California AB 2047 would bar the sale of any 3D printer not equipped with firearm blocking technology. Here is what the bill text says. Read the original story: California AB 2047 Would Make It Illegal to Sell a 3D Printer in the State Unless It Refuses to Print a Gun
California lawmakers have passed AB 2047, the California Firearm Printing Prevention Act, sending the measure to Governor Gavin Newsom for a signature or veto by the end of September, according to AmmoLand Shooting Sports News. But buyers of consumer 3D printers should expect no immediate change,...
California lawmakers approved AB 2047, creating a pathway for the state to require 3D printers to inspect and block firearm-related design files.
The petition presents two questions. The first comes from a strange venue fight. Defense Distributed sued in Texas, and the case was transferred to New Jersey. The Fifth Circuit later held that the transfer was improper and directed the Texas court to request the case back. The New Jersey c...
This week (15-19 June), Paris is hosting the Eurosatory defense expo. Büttner & Co. Ltd., a defense manufacturer out of Hungary, has chosen this venue to debut its innovative multi-caliber suppressor.
California, New York, Maryland, and Connecticut have banned "convertible pistols," meaning Glocks, even though Glock switches are already a federal crime. Here's where every state stands and why the courts are likely to overturn it.
New York’s new 3D printer law demands technology that does not currently exist, turning gun control into a broader attack on innovation, speech, privacy, and the right to make things without government permission.
In one of the most-significant yet most under-the-radar legal battles going on in the U.S. right now, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a petition for a rehearing of the Defense Distributed v. Attorney General of New Jersey case. A three-judge Third Circuit panel has recently dismis...
Colorado bill criminalizing possession of 3D printing code draws fierce opposition over First and Second Amendment concerns.
The suit seeks declaratory judgments that the extraterritorial application of the California provisions violates the First, Second, and Fourteenth Amendments.