
SEO
Powered by: CEglobal