For many years, American investigators have relied on gun traces to make significant progress in solving crimes. Traditionally, homicide detectives have utilized ballistics and weapon serial numbers cross-referenced with extensive records from gun shops, manufacturer IDs, and crime databases. However, these investigative methods are quickly becoming outdated as a new wave of untraceable firearms enters the streets of the country. Recently, untraceable 3D-printed guns and silencers have been discovered, such as those carried by suspected killer Luigi Mangione. The decreasing cost of 3D printers, some priced at $300 or less on Amazon, is making these weapons more accessible to potential criminals, experts have warned.
The “ghost gun” and silencer found in the backpack of the suspected killer of United Healthcare CEO at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s were created using a 3D printer and easily obtained metal components, according to Altoona Police. David Pucino, legal director of the gun violence prevention group Giffords Law Center, stated that it was inevitable for such weapons to be used in high-profile shootings. Mangione’s homemade firearm, connected by prosecutors to shell casings at a murder scene, is just one example of the concerning trend of criminals utilizing 3D-printed guns across the nation.
Once considered a novelty, these untraceable weapons have now become a significant threat in the criminal underworld. Arrests related to 3D-printed guns have tripled in recent years, with federal authorities seizing over 25,000 homemade firearms in 2022 alone. As the quality of 3D printers improves and prices drop, this trend shows no signs of slowing down, potentially turning America into a hub of untraceable firearms.
Current laws pertaining to ghost guns vary from state to state, though President Joe Biden has pledged to address this issue. In September, Biden established an Emerging Firearms Threats Task Force through an executive order to evaluate and combat the risks posed by unregistered 3D-printed guns.
The ease and affordability of producing ghost guns are alarming, as highlighted by Felipe Rodriguez, a longtime professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and retired detective sergeant. He expressed concern over the impact of 3D printers on the illegal firearms market, noting that traditional methods of tracing guns back to suspects are rendered ineffective when guns are printed at home.
Rodriguez emphasized the potential dangers of this technology, referencing the U.S. Military’s development of a 3D-printed grenade launcher named the Rambo, which successfully fired a 3D-printed grenade in 2017. The emergence of such weapons underscores the urgent need for regulatory measures to address the growing threat of untraceable firearms in the country.
The Army agency expressed interest in weapon prototype development to speed up the provision of munitions to soldiers. Guns like the one found in Mangione’s possession are relatively inexpensive and easy to produce. Ghost Guns, a popular site, sells a 3D printer starter kit for approximately $300, which includes blueprints for a .22 caliber pistol and the necessary filament material for printing. The printer operates by creating layers of plastic filament that solidify to form the desired design. In addition to guns, these machines have the potential to produce various other weapons such as automatic gun components, grenades, and bombs.
Mangione was in possession of a Glock-style Gen3 G19 printed frame with an aftermarket metal slide. While many 3D printed gun plans only cover the pistol’s nylon fiber frame, additional mechanical parts are required for it to function properly. The polymer pistol, equipped with a metal slide and threaded barrel, was discovered in Mangione’s backpack by Altoona police.
Advocates of gun rights view 3D printing as a continuation of the longstanding American tradition of crafting firearms at home. Taylor Rhodes from the National Association for Gun Rights defended the practice as a cherished tradition among gun owners and criticized attempts to regulate homemade firearms as an infringement on rights.
The technology of printing guns has evolved significantly, making it more accessible and affordable. Despite some states implementing bans, regulating the practice remains challenging due to the legal availability of printers and materials. The rise in crimes involving ghost guns has been noted by law enforcement agencies, with the ATF reporting a substantial increase in the number of ghost guns recovered over the years.
Mangione was arrested by Altoona police for carrying a firearm without a license, among other charges. However, possessing a 3D-printed gun itself is not illegal in Pennsylvania. Only a few states have established policies regarding ghost guns. The possession of a homemade silencer without the necessary tax stamp under the National Firearms Act is illegal.
According to 3Dprint.com, an industry publication, the number of arrests related to 3D-printed guns has sharply increased. Between 2020 and 2022, the arrests tripled, with most of them occurring in the U.S. Several recent incidents involve individuals being apprehended for crimes involving 3D-printed guns:
– In September, police investigating gang activity seized a collection of 3D-printed gun parts and printers from a 14-year-old teenager in Detroit, resulting in his arrest on gun charges.
– A Maryland man named Jerod Adam Taylor is currently evading authorities after they found 80 firearms, including 3D-printed guns, at his residence in response to a domestic assault incident in November. Taylor, who has prior convictions, is prohibited from possessing firearms.
– In New York City, three individuals, including two minors, were arrested for operating a 3D printing operation producing guns at a daycare facility in 2023. Mayor Eric Adams expressed concern over the situation, emphasizing the gravity of the issue.
– A man in Mississippi was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison for using 3D-printed switches to convert semi-automatic weapons into machine guns.
– An Ohio man received a three-year prison sentence for using a 3D-printed switch on his Glock. Although he claimed self-defense, federal prosecutors deemed his possession of the switch illegal under the National Firearms Act.
Beyond firearms, 3D printers have been found capable of producing grenades, bombs, and machine gun switches, further exacerbating the issue. Federal efforts, such as “Operation Texas Kill Switch,” have targeted machine gun conversion devices, emphasizing the dangers posed by these easily producible components.
The proliferation of 3D-printed guns has raised concerns about the potential impact on gun legislation, with experts highlighting the need for regulatory measures. The shooting incident involving a CEO shooter has underscored the urgency of addressing the unregulated production of DIY firearms. Advocates stress the necessity of government intervention to curb the dissemination of 3D-printed guns and prevent further incidents like the one involving Mangione.
The issue of 3D-printed guns is a subject that has experts concerned about the potential for a new wave of crime. Luigi Mangione, a prominent figure in the field, has suggested that one way to address this issue is by implementing licensing requirements for printers to detect when they are producing gun parts. Alternatively, he proposed that the government could step in to regulate the computer code used in printing guns. However, Mangione expressed apprehension that these measures may only serve as a temporary solution, stating, “The genie is out of the bottle.”
The possibility of a new era of 3D gun crime looms on the horizon, as highlighted in a recent article by Minnah Arshad of USA TODAY. The case of Luigi Mangione serves as a focal point for discussions on how to tackle the challenges posed by the proliferation of 3D-printed firearms. Experts are in agreement that swift and decisive action is needed to prevent the potential misuse of this technology for illicit purposes.
Mangione’s call for printers to have a license to detect gun parts being produced underscores the importance of accountability in the digital age. By implementing such measures, it is hoped that a level of control can be maintained over the production of firearms through 3D printing technology. However, concerns remain about the efficacy of these solutions in a landscape where innovation is constantly outpacing regulations.
The specter of 3D gun crime has raised questions about the need for a comprehensive regulatory framework to address the challenges posed by this emerging technology. Experts warn that without proper safeguards in place, there is a risk of uncontrolled proliferation of 3D-printed firearms, leading to potentially disastrous consequences.
As the debate on 3D gun crime continues to unfold, it is crucial for stakeholders to come together to chart a path forward that balances technological advancement with public safety. The case of Luigi Mangione serves as a stark reminder of the urgent need for action to address the potential risks associated with the unchecked proliferation of 3D-printed firearms.
In conclusion, the emergence of 3D gun crime presents a complex and multifaceted challenge that requires a coordinated and proactive response from policymakers, law enforcement agencies, and industry stakeholders. The case of Luigi Mangione and the insights shared by experts serve as a wake-up call for society to address the risks posed by the growing accessibility of 3D printing technology in the realm of firearms production. It is imperative that steps be taken to mitigate these risks and safeguard public safety in the face of this evolving threat.
