Executive Summary
This research journal article discusses how 3D Printing technology may effect federal firearms regulations. The focus of the article is that, due to the development of 3D Printing technology, individuals, even people without technical expertise, now have the ability to use the new technology to produce guns at home much more easily than they ever have before. This behavior might bring great harm to society. However, if a comprehensive prohibition on using 3D Printers to manufacture personal weapons were implemented, it might defy the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller Supreme Court decision. In fact, the increasing popularity of 3D Printing means lawmakers must decide soon whether or not to allow 3D Printing of weapons. 3D Printing either should only be allowed to produce things that cannot be used as lethal weapons. Or, secondly, it can be used to produce a physical, working gun. The second option might achieve advances in 3D printing technology and promote the development of firearms design. However, developments in 3D Printing technology are creating concerns that not only legitimate consumers but also criminals are able to “print” firearms at home. If the law doesn’t allow individuals to use 3D printers to manufacturer personal weapons like handguns, it might be illegal according to the Second Amendment of the Constitution, a provision which protects the right of individuals to possess firearms under the law. Specifically, under the 2nd Amendment individuals may have the right to create their own firearms for self-defense, and the right to the manufacture firearms technology and materials.
Analysis and Critique In fact, 3D Printing technology is not brand new. This technology has been undergoing development for more than a decade. The reason it became more popular recently is because of decreasing usage costs, so more and more individuals have the opportunity to own 3D Printers for