This report on Right Wing Extremists (RWE) and their use of 3D-printed guns came across my desk from the indefatigable Jeff Teitlebaum, the Forensic Research Library at the Global Forensic & Justice Center at Florida International University.1
Abstract: The last decade has seen a rapid proliferation in the use of 3D-printed firearms by right-wing extremist actors, presenting significant new challenges for law enforcement in countering political violence. This article provides an empirical overview of right-wing extremists’ adoption of 3D-printed firearms (3DPF) for political violence using a dataset of 35 incidents worldwide. It analyzes the geographical and temporal spread of 3DPF use by RWE and outlines four main motivations: symbolic and ideological reasons, supplementing conventional firearms, using 3DPF as alternatives when legal acquisition might alert law enforcement, and financing other activities or profiting from sales. The study emphasizes the need for continuous monitoring, enhanced forensic techniques, and international cooperation, in addition to adapting law enforcement strategies and developing policies to address the evolving threats posed by 3DPF. As such, it provides an empirical foundation for further research and policy development into extremist use of 3D-printed firearms.
It has an extended discussion of the topic. Consider this a bonus horribilis.
The world of firearms is being revolutionized by 3D printing technology, posing significant challenges to law enforcement and and forensic science, while sparking heated ideological debates. A 3D-printed firearm is a firearm that is partially or primarily produced with a 3D printer; the Liberator, the first fully 3D-printed gun, emerged in 2013, and signaled a shift in firearm accessibility. This technology allows individuals to create untraceable "ghost guns" at home, bypassing traditional regulations and background checks. Making guns for yourself is not illegal; making them for sale or distribution without a licence is.
The true innovation and cultural significance of 3D-printed guns lie in their ability to combine printed components with standard, commercially available metal parts. This hybrid approach allows for the creation of more reliable and durable firearms, as seen in the FGC-9, an example of a hybrid 3D-printed firearm that incorporates metal elements to enhance its functionality. This blending of traditional firearm components with 3D-printed parts has blurred the lines between homemade and commercially produced firearms.
The core of 3D-printed gun culture revolves around open-source firearm frames and receivers. These digital blueprints are readily available online, enabling individuals to download, print, and assemble firearms at home, bypassing conventional gun control measures that focus on regulating the receiver as the defining component of a firearm. The convergence of open-source designs, affordable 3D printers, and easily obtainable metal components has fostered a DIY gunsmithing community that challenges traditional firearm manufacturing and control. This evolution in firearm accessibility raises significant concerns for law enforcement, regulators, and forensic experts.2
While early designs like the Liberator were single-shot and considered impractical, the technology has rapidly advanced in recent years. Multi-round revolvers, rifles, and even semi-automatic weapons with 3D-printed components are now a reality. These advancements have turned hobbies and novelty into practical weaponry.
The rise of online platforms like The Gatalog and Defense Distributed's DEFCAD.com has facilitated the spread of 3D gun printing files. These platforms, operating in legal gray areas, host blueprints for an array of digital weaponry, including increasingly sophisticated and potentially lethal designs. The 3D-printed gun movement is characterized by a clash of ideologies. Proponents advocate for "freedom of armaments" and the democratization of firearm access through open-source technology. Opponents, including law enforcement agencies and gun control advocates, express alarm about the proliferation of untraceable weapons and their potential to exacerbate gun violence. This ideological divide further complicates the legal and regulatory landscape, making it difficult to establish clear legislation and effective control mechanisms.
The evolution of 3D printed guns
The evolution of 3D-printed firearms has been characterized by a rapid progression from basic, single-shot designs to more complex and potentially deadly weapons. Early designs, like the "Liberator" introduced in 2013, were functional but limited in practicality due to their single-shot capacity. The community's drive to enhance functionality is evident in subsequent designs like the "Grizzly," a .22-caliber rifle, and the "Reprringer," a five-shot derringer revolver. These advancements showcased the feasibility of creating larger, more powerful 3D-printed firearms with increased firepower. Further demonstrating the increasing sophistication in design was Yoshitomo Imura's "ZigZag," a six-shot revolver chambered for .38-caliber bullets. Imura's innovation served as a testament to the growing community of DIY gunsmiths actively pushing the boundaries of 3D-printed firearm technology.
A significant shift in the evolution of these weapons involved the creation of 3D-printed lower receivers. As the most regulated component of a firearm, the ability to print lower receivers enabled individuals to assemble semi-automatic weapons using commercially available, off-the-shelf parts. This effectively bypassed traditional regulations and significantly increased the potential lethality and accessibility of 3D-printed firearms. Online communities like FOSSCAD further facilitated this trend by hosting blueprints for various lower receivers compatible with platforms like AR-15s, Skorpions, and SKS rifles.
The evolution of 3D-printed firearms is expected to continue, fueled by the accessibility of affordable 3D printers, user-friendly software, and the growing online community of DIY gunsmiths. The focus on hybrid designs incorporating metal components, as observed in the Reprringer and ZigZag, points towards a trend of creating more robust and reliable 3D-printed firearms. The potential for this technology to create fully automatic firearms remains a significant concern: Experts believe this evolution will likely result in the creation of even more sophisticated and powerful weapons, posing considerable challenges for regulation and control in the future.
What does this mean for forensic science?
The emergence of 3D-printed firearms presents significant challenges for forensic science, complicating traditional investigative methods and requiring innovative approaches to evidence collection and analysis. A primary concern is the inherent difficulty in tracing these weapons, as they lack the serial numbers and identifying markings typically found on conventional firearms. This absence of traceable identifiers hinders investigators' ability to track the origins and ownership of 3D-printed guns, making it challenging to establish connections between weapons, suspects, and criminal activity.
The materials used in 3D-printed firearms also complicate firearms analysis. Traditional firearms analysis relies on examining the microscopic striations left on bullets by the firearm's metal barrel. However, 3D-printed guns, often constructed from plastic or resin materials, may not produce these distinct markings, or the markings may be less discernible, making it harder to match projectiles to specific weapons. This poses a significant obstacle for investigators trying to link recovered bullets to 3D-printed firearms used in crimes.
The rapid evolution of 3D printing technology further complicates matters, requiring forensic experts to continuously adapt their techniques and knowledge. New designs, materials, and printing methods are constantly emerging. Law enforcement agencies and forensic laboratories need to invest in the resources and training necessary to keep pace with these advancements and maintain the capacity to conduct thorough forensic investigations involving 3D-printed firearms.
The future (not the part I hate)
To effectively address these challenges, forensic science must evolve in conjunction with the technology. This evolution will require developing new techniques for analyzing firearms evidence from these weapons, potentially focusing on microscopic material (trace) analysis or chemical residue testing. Exploring alternative methods for tracing these weapons, such as examining manufacturing imperfections, digital fingerprints in design files, or tracing materials used in production, could also prove beneficial. Additionally, establishing best practices for evidence preservation is critical, considering the unique properties and potential vulnerabilities of 3D-printed firearms. Finally, fostering collaboration between forensic scientists, law enforcement agencies, and 3D printing experts is essential to stay ahead of technological advancements and facilitate knowledge sharing.
My day job is there and I work with Jeff.
Disclosure: I’m Editor in Chief of Forensic Science International: Synergy.