The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing • Hacker News Board

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#421

Post by shevy-java » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:33 PM UTC

Not long ago, California rushed forward to force age sniffing, aka age verification. See systemd riding along the wave: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/40954

3D printing is also on a current hype run; I think a lot of this has to do with how cheap it is to print some things. So naturally some companies with overpriced shit, get nervous. So suddenly, California AGAIN, wants to censor and restrict people here.

Now - I think this will fail, 3D printing already won (IMO). It is similar to the right to repair movement. Though at an earlier stage. I am getting tired of all those lobbyists being active in California. And this is a problem that happens a LOT in the USA. This kind of lobbyism needs to go.

It is time to look at which folks act as lobbyists here, at the least at the surface level. All their communication with other organisations or companies, must be made open, so that people can look whether they are lobbyists or not. (This will not cover all lobbyists, but it will cover about 95% of them, because most lobbyists are stupid - see how EU OLAF caught some stupid EU lobbyists here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_corruption_scandal_at_th... - so the EU is similar to the USA here, all built by lobbyists. See also how Meta bribed people for age-sniffing and similar spying tools or Jeff Grey from honor your oath point at the problem of non-stop monitoring of everyone in cars at all times)

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#422

Post by jim33442 » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:35 PM UTC

caconym_ wrote: post #135

horsawlarway wrote: post #38

Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…

Reminds me of the sUAS legislation crushing the R/C flying hobby. Vague allusions to "safety" are constantly being thrown around, but in fact it seems that big companies are lobbying to claim the airspace for drone delivery and similar autonomous BVLOS operations.

Idk what law in particular, but if this is about flying drones at low altitude in places where other people didn't show up to hear drones buzzing, I'd want it banned whoever is doing it.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#423

Post by shevy-java » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:36 PM UTC

horsawlarway wrote: post #38

Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…

First, I agree with you, though I don't call it "bad legislation", I call it lobbyism. But there is one tiny nitpick to disagree with, aside from another user pointing out that there are even simpler ways for obtaining firearms.

> If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm

While I totally agree with you that this is all about lies, there is still one difference in that most regular firearms are metal-based. With 3D printing one could print plastic or similar materials.

Again, I am not saying this is a reason to explain this lobbyism here, but we also need to be objective when debunking the lies of the other side. For instance, one difference is metal detection (naturally plastic-based weapons would also tend to break more easily, so this whole legislation is a total lie to begin with anyway; California is currently broken. I am surprised about that, usually you'd think other US states are more broken, but California is now in the top 3 lobbyist-controlled states - and from there the disease spreads slowly).

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#424

Post by someguynamedq » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:45 PM UTC

favorited wrote: post #99

horsawlarway wrote: post #38

Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…

> You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. Why would you buy a pipe at Home Depot? A gun barrel is not a firearm, and is not required to be registered or serialized. You can drive to Arizona or Nevada and buy an actual barrel, with rifling, manufactured to meet well-known specifications, without showing an ID.…

> Occam's razor. This isn't a shadowy manufacturing cabal, threatened by 3D printing. Gun control lobbyists are trying to prevent the printing of handgun frames and Glock switches, because they're the easiest parts to print.

Probably more accurate to say politicians are trying to take actions which will be seen publicly as fighting against gun crime. It seems like a stretch to say anyone earnestly believes that 3D printed guns are a real problem in the landscape of existing gun crime in America

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#425

Post by kobalsky » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:46 PM UTC

codedokode wrote: post #82

Sorry if it is a dumb question, but why in USA people try to regulate 3D printing instead of banning sale of bullets without a firearm owner license? What stops people from buying Chinese printers or components on AliExpress? Or using an open source printer? At the same time, if you cannot buy bullets, your plastic gun is worthless.

> What stops people from buying Chinese printers

Exactly the same thing that stops you from buying a generic inkjet printers.

Go check Amazon. There are none.

Some say the inkjet printer head is the secret sauce, but then yousearch for generic laser printers and there are none either.

Is every printer technology an uncrackable tech that has resisted decades of reverse engineering?

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#426

Post by lynndotpy » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:46 PM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #322

lynndotpy wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is different than the proposed test for sanity.

Is a proof of lack of insanity a proof of sanity?

To start with, "visibly insane" is a ludicrous idea.

Further, yes, you can get a license despite being "visibly insane". Some people consider it insane to believe in a deity, to not to, to smoke cigarettes, to have dyed hair, to have an electric car, to have a lime car, to own a Nissan, etc. During my test, the tester said nobody should drive if they hadn't gotten 10 hours of sleep, and I admitted I had only had six or seven. I still got my license.

Interpreted generously, maybe some small percentage of "insane people" are visibly so. Even then, looking at someone is not a proof of a lack of sanity.

Sanity isn't a thing you can test for, it's definitely not something the government should test for.

To make the implied question explicit: How do you envision positively testing for sanity? How would you feel if this test were implemented in 1940, 1900, 1860, 1820, etc? Would your feelings about that differ by the inclination of the politicians in power?

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#427

Post by 15155 » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:47 PM UTC

esseph wrote: post #274

15155 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> metal detectors are kind of the primary way we try to find guns on people What are bullets and shell casings made out of again?

> What are bullets and shell casings made out of again? Usually non-ferrous metals like brass, lead, and copper unless you live closer to Russia, then you may end up with steel-case. That's besides the point though, the barrel of the gun will be steel.

Ferrous metals aren't required for any modern security-screening metal detectors: these materials are still highly electrically conductive, and therefore easily-detectable eddy currents are still inducible.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#428

Post by draygonia » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 2:48 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #385

remarkEon wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would not be surprised at how motivated a gang member is to acquire a firearm, no. So, I guess point taken, however a) I was responding to a claim that's slightly different from 3D printing lower receivers, and b) I thought YouTube banned/got rid of content that actually taught you how to do this? I have not looked in a long time. In any case, milling out a block of material on your own to function as a lower is go…

> Separately, I am always a little confused by the idea that you cannot "trace" these firearms. It's presumably a misunderstanding of how investigations work. They're paperwork people so the assumption is that the serial number is of vital importance because it's what's on the paperwork, and if something could exist with no serial number then the entire system is in danger. Meanwhile the serial number is overall not…

Serial numbers are security theater on the same level as TSA checkpoints at the airport.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#429

Post by hypeatei » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 3:10 PM UTC

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #336

hypeatei wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> any real attempt to regulate guns Any real attempt would need to be at the national level, not that I would advocate for it, but it's simply a pipe dream to create a "gun free zone" in a country with 100s of millions of firearms. There are plenty of gun enthusiasts in California, they just don't flaunt it or talk about it.

> Any real attempt would need to be at the national level Exactly! Prohibition works really well. Now if only we could figure out what state that coke, heroin and meth are still legal in!!

I stated that I wouldn't advocate for a national prohibition on guns mostly because I think it wouldn't work and I support gun rights. But if you were to try banning guns, it'd have to be a huge national effort and not just a few states.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#430

Post by dlev_pika » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 3:17 PM UTC

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #342

dlev_pika wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry you feel the need to be armed in the streets - that sucks :(

Need? Get to. I get to carry and make sure that I’m not a useless decoration if I or my family is ever in trouble because of someone that shouldn’t be in general population. Need :) Ya, I see how you sell it to yourself as a negative.

I prefer a working police force, fewer rEsPoNsIbLe gUn oWnErs, and not to increase my, or my family’s, chances of dying by firearm, but I guess we all need to feel we are worth it, in one way or another - damned be the costs.