Three-Dimensional Printed Hysteria

The warning bells began to ring feverishly in early May of 2013. Article after article came out that month cautioning people about the ominous future we all faced due to the incoming wave of three-dimensional (3D) printed guns.

One of the first was an article released by Forbes on May 3, 2013, titled “This Is The World's First Entirely 3D-Printed Gun.” The article summarized how a company named Defense Distributed planned to release to the public the 3D printable CAD files for a gun they called “the Liberator.” ¹

Forbes followed that story with an article on May 5, 2013, titled “Meet The ‘Liberator’: Test Firing The World's First Fully 3D-Printed Gun.” This second Forbes article detailed how Cody Wilson, the founder of Defense Distributed and “a radical libertarian and anarchist,” successfully test-fired the Liberator. The column also discussed how certain lawmakers were nervously scrambling to ban 3D printable guns. Charles Schumer was quoted in the story as saying, “A terrorist, someone who's mentally ill, a spousal abuser, a felon can essentially open a gun factory in their garage.” In addition, the article pointed out that the CAD file for the Liberator and the video introducing the gun were already available online. ²

Adding to the hysteria, on May 8, 2013, Forbes released another story detailing how the plans for the Liberator had been downloaded 100,000 times. ³ Other publications also joined into the conversation. In total, no less than a dozen write-ups appeared that same month highlighting the impending danger 3D printed guns presented.

The inherent theme of many of these stories was the same, be afraid, be very afraid. Soon the streets were likely to be awash with criminals all armed with countless 3D printed guns they easily produced at home. These 3D printed gun toting hooligans would be capable of committing heinous untraceable crimes and society, including law enforcement, was virtually helpless to do anything about it. To put it simply, the sky was falling!

The barrage of columns subsided for the next couple of years, after U.S. lawmakers ordered Defense Distributed to remove the files from their site and as the legality of 3D printed guns played itself out in the courts. Then with (1) the settlement reached in the summer of 2018 between the Department of Justice and Defense Distributed allowing for the blueprint files to be reposted and (2) the subsequent ruling of a federal judge granting a restraining order blocking the release of the files, there was an uptick in articles revisiting the matter.

As an example, on August 28, 2018, CNN published a story titled “Maker of 3D-Printed Guns Begins Selling Blueprints, Despite Court Order.” The story discussed how Cody Wilson interpreted the restraining order, blocking the release of the blueprints, to only apply to him making the files available for free. Hence, instead Mr. Wilson started selling the blueprints to his customers. The report also stated that during the time that elapsed between the settlement and the federal judge's decision granting the restraining order “1,000 people downloaded the designs.” ⁴

Since that time period, the stories raising concerns about 3D printed guns have continued to trickle in. CNET released a story providing a broad stroke analysis of the controversy surrounding 3D printed guns. ⁵ While a write-up appeared in Wired that illustrated how decentralized 3D printed gun networks were emerging online and anonymously sharing schematics for 3D printed guns with other enthusiasts. ⁶ Also, Science News published a piece about problems that untraceable plastic 3D printed guns, coined as “ghost guns,” pose for law enforcement. ⁷

Yet, here we are >6 years later from the first set of articles on the subject, with the current reality being much different from what was projected. Nearly 7 years have passed and there still has not been an outbreak in 3D printed gun-related crimes.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation does not keep statistics for reported crimes that are specifically linked to 3D printed guns. However, it is noteworthy that the first and only news report I could locate claiming that a 3D printed gun was used in a commission of a crime was an article called “Couple Gets Engaged, Uses 3D Gun To Murder Ex's Mom: Cops” published in The Daily Beast on January 2, 2020. In that report, a seemingly disturbed young couple is accused of murdering the mother of one of their exes with a 3D printed gun. The detective in the article is quoted as saying, “It's the first one I've seen used.” ⁸ The scarce amount of other news reports I was able to find, which dealt with crimes linked to 3D printed guns, all concerned individuals who were caught illegally possessing 3D printed guns or gun parts, but who had not actually used such weapons. Consequently, although the story of the murder is abhorrent and any illegal activity is troublesome, the limited incidents of criminal behavior linked to 3D printed guns denote that the problem has not risen to anywhere near the level of being an epidemic.

Thus, the questions must be asked, what happened? Why did not the fears of a multitude of 3D printed gun toting criminals manifest? Did all of those publications just misinterpret and/or misjudge the threat? Or is the threat actually still looming and the alarm bells were just rung a little too early?

To answer those questions, I will first look at the current status of the threat. Afterward, in an attempt to forecast for the future, I will examine some of the root causes of crime and how 3D printing technology (in its entirety) may affect criminal behavior down the road.

The mechanics of creating 3D printed guns have always presented challenges in terms of cost-effectiveness and usefulness of such guns. As stated in the Science News article referenced earlier, “Right now, violence involving 3-D printed guns is more of a risk than a reality. The most common available 3-D printers, which cost hundreds of dollars, may not print usable guns, and high-end models cost tens of thousands of dollars.” ⁷ The column goes on to chronicle tests ran on the Liberator by a group of Swiss researches led by forensic scientist, Olivier Delemont, stating, “Most of the plastic guns broke upon firing; the frame cracked or the barrel fell out. On occasion, the weapons also ejected the nail, and bullets often deviated from their intended path.” Furthermore, Delemont is quoted as saying, “it would be more dangerous to be the shooter than to be the target.” ⁷

Alternatively, 3D printing a metal gun would create a more effective weapon than a 3D printed plastic gun; however, the costs are prohibitive. To 3D print a metal gun an industrial printer would be required, which is very costly, as acknowledged by an article about such weapons written in Extreme Tech, “the gun was printed with an industrial printer, the price of which is out of the range of your standard crazy person that would print a gun to mug you or rob a convenience store.” ⁹

Thus, for the reasons stated earlier, it is generally acknowledged that the threat is still not realistic. Hence, the concern is that as 3D printers improve and the costs come down, the threat will become more substantive at some point in the future. Nonetheless, as declared in an article written in Fortune on October 17, 2018, “The dangers of 3D-printed guns make for good headlines, and regulators and politicians like headlines. But let's face it: 3D-printed guns are only as dangerous as the individuals—currently not many in number—who make them with ill intent.” ¹⁰

This brings us to a greater point about 3D printing in general and its potential overall impact on society going forward. As the Fortune commentary alludes to, the fear of the proliferation of 3D printed guns is contingent upon there being a significant portion of the populace intent on using them for criminal activities. However, if we look at all of the benefits that 3D printing will bring to society, especially its ability to offset some of the major causes of crime and thereby decrease the segment of the population prone to criminality, then we will see that the positive aspects of the technology may ultimately outweigh and undercut any risk created by people having easier access to 3D printed guns.

On the whole, the causes of crime are complex. Nevertheless, there is research that suggests that food insecurity and housing insecurity are two strong factors in leading to criminal behavior. Obviously, these are not the only factors but I will use them for illustrative purposes to demonstrate 3D printing's potential impact on curtailing criminality.

“Hunger makes a thief of any man” quote by Pearl S. Buck. ¹¹

In 2011, the World Food Programme released a report describing how food insecurity leads to an increase in violent conflicts. ¹² Subsequently, it can be extrapolated from such findings that a decrease in food insecurity should result in a decline in crime.

3D printing technology can be a useful tool in reducing food insecurity. 3D printing is already at a stage where it can produce on-demand dining, and as the technology improves it will increasingly help make food more readily available. In 2017, a column appeared in Mimeo discussing such on-demand dining. As stated in the article, “On-demand dining with 3D printers is something people once thought of as a thing of science fiction movies, but today, it's become real and increasingly common.” ¹³ Forbes also published a story in 2018 discussing the benefits of edible 3D printing. ¹⁴ Hence, in the future, the arbiters of public policy could use 3D printing as a mechanism to help lessen those suffering from food insecurity and, therefore, negate a major cause of criminal behavior.

As mentioned earlier, another contributing factor to criminality is housing insecurity. In an article in Housing Matters, where they discuss the benefits of people being stably housed, they point out that when stably housed, “people commit fewer survival crimes (offenses like theft, robbery, trespassing, loitering, and prostitution), which are chief reasons people with low-level offenses are incarcerated.” ¹⁵

3D printing has already shown that it can be utilized to assuage housing insecurity. As explained in a report that appears in 3D Printing Media Network, “3D printed housing has been touted as a possible solution for low-income housing. Earlier this year, ICON and New Story made headlines for their $4,000 3D printed house. The 3D printed technology used for the build is reportedly capable of constructing a single story, 600–800 square foot home in under 24 hours and is ultimately intended for producing housing in developing areas.” ¹⁶ The article also says, “Creative design agency Framlab also proposed the development of 3D printed pods to help house New York's homeless and, eventually, to combat homelessness in every city.” ¹⁶

Accordingly, as we speculate on what the future may hold with regard to 3D printed guns and crime, it would be wise to not look at 3D printed guns alone in a vacuum but instead at the full impact 3D printing will have on the world. If we do that, it can be reasonably assumed that 3D printing, with its ability to cancel out causal factors in criminality, is more likely to lead to a future with less crime.

Furthermore, adding to the probability of such an encouraging outlook are all of the other ways 3D printing is and will benefit humanity, including: safer vehicles, cleaner factories, better education, and greater medical progress. ¹⁷ These innovations will lead to better communities and better communities will conceivably be ones where crimes become less frequent.

In conclusion, 3D printed guns are not a significant societal problem and the chances are good that they will never become one. Thus, stories raising the alarm about 3D printed guns can be seen as an injustice to the positive impact that 3D printing is having on our culture because when things are looked at holistically it is clear that 3D printing technology should not be feared but cheered.