A proposed bill in the New York State Senate proposes background checks for 3D printer purchases.
Assembly Bill A2228 no doubt attempts to address the increasing concern over “ghost guns”. These are weapons made from typical gun components, but including the critical piece that normally carries the serial number for licensing purposes. It’s possible to buy “kits” that include all but the critical component, which can then be 3D printed and combined with the kit.
Police forces worldwide have increasingly encountered perps carrying such weapons, and they’d like to do something to counteract the problem.
Somehow this intent has resulted in a bill in the New York State Senate.
But what does the bill propose? The bill’s key points include:
- Background Check Requirement: Retailers must request and receive criminal history information from the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) before selling such 3D printers
- Criminal History Review: The DCJS commissioner will determine if the purchaser has felony convictions, serious offenses, or outstanding felony-related warrants that would disqualify them from owning firearms under state law. Retailers may only proceed with the sale if the DCJS provides written approval
- Definition of 3D Printer: The law defines 3D printers as devices capable of creating three-dimensional objects from digital models
Anyone involved with 3D printing will immediately realize this is entirely impractical and will almost certainly not achieve the goals of the bill.
There are a number of issues that immediately come to mind:
- Online Sales: 3D printers are sold typically over the web from distant locations, where NY law may not be applicable, and thus the criminal checks would not be done.
- Out of state: Would online retailers be required to implement a records check for orders sourced in New York? How many would actually do that?
- Retail: The bill seems to target retail stores in New York that sell 3D printers. How many of these exist? Would they be put out of business by this rule?
- Large Sellers: What about large retailers like Home Depot, Best Buy, or Staples that occasionally carry 3D printers? Would they bother to implement the checks or just drop the items from their shelves?
- Definition: The definition of the 3D printer effectively includes all 3D printers, even those specifically designed for children.
- Industrial: The definition also would include all industrial 3D printers. Does that mean businesses purchasing equipment require criminal background checks? Or do all staff at the company require checks? Or just the 3D printer operators? Or the purchaser?
- Libraries: How would publicly available 3D printers in libraries or makerspaces fit into this scheme? Would library visitors require background checks before using the equipment? It seems to not be the case, leaving open a method to obtain the restricted parts.
- Cost: If implemented, this would be extra effort for retailers, and they would pass on that cost to buyers, raising the prices of 3D printers.
I can go on with many more problems, but you get the idea: this is a bill proposed from an extremely naive view of how this all works. It is unimplementable and will be entirely ineffective — except, perhaps, for politicians to gain some points with uninformed voters that might perceive this as a good thing.
The New York State Senate page allows for public comments, and there are several, all negative. This is unsurprising, and as the proposed bill becomes more well-known, additional negative comments will surely appear.
Yes, there is a problem, but you can’t solve it in this way. An analogous situation would be automobiles: you have to get checked before use (driver licensing), but that does in no way prevent accidents or crimes from taking place using automobiles.
My message to the New York State Senate: try something else, this will not work at all.
Via New York Senate
