I strongly oppose the proposed legislation requiring background checks for the purchase of 3D printers. I am an avid user at home and work of 3D printing technology and understand the process of creating an STL file, slicing the file in software that converts the file into GCODE, which then is uploaded via network, USB Key, or MicroSD card to the 3D printer to produce the design.

I currently use both FDM (Fused Deposited Material) and SLA (Stereolithography) 3D printing styles.

While I understand the intention to address concerns about the misuse of 3D printing technology, this measure raises significant issues related to overreach, effectiveness, and unintended consequences.

### 1. **Unnecessary Overreach and Burden on Consumers**
3D printers are general-purpose tools used in countless legitimate and productive applications, including education, manufacturing, medicine, and creative hobbies. Requiring background checks for purchasing a widely available and lawful device places an undue burden on law-abiding individuals and businesses. This approach would treat an everyday piece of technology as inherently dangerous, which is neither accurate nor reasonable.

### 2. **Questionable Effectiveness**
The proposed legislation would likely be ineffective in addressing the root issues it seeks to solve. Individuals intent on using 3D printers for illegal purposes could easily bypass such restrictions by:

- Purchasing printers secondhand through private transactions or online marketplaces.
- Constructing homemade 3D printers using publicly available designs and components.

Instead of imposing restrictions on legitimate users, it would be more effective to focus on education and enforcement targeting the misuse of 3D-printed materials, such as the production of illegal or dangerous items.

### 3. **Hindrance to Innovation and Accessibility**
3D printing is a cornerstone of innovation, democratizing manufacturing and empowering entrepreneurs, students, and researchers. Imposing background checks could create unnecessary delays and costs, discouraging individuals and small businesses from adopting this transformative technology. This is particularly detrimental to underserved communities that rely on affordable access to technology for educational and professional advancement.

### 4. **Existing Legal Protections Are Sufficient**
The misuse of 3D printing to produce illegal items is already addressed under existing laws. For example, manufacturing untraceable firearms or counterfeit goods is illegal regardless of the method of production. Strengthening enforcement of these existing laws would be a far more effective approach than broadly restricting access to the technology itself.

### 5. **Privacy Concerns**
Requiring background checks for 3D printers raises serious privacy concerns, as it would involve collecting personal information from individuals engaged in lawful and harmless activities. Such data collection could create opportunities for misuse or abuse of personal information without achieving any meaningful benefit.

### Conclusion
Rather than enacting overly broad and burdensome legislation, policymakers should focus on targeted measures that address specific concerns about the misuse of 3D printing technology. Educational initiatives, public-private partnerships, and stronger enforcement of existing laws can achieve the desired outcomes without stifling innovation or imposing unnecessary restrictions on law-abiding citizens.

Useless legislation that solves no problem, but serves as a roadblock to getting hobbyists, educators, and manufacturers 3d printers.

It’s a shame that legislators are able to regulate things they clearly have no understanding of

Ridiculous Legislation that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

You may as well ban any and all hardware store purchases.

The individual would have used any means available to achieve his goal... And it's insane to see legislation within 60 days of the event.

There's far more important issues to be considered, like addressing homeless and migrant shelter programs which need funding and work.

Any legislation that would benefit the actual people living in NY, not just the millionaires, would be appreciated - We the People do not want more regulations just to make Millionaires feel more comfortable.

Let them pay for their own security - leave the State out of it.

In short: this bill is akin to background checks to buy any tool- a screwdriver, a saw, or a laptop.

In-depth, I agree with and appreciate every point of the comprehensive comment left above by `Russell_Lovrin`.

This is a ridiculous suggestion for a bill. Hopefully this is the low point of Jennifer Rajkumars career and she begins to make better choices to better represent her constituency.

I do not think this would be effective regulation or effective use of enforcement time or dollars. 3d printers, like most things, can be misused. But background checks won’t solve an issue. For most people 3d printing is a hobby or allows for making easy adjustments in their life. It also has great educational use. This law will not help but make it harder for good people to get into a new hobby and make the very few wanting to use it illegally hide it more.

This legislation is absolutely absurd and a waste of taxpayer money.

How many other items will the state start requiring criminal background check requirement in order to purchase?

The assassination of Former Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe was assassinated with by a homemade, makeshift firearm. So are we going to start requiring criminal background checks for any item or material that could potentially be used to craft a firearm?

Pipes, lumbers, metals, nails, tape, rubber bands? How about the specialized sands and other molding materials used for casing metals or for casting anything at all? Are we going to start requiring background checks for any tools that could be used for potentially crafting or modifying a firearm? Pliers, vice, crucibles, forges, anvils, files or screwdrivers?

Any one of the items or materials mentioned above could be used to construct a makeshift firearm or modify an existing firearm. So how far is the state going to inject themselves into the lives of New York state residents under the guise of firearm restriction?

To say you need a background check for a 3d printer would lead to needing one for any standard machining tool. Bananas. I Oppose this with my whole heart. You don’t get to run a background check for simple tools.

This is an insane overstep to connect 3D Printers as if their sole purpose was to make firearms.

Are legislators going to fix the loophole that you can buy pipes at Home Depot because theres a chance they are used to make pipe bombs for under $50? Heck, you can use those same pipes to make a primitive shotgun if inclined.

Instead this is going to harm what manufacturing and engineering industry is left in NY. It's become a staple tool for both industries to use for prototyping, for fixturing, for manufacturing and more.
Kids in school are taught on 3D Printers on the path to learning about engineering and just the world in general. Engineers and hobbyists use 3d printers even at home to grow their knowledge.

This law will impact all legal uses of 3D printer and will be a hindrance to libraries maker spaces and research institutions in an attempt to ineffectively control a technology. The end use of making weapons is already restricted.

I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed legislation that would mandate criminal history background checks for individuals purchasing three-dimensional printers capable of producing firearms. While I share the commitment to public safety and efforts to address gun violence, I respectfully urge you to oppose this bill for the following reasons:

1. The Bill Overreaches in Regulation:
Three-dimensional printers have a wide range of legitimate, non-firearm-related applications, such as education, healthcare, manufacturing, and creative industries. Subjecting purchasers of 3D printers to background checks because of their potential misuse unfairly targets a burgeoning technology with significant societal benefits. This approach may stifle innovation and deter individuals and businesses from adopting this technology.

2. Enforcement Challenges and Unintended Consequences:
Implementing background checks for 3D printers would pose substantial enforcement and logistical challenges. It could lead to confusion about what constitutes a "firearm-capable" printer, creating a vague regulatory framework. Additionally, such measures could push individuals seeking to misuse this technology toward unregulated markets or smaller, less detectable printer models.

3. The Real Issue Lies in Misuse, Not Technology:
The focus should remain on preventing the illegal creation and distribution of firearms, rather than broadly regulating tools with lawful applications. Stronger enforcement of existing laws targeting the unlawful possession and manufacture of firearms would be more effective than restricting access to technology itself.

4. Potential Negative Impact on New York's Economy:
New York has a growing tech and manufacturing sector that relies on advanced tools like 3D printers. Imposing unnecessary restrictions could put businesses and entrepreneurs at a disadvantage, discouraging investment in the state and harming economic growth.

5. Protecting Civil Liberties:
Regulating the purchase of 3D printers could set a concerning precedent by criminalizing the acquisition of tools based on potential misuse. This could infringe on individuals’ rights and freedoms, particularly if similar logic is applied to other versatile technologies in the future.

I strongly support measures that directly address gun violence while safeguarding innovation, economic growth, and civil liberties. Instead of regulating 3D printers, I encourage focusing on targeted solutions such as improving firearm tracking, increasing penalties for illegal gun manufacturing, and enhancing public awareness about gun safety.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I appreciate your service to our state and your dedication to balancing safety with technological progress. Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this issue further.

The lack of creative thinking here is astounding.

I am a felon, I would be ineligible to buy a 3D printer under this law. Guess what, I could just have my wife buy it, or another family member, or as stated above I could buy one privately off Facebook or another marketplace. I could also just ask a friend with a 3D printer to print me off a gun. I could list so many ways to circumvent this garbage piece of legislation. If bad guys want guns, they will get guns. Making it take up to 2+ weeks for a plain Jane everyday law abiding American to get a 3D printer is ridiculous. Not to mention that there is paperwork and government/police involved and this all costs money. I would assume they would charge the customer a fee to "apply" for a 3D printer "license" or the price of the printers would just raise to accommodate.

The absolute stupidity of those in power in this country really make me dumbfounded how we haven't just nuked ourselves out of existence yet.

My main point is being a felon makes you ineligible for so many things it's ridiculous. With more and more Americans every year having criminal records, when does it end. My son is into STEM and robotics etc. He has asked me repeatedly to buy him a 3D printer. Well, under this law I can't. He clearly wouldn't be able to apply via the background check process himself as far as I can tell. I'm sure there will be a minimum age. Why should my son miss out on a revolutionary piece of technology because I got caught with some illicit substances 15 years ago before he was even a tadpole in my fishing bag.

This dang country.

I oppose the proposed New York State law requiring background checks for purchasing 3D printers. This measure unfairly targets a widely used and lawful technology, placing an unnecessary burden on consumers and businesses. 3D printers have countless legitimate applications in education, manufacturing, medicine, and hobbies. Treating these tools as inherently dangerous misrepresents their purpose and discourages innovation and accessibility, particularly for small businesses and underserved communities.

The law would also fail to achieve its goals. People with bad intentions could easily bypass restrictions by buying printers secondhand or building their own. Misuse of 3D printers is already addressed under existing laws, such as those banning untraceable firearms or counterfeit goods. Strengthening enforcement of these laws, combined with education and targeted efforts, would be a far more effective and fair solution than broad restrictions that harm innovation and privacy.

I strongly oppose this bill. Will you require background checks for pipes, files, screws, bolts, nuts, screwdrivers, hacksaws, cnc machines, lathes, and the like? What about hands? Hands can be used to craft a firearm, might as well require background checks for those too.

I believe Assembly Bill A2228 is an overreach of power and would stifle the growth of technology and innovation. We should make 3D printing more accessible to foster innovation, small business growth, and continue to move power into the hands of the people, by the people for the people. Instead of buying an overpriced wall hook or drawer organizer, I can make a customized one myself, or even sell them to my neighbors for a better price.

When I have a 3D printer, I have the option to make products myself instead of buy them, I can make things for others (Here in the USA!) or even start a successful small business.

A bill like this, if it were passed, would just be another reason on the list of why I am considering leaving NY state for good. Stop trying to punish many for the sins of one. This bill is illogical.

I also strongly oppose passage of this legislation. 3D printers are a generic commodity, used in countless places for countless purposes... everywhere from schools to creating aircraft and other machine parts. Many, if not most 3D printer purchases are online and/or from out of state for om my understanding. This will hamper creativity as well, since well-intentioned people may not wish to submit to a background check, even if they have nothing to hide. Even those who might have something "bad" in their background should not be restricted from purchasing 3D printers since they can be used for thousands of purposes, other than creating illegal items. People who have legitimate 3D printing needs could easily face great difficulties because of a blemished history. Not good, not practical to enforce, and generally a bad idea. Thank you for your consideration.

The details of this bill show how little the author knows about 3d printing, 3d printer design, construction, or final product. This bill is a massive overreach with little to no effectiveness and no good way of implementation.

For example, FLSUN is a manufacturer of 3D printers and it can be ordered from them. Will FLSUN, based out of Zhengzhou City China, be able to retrieve the background checks for US Citizens? What about 3D printers purchased in other states and brought across state lines? How about the individual parts that can be assembled into a 3D printer? Will there be a law about a straw purchase of a 3D printer?

I strongly oppose this legislation

This proposed law will have no effect on ghost guns. Anyone who wishes to use a 3D printer for nefarious purposes can easily access one. There are many thousands of printers already at homes and businesses in the state. It is easy to build a 3D printer using open source designs. There is no effective way of preventing 3D printers from entering the state.

The law would only be an expensive inconvenience and violation of privacy for 3D printing hobbyists and for startups. The worst impact is that it will mean kids who would otherwise developed an interest in engineering will not because of reduced access to 3D printing.

The fact this law is even under serious consideration makes feel sad that some of our senators are lacking even the most basic understanding and awareness of the technologies they seek to regulate.

This bill is absolutely daft. ANY 3D printer can be used to print the listed items. As someone who's used 3D printers for 10+ years, this bill is egregiously overreaching. If I need to add another printer to my collection of printers for some product, I see zero reason I should need a background check to make the purchase to add manufacturing capacity ASAP. There is nothing inherent about a 3D printer that makes it suited to manufacturing any component.

Unless there are plans on requiring background checks for CNC machines, various manual machining equipment (mills, lathes, etc), and anything else required to manufacture an *actual* firearm as easily as manufacturing a serving spoon, I see absolutely zero reason for this bill to exist.

You might use your vehicle to drive through a crowd or you might use it to take a trip to the Adirondacks. Would you submit to a background check in order to purchase a vehicle? You might use a pencil as a weapon or to write in your diary. Would you submit to a background check to purchase a pencil?

Please kill this bill immediately and get back to the business of the people. Thank you.

NY overreach again.
I don't see how this is legal nor is it enforceable. My 3D printer was bought from Prusa overseas. How can you process a background check on shipments or kits.
NY must have better things to do than create legislation like this.

Even if you ignore the obvious constitutionality concerns, the huge privacy impact on everyone who wants a 3D printer, the substantial burden on merchants, and the rather large potential damage to industry in New York, this would still be a terrible idea because it harms real people without any real justification.

People make mistakes. They do their time. They get set free. They try to start a new life. And what happens? Well-meaning legislators come up with laundry lists of laws to "protect" the public from those people that end up preventing them from earning a living.

Let's get real here. Probably not more than one or two 3D printers out of every million sold will ever be used to create a firearm. But they are used to make things that get sold commercially. Do you know how many things on sites like Etsy are made with 3D printers? It's a pretty significant industry.

So now what you're saying is that anyone who isn't allowed to own a gun also isn't allowed to buy a 3D printer to participate in that rather large and rapidly economy, all because the hardware could theoretically be used to print some part of a firearm. You're literally taking easy, well-paying jobs away from former inmates based on an assumption that they will turn criminal, and thus, ironically, encouraging them to do so.

Sure, 3D printers can be used to make gun parts. The problem is, so could a lathe, a mill, a chisel, a drill, a hacksaw, or any number of other very basic tools. What's next? Are you going to require a background check before buying woodworking or metalworking tools of all kinds? Because the machinist unions are going to have a field day with that one.

While we're at it, should released prisoners also not be allowed to own a car? After all, they could drive to another state with less restrictive gun laws and buy one? Should they not be allowed to use the Internet or a telephone? They could use either of those to set up a private gun sale with someone? See how silly this idea becomes when taken to its logical conclusion?

The same sort of logic could be used for requiring background checks on darn near everything you could possibly use to make things, communicate, or travel, which makes singling out 3D printers arbitrary and capricious (read "this will be struck down with 100% certainty"). And if you do that, congratulations, you will have guaranteed that those former prisoners will have nothing else that they can do to earn a living other than commit crimes. Is that really what you want?

There's also a high degree of immorality in any law that would presume guilt like this. After all 99.9999% of 3D printers will never be used to print gun parts, yet this law basically says that because someone has previously been convicted of a crime and isn't allowed to own a gun, that they are presumed to be buying a 3D printer for nefarious purposes and should not be allowed to do so. It's one thing to limit direct access to a deadly weapon. It's quite another to limit access to something that is almost guaranteed to *not* be used to create a deadly weapon merely because there's a small chance that a few of them might use it that way.

Besides, there will almost certainly always be much easier and safer ways to get a weapon than to 3D print them. It isn't even a very good way to do that. And making it much harder for every hobbyist to make random tools for use around their home based on the nonsensical assumption that preventing bad people from having access to 3D printing won't just make them spend a few hundred dollars more for a CNC mill is just about as ridiculous as it gets.

Before you even *think* about passing a law that is such a massive violation of civil liberties for so many people, potentially harms the economic opportunities for released prisoners, and still has almost zero chance of actually preventing any actual crimes, you should at least try to figure out how many people on your firearm ban list actually own a 3D printer and are using it for legitimate purposes. You might very well be surprised to learn that you're doing way more harm than good with this proposed law, and I don't think for a single second that you've actually collected that data.

Laws should be passed with a reasonable belief that they will make things better overall. There is a reasonable belief among the overwhelming majority of 3D printer users that what you are doing will make things worse overall. This almost certainly means you're barking up the wrong tree, and you should take about ten steps back and abandon the idea entirely.

Just saying.

Even if you ignore the obvious constitutionality concerns, the huge privacy impact on everyone who wants a 3D printer, the substantial burden on merchants, and the rather large potential damage to industry in New York, this would still be a terrible idea because it harms real people without any real justification.

People make mistakes. They do their time. They get set free. They try to start a new life. And what happens? Well-meaning legislators come up with laundry lists of laws to "protect" the public from those people that end up preventing them from earning a living.

Let's get real here. Probably not more than one or two 3D printers out of every million sold will ever be used to create a firearm. But they are used to make things that get sold commercially. Do you know how many things on sites like Etsy are made with 3D printers? It's a pretty significant industry.

So now what you're saying is that anyone who isn't allowed to own a gun also isn't allowed to buy a 3D printer to participate in that rather large and rapidly economy, all because the hardware could theoretically be used to print some part of a firearm. You're literally taking easy, well-paying jobs away from former inmates based on an assumption that they will turn criminal, and thus, ironically, encouraging them to do so.

Sure, 3D printers can be used to make gun parts. The problem is, so could a lathe, a mill, a chisel, a drill, a hacksaw, or any number of other very basic tools. What's next? Are you going to require a background check before buying woodworking or metalworking tools of all kinds? Because the machinist unions are going to have a field day with that one.

While we're at it, should released prisoners also not be allowed to own a car? After all, they could drive to another state with less restrictive gun laws and buy one? Should they not be allowed to use the Internet or a telephone? They could use either of those to set up a private gun sale with someone? See how silly this idea becomes when taken to its logical conclusion?

The same sort of logic could be used for requiring background checks on darn near everything you could possibly use to make things, communicate, or travel, which makes singling out 3D printers arbitrary and capricious (read "this will be struck down with 100% certainty"). And if you do that, congratulations, you will have guaranteed that those former prisoners will have nothing else that they can do to earn a living other than commit crimes. Is that really what you want?

There's also a high degree of immorality in any law that would presume guilt like this. After all 99.9999% of 3D printers will never be used to print gun parts, yet this law basically says that because someone has previously been convicted of a crime and isn't allowed to own a gun, that they are presumed to be buying a 3D printer for nefarious purposes and should not be allowed to do so. It's one thing to limit direct access to a deadly weapon. It's quite another to limit access to something that is almost guaranteed to *not* be used to create a deadly weapon merely because there's a small chance that a few of them might use it that way.

Besides, there will almost certainly always be much easier and safer ways to get a weapon than to 3D print them. It isn't even a very good way to do that. And making it much harder for every hobbyist to make random tools for use around their home based on the nonsensical assumption that preventing bad people from having access to 3D printing won't just make them spend a few hundred dollars more for a CNC mill is just about as ridiculous as it gets.

Before you even *think* about passing a law that is such a massive violation of civil liberties for so many people, potentially harms the economic opportunities for released prisoners, and still has almost zero chance of actually preventing any actual crimes, you should at least try to figure out how many people on your firearm ban list actually own a 3D printer and are using it for legitimate purposes. You might very well be surprised to learn that you're doing way more harm than good with this proposed law, and I don't think for a single second that you've actually collected that data.

Laws should be passed with a reasonable belief that they will make things better overall. There is a reasonable belief among the overwhelming majority of 3D printer users that what you are doing will make things worse overall. This almost certainly means you're barking up the wrong tree, and you should take about ten steps back and abandon the idea entirely.

Just saying.

Is this a joke? This is absolutely ridiculous. You should be fired for trolling people with laws like this.

I cannot imagine a more pathetic attempt at paranoid knee-jerk reactions than this. This is a Justin Trudeau level of stupidity.
Regulating the purchase of new 3D printers that are capable of printing a firearm or firearm components means classifying all 3D printers under the NFA. Anyone can print an auto sear.
What about buying a printer off of Facebook Marketplace? Craigslist? Word of mouth? Out of State? How’s this regulation going to work under those circumstances?
Owning a firearm is our inalienable Right. You’re never going to make America gun-free.
Perhaps drafting a bill that targets gun crimes? Don’t legislate law abiding citizens. Legislate the criminals.
A2229 - Mandatory Minimum Consecutive Sentences
a) If a person has a gun on their person or in their car illegally (stolen, serial number removed, convicted felon…), ten year minimum sentence.
b) A firearm (including airsoft) is used in a crime, but is not discharged, fifteen year sentence to be served CONSECUTIVELY with any other offences.
c) A firearm is discharged in the commission of a crime, twenty year minimum sentence, plus the consecutive sentence on the other crimes.
d) Murder, life without parole.
e) If more than one firearms offence is present with the same offender, all sentences must be served consecutively.
f) If more than one person is present in the vehicle or home or workplace at the time of the arrest, and ownership of the subject firearm cannot be established, all persons are equally responsible and subject to the same offence sentencing.
g) If one subject claims ownership of the firearm, all other persons present are absolved of their liability towards that offence. Unless one or more of the persons is a convicted felon.

What do you think? Get tough on crime, not the citizens.
You can pass a Bill banning all firearms in New York State. Guns will still be used in crimes against us.
This might come as a shock, but criminals don’t give a heck about your laws.

This bill is absurd. How about a background check to buy a screwdriver or a file both are used to make a gun. It is already illegal to own a ghost gun, no matter what is used to make it.

I'm almost dizzy from shaking my head so hard, this proposal is absolutely ridiculous and it needs to be removed from consideration. What's next, requiring background checks for other tools like screwdrivers and wrenches? You people (politicians) need to find something worthy of our tax dollars to spend your time on.

This Bill doesn't solve anything just like the rest of the gun laws in NY. Voting NAY!!!

This is so uninformed that it's truly staggering. Look up the RepRap project or open-source 3D printers. I was 14 or 15 when I built my first 3D printer—a Prusa Mendel—using mostly commercially available parts that anyone with a credit card could purchase. The only components that didn’t come from Home Depot or McMaster were a handful of 3D-printed parts, which anyone with an existing printer could produce in a few hours and sell for next to nothing.

Not only is this law ineffective at stopping any real threat actors, but it also highlights how painfully uninformed and careless its proposer is. This is a blatant attempt to exploit public fear, and it’s honestly sickening. Get some experts on your payroll and consult them before pushing legislation that could jeopardize thousands of livelihoods and hobbies just to advance your political career.

This bill is insanely angering. During the pandemic, the 3d printing community came together to make face masks for people after enough could not be given to workers who needed them, and now you want to harm those people who helped you? This is an insane overstep, not to mention the fact that the bill is extremely vague, and wouldn't even stop ghost guns from being made, not all ghost guns are 3d printed, you can make one very easily with a pipe, a nail, and some wood. Do our senators even know what a 3d printer capable of 3d printing a ghost gun looks like? I guarantee you if you show them a picture of a Prusa i3 and a Voron 2.4, they would say they can't tell the difference and would assume they can both make ghost guns, when we in the community know better. Maybe if you got someone to educate you all, this bill could seem less inane, but the open ended-ness of this bill is going to harm schools, small businesses, and the little remaining industry in NYC. This is the kind of bill that makes me ashamed to be a democrat, our party needs to focus on things that ACTUALLY MATTER, like protecting immigrants from our new government, helping our homeless, dealing with the mismanagement of the subway, and so many other things that have gone ignored for too long in this city. I urge anyone who sees this to oppose this bill, and any senator who sees this, to educate yourself and understand exactly who this bill will affect.