California will force 3D printer makers to block firearm printing — but existing machines will be exempt

California’s new law targets 3D printers capable of facilitating gunmaking, not existing machines Existing California 3D printer owners face no new installation requirement Manufacturers cannot comply fully until ASTM establishes the technical standard California has enacted a new requirement that w

<![CDATA[ <article> <ul><li><strong>California’s new law targets 3D printers capable of facilitating gunmaking, not existing machines</strong></li><li><strong>Existing California 3D printer owners face no new installation requirement</strong></li><li><strong>Manufacturers cannot comply fully until ASTM establishes the technical standard</strong></li></ul><p>California has enacted a new requirement that will eventually make manufacturers add firearm prevention technology to certain <a href="https://www.techradar.com/best/best-3d-printers">3D printers</a>.</p><p>The law signed by Governor Gavin Newsom does not immediately require companies to alter machines already sold or owned.</p><p>The measure instead governs how qualifying printers can enter California’s market once the new requirements apply.</p><h2 id="california-leaves-existing-printers-outside-the-requirement">California leaves existing printers outside the requirement</h2><p>The measure applies to future sales and transfers, meaning owners of existing equipment will not have to install new blocking hardware.</p><p>That distinction removes a significant compliance issue for people who already possess printers that could otherwise fall within the regulation.</p><p>The legislation also does not prohibit possession or ordinary operation of machines that lack the eventual firearm prevention capability.</p><p>Instead, manufacturers will face obligations when covered printers enter California’s market after the required technical standard becomes available.</p><p>California therefore joins New York as the second US state to establish restrictions specifically concerning firearm production through 3D printing equipment.</p><p>Colorado and Washington are pursuing comparable measures, although their proposals have not yet become equivalent statewide requirements.</p><p>The law’s practical reach nevertheless depends on technology capable of identifying potentially prohibited designs without blocking legitimate printing activity.</p><p>There are two commonly discussed approaches for recognizing firearm-related designs, although each creates different technical problems for enforcement.</p><p>One approach compares digital files against databases containing known firearm designs, while another uses trained software to assess printed objects</p><p>Database matching could potentially be bypassed by changing a design’s dimensions or dividing one object into separate printable components.</p><p>Automated analysis could instead misclassify legitimate items because many ordinary mechanical components can resemble firearm parts during digital assessment.</p><p>Those concerns include objects such as tubes, brackets, levers, and barrels that can serve unrelated purposes outside weapons production.</p><h2 id="astm-standard-controls-when-manufacturers-must-act">ASTM standard controls when manufacturers must act</h2><p>The California requirement does not establish its own detailed technical specification for determining how firearm prevention technology should operate.</p><p>Instead, manufacturers must wait for ASTM International to publish or adopt an applicable standard before the requirement becomes operative.</p><p>The California Department of Justice must begin checking quarterly for such a standard no later than July 1, 2027.</p><p>Those checks must continue through July 1, 2029, after which the statutory checking obligation ends if no standard exists.</p><p>That timetable leaves an important question unresolved because manufacturers cannot implement a requirement whose technical benchmark remains unwritten.</p><p>The Electronic Frontier Foundation questioned whether mandated detection technology could reliably achieve its intended purpose under these conditions.</p><p>“There is no world where the mandated technology actually works as intended,” said the Electronic Frontier Foundation in June 2026.</p><p>If ASTM does not establish the necessary standard by July 1, 2029, the DOJ would stop its required searches.</p><p>The law therefore creates a future compliance system whose operation depends on an external standards process that has not yet produced its benchmark.</p><p>Via <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/3d-printing/california-bill-requiring-3d-printers-to-block-firearm-printing-becomes-law-rule-to-require-manufacturers-to-include-blocking-technology-once-an-industry-standard-is-published" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Toms Hardware</a></p><figure class="van-image-figure inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:676px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:31.51%;"><img id="diM9tpwF2Lz85R8q85CT78" name="tr-g_news" alt="Google logo on a black background next to text reading 'Click to follow TechRadar'" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/diM9tpwF2Lz85R8q85CT78-1920-80.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="676" height="213" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div></figure> </article> ]]>