States Move to Ban 3D-Printed Guns: Legislative Roundup

Two U.S. states have taken landmark legislative action against 3D-printed firearms in March 2026, raising complex questions about the intersection of additive manufacturing technology, public safety, and free speech. Washington State’s HB 2320 was signed into law by Governor Bob Ferguson on March 24, while Colorado’s version advanced through the legislature after amendments to avoid a veto from Governor Jared Polis.

Washington State: HB 2320 Signed Into Law

Washington’s HB 2320 is the more aggressive of the two laws. It explicitly:

• Bans using 3D printers or CNC machines to manufacture firearms or firearm components
• Restricts distribution of digital firearm manufacturing code — targeting CAD files and blueprints that enable home gun production
• Creates a “rebuttable presumption” — if someone possesses both a 3D printer and a digital firearm file, the law can presume intent to manufacture
• Addresses “digital loopholes” — closing gaps in existing ghost gun laws that didn’t account for digital manufacturing

The law goes beyond physical firearms to regulate the digital blueprints that allow gun printing, an approach that legal scholars say raises First Amendment questions about whether computer code constitutes protected speech.

Colorado: Amended to Avoid Veto

Colorado’s bill initially mirrored Washington’s approach but faced pushback from Governor Jared Polis, who threatened a veto. The bill was amended to remove a key provision — reportedly the regulation of digital code distribution — to secure the governor’s signature. Colorado Democrats have vowed to revisit the issue in the next legislative session.

What This Means for 3D Printing

The legislation directly affects the 3D printing community in several ways:

Machine Regulation

Washington’s law explicitly pulls 3D printers and CNC machines into firearms law. See also: The Current State of Metal 3D Printing in 2020. This concerns maker community organizations like Adafruit, which warned that the bills are “bad for STEM, bad for business, and bad for open source 3D printing” because they regulate the machines themselves, not just the illegal output.

Digital Code Restrictions

Regulating CAD files and digital manufacturing code is legally uncharted territory. Previous court cases (including the Defense Distributed v. United States Department of State case) have touched on whether 3D-printable gun files are protected speech, but no definitive Supreme Court ruling exists.

The Ghost Gun Context

The legislation responds to growing concern about “ghost guns” — untraceable firearms without serial numbers that can be built at home. While most ghost guns are currently made using CNC-machined 80% receivers, 3D printing is increasingly capable of producing functional firearm components, particularly when combined with metal reinforcement.

The Policy Debate

Argument For Regulation	Argument Against Regulation
Prevents untraceable firearms	Regulates machines, not just illegal output
Closes digital loophole in background check system	CAD files may be protected speech (1st Amendment)
Addresses public safety concern	Chills open-source innovation and STEM education
Deters at-home gun manufacturing	Difficult to enforce; files spread via internet
State-level response to federal inaction	Patchwork of state laws creates compliance confusion

What 3D Printer Owners Should Know

If you own a 3D printer in Washington State, the law affects what you can legally print. In Colorado, the final version of the law is still being shaped. Regardless of location, the trend toward regulation is clear: as 3D printing technology improves and becomes more capable of producing functional weapon components, lawmakers will continue to grapple with how to regulate the technology without stifling its many legitimate applications.

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources: Everytown, NRA-ILA, GeekWire, Adafruit, Journal-Advocate, Bearing Arms, Ammoland