News
3D-printed guns, like the one allegedly used to kill a health care CEO, are a growing threat in the US and around the world
Nir Kshetri, University of North Carolina – Greensboro
Police investigating the shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson on Dec. 4, 2024, have announced that the suspected assailant had used a 3D-printed gun. Several high-profile crimes in recent years have involved this kind of homemade, or partially homemade, weapon.
Often called “ghost guns” because they can be hard to trace, these firearms can be either partially or completely made with components that have been produced in metal or plastic on commercially available 3D printers. The U.S. Supreme Court is considering the legality of current federal restrictions on these firearms.
The first known criminal case involving a 3D-printed gun resulted in the arrest of a U.K. man in 2013. But since then, police worldwide have reported finding increasing numbers of these weapons.
My research focuses on the economic and social effects of advanced digital technologies, including 3D printing. I see that the use of 3D-printed guns in criminal and violent activities is likely to continue to increase. And it will likely prove ever harder for governments and police to regulate these firearms.
Surge in arrests and seizures
Arrests and seizures connected to 3D-printed guns are escalating quickly. Between 2017 and 2021, U.S. law enforcement agencies seized and reported nearly 38,000 suspected ghost guns, according to a 2024 report from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In 2021 alone, 19,273 suspected ghost guns were traced, a significant increase from 8,504 in 2020. The number of seized 3D-printed guns in New York state alone surged dramatically, from 100 in 2019 to 637 in 2022.
Arrests linked to 3D-printed guns are also rising. The world recorded 108 arrests in the first half of 2023, compared to 66 arrests in all 2022.
North America leads in 3D-printed gun-related arrests, with 166 cases from 2013 to June 2023. Europe followed with 48 arrests, while Oceania ranked third with 24 arrests.
The U.S. is a particular hot spot, with 36% of total global arrests related to 3D-printed firearms in 2023. But Canada is close behind, with 34%. The U.K. had 10%, and Australia had 8%.
Growing global security threat
Police and media reports indicate that many efforts to acquire or manufacture 3D-printed firearms were connected to plans for violent actions.
These guns have been used by diverse groups including far-right extremists, ethno-separatists, jihadists, left-wing anarchists, organized crime groups in Europe and pro-democracy rebels in Myanmar.
From 2019 to mid-2022, there were at least nine documented cases in Europe and Australia of extremists, terrorists or paramilitary groups either producing or attempting to produce firearms using 3D-printing technology. An analysis of 165 cases of 3D-printed firearms from 2013 to mid-2024 reveals that 15% were linked to terrorism. Far-right groups appear to be the most frequent users among terrorism-related cases.
A widely varied legal landscape
Often, 3D-printed guns are homemade firearms without serial numbers. This lack of identification makes them attractive to criminals because it is harder for law enforcement to link specific guns to particular crimes or suspects. Different countries take very different approaches to regulating these weapons.
Japan enforces stringent laws governing the manufacture, possession and sales of firearms. Its legal system strictly prohibits unauthorized firearm production, including 3D-printed guns. In 2014, a 28-year-old Japanese man was sentenced to two years in prison for producing plastic 3D-printed firearms.
In 2023, Canada effectively banned ghost guns. It is illegal to possess or manufacture them without a license from the government.
In Australia, making a 3D-printed firearm is illegal, and in some states, possessing a digital blueprint to create one is also an offense. In the state of New South Wales, a person convicted of possessing blueprints can face up to 14 years in prison. In Tasmania state, the punishment can be even more severe – up to 21 years in prison.
Across the European Union, making or owning homemade firearms, including 3D-printed ones, is broadly prohibited. However, laws and penalties vary, with some nations criminalizing even the possession of digital files or blueprints related to 3D-printing guns.
In the U.K., where firearms are very restricted, 3D-printed guns have been considered illegal. But in November 2022, the government updated the laws to specifically ban possessing, buying or producing parts for 3D-printed guns. The proposal aims to explicitly ban 3D-printed guns, addressing their unique challenges directly, rather than relying on existing laws designed for traditional firearms. The U.K. National Crime Agency has called for a ban on possessing blueprints as well, and Parliament is currently considering two bills proposing such a ban. https://www.youtube.com/embed/c1g-C7c-57U?wmode=transparent&start=0 An NBC News investigation describes how easy it is to build a ghost gun.
Federal rules in the US
The U.S. Constitution poses some unique challenges to regulating ghost guns, especially for the federal government, but also for states.
For regular firearms – that is, those not produced by 3D printing – U.S. federal law requires that a key component, called the lower receiver, bear a unique serial number. Purchasing a lower receiver requires a federal background check and conducting the transaction through a merchant who holds a Federal Firearms License.
The situation is more complicated when it comes to 3D printing weapons. The First Amendment to the Constitution protects freedom of expression, which includes sharing digital files that could contain firearm designs. And the Second Amendment protects citizens’ right to bear arms.
In the U.S., selling 3D-printed firearms requires a federal license. But producing or owning homemade firearms for personal use is allowed. That includes 3D-printing the lower receiver component, and assembling the rest of the weapon with unregulated parts.
Current federal law, under review by the Supreme Court, also requires 3D-printed guns meet specific guidelines, even if they do not contain any currently regulated firearms components. Under the rule, makers of ghost gun kits must obtain a federal license, conduct background checks, record information about their customers and add serial numbers to their products.
The type of weapon also matters when determining the legality of a 3D-printed firearm. Automatic weapons, or machine guns, can continue to fire ammunition as long as the user holds the trigger down. These weapons have been heavily regulated by federal law for almost 90 years.
Criminals have used 3D printers to produce “Glock switches” or auto-sears, which convert semi-automatic firearms into fully automatic machine guns. That turns those items into machine guns under federal law, making them illegal. Owning this kind of 3D-printed conversion device can lead to a maximum of 10 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
In the states
The states can also regulate firearms, and many are trying to get control of 3D-printed guns.
By November 2024, 15 U.S. states had established regulations on ghost guns, though exact requirements vary. The rules typically require a serial number, background checks for firearm component purchases and reporting to authorities that a person is producing 3D-printed guns.
For instance, in New Jersey, a 2019 law mandates that all ghost guns have a serial number and be registered. Under current New York law, possession or distribution of a 3D-printed gun is classified as a misdemeanor. However, a proposed law seeks to elevate the manufacturing of firearms using 3D-printing technology to a felony offense.
As technology advances and rules evolve, criminals who use 3D-printed firearms will continue to pose threats to public safety and security, and governments will continue playing catch-up to effectively regulate these weapons.
Nir Kshetri, Professor of Management, University of North Carolina – Greensboro
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Long Track Back
Why Downtown Los Angeles Feels Small Compared to Other Cities
Downtown Los Angeles often feels “small” compared to other U.S. cities, but that’s only part of the story. With some of the tallest buildings west of the Mississippi and skyline clusters spread across the region, LA’s downtown reflects the city’s unique polycentric identity—one that, if combined, could form a true mega downtown.
Last Updated on February 18, 2026 by Daily News Staff
Panorama of Los Angeles from Mount Hollywood – California, United States
When people think of major American cities, they often imagine a bustling, concentrated downtown core filled with skyscrapers. New York has Manhattan, Chicago has the Loop, San Francisco has its Financial District. Los Angeles, by contrast, often leaves visitors surprised: “Is this really downtown?”
The answer is yes—and no.
Downtown LA in Context
Compared to other major cities, Downtown Los Angeles (DTLA) is relatively small as a central business district. For much of the 20th century, strict height restrictions capped most buildings under 150 feet, while cities like Chicago and New York were erecting early skyscrapers. LA’s skyline didn’t really begin to climb until the late 1960s.
But history alone doesn’t explain why DTLA feels different. The real story lies in how Los Angeles grew: not as one unified city center, but as a collection of many hubs.
Downtown Los Angeles
A Polycentric City
Los Angeles is famously decentralized. Hollywood developed around the film industry. Century City rose on former studio land as a business hub. Burbank became a studio and aerospace center. Long Beach grew around the port. The Wilshire Corridor filled with office towers and condos.
Unlike other cities where downtown is the place for work, culture, and finance, Los Angeles spread its energy outward. Freeways and car culture made it easy for businesses and residents to operate outside of downtown. The result is a polycentric metropolis, with multiple “downtowns” rather than one dominant core.
A Resident’s Perspective
As someone who lived in Los Angeles for 28 years, I see DTLA differently. While some outsiders describe it as “small,” the reality is that Downtown Los Angeles is still significant. It has some of the tallest buildings west of the Mississippi River, including the Wilshire Grand Center and the U.S. Bank Tower. Over the last two decades, adaptive reuse projects have transformed old office buildings into lofts, while developments like LA Live, Crypto.com Arena, and the Broad Museum have revitalized the area.
In other words, DTLA is large enough—it just plays a different role than downtowns in other American cities.
View of Westwood, Century City, Beverly Hills, and the Wilshire Corridor.
The “Mega Downtown” That Isn’t
A friend once put it to me with a bit of imagination: “If you could magically pick up all of LA’s skyline clusters—Downtown, Century City, Hollywood, the Wilshire Corridor—and drop them together in one spot, you’d have a mega downtown.”
He’s right. Los Angeles doesn’t lack tall buildings or urban energy—it just spreads them out over a vast area, reflecting the city’s unique history, geography, and culture.
A Downtown That Fits Its City
So, is Downtown LA “small”? Compared to Manhattan or Chicago’s Loop, yes. But judged on its own terms, DTLA is a vibrant hub within a much larger, decentralized metropolis. It’s a downtown that reflects Los Angeles itself: sprawling, diverse, and impossible to fit neatly into the mold of other American cities.
🔗 Related Links
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Knowledge
Century City: From Hollywood Backlot to Business Hub
Century City, originally part of 20th Century Fox’s backlot, transformed into a prominent business district in Los Angeles during the 1950s amid the decline of cinema. Developer William Zeckendorf envisioned a mixed-use urban center, leading to iconic skyscrapers and establishing the area as a hub for law, finance, and media, blending Hollywood history with modern business.
Before Century City became one of Los Angeles’ premier business districts, it was part of 20th Century Fox’s sprawling backlot, used for filming movies and housing studio operations. By the 1950s, as television rose and movie attendance declined, 20th Century Fox faced financial challenges and decided to sell a portion of its land.
Developer William Zeckendorf envisioned a “city within a city”—a modern, mixed-use urban center with office towers, hotels, and entertainment facilities. Branded Century City, the name paid homage to its studio roots while symbolizing LA’s vision for the future.
The first skyscrapers, including the Gateway West Building, set the tone for the district’s sleek, futuristic skyline. Architects like Welton Becket and Minoru Yamasaki helped shape Century City’s iconic look. Over time, it evolved from Hollywood’s backlot to a corporate and legal hub, attracting law firms, financial institutions, and media companies.
Today, Century City stands as a testament to Los Angeles’ postwar optimism, westward expansion, and multi-centered urban growth—a unique blend of Hollywood history and modern business.
Related STM Daily News Links:
- The Evolution of Los Angeles Public Transportation
- Why Los Angeles Grew Into a Sprawling City
- Downtown Los Angeles: Past, Present, and Future
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Community
Local governments provide proof that polarization is not inevitable
Local politics help mitigate national polarization by focusing on concrete issues like infrastructure and community needs rather than divisive symbolic debates. A survey indicates that local officials experience less partisanship, as interpersonal connections foster recognition of shared interests. This suggests that reducing polarization is possible through collaboration and changes in election laws.
Lauren Hall, Rochester Institute of Technology
When it comes to national politics, Americans are fiercely divided across a range of issues, including gun control, election security and vaccines. It’s not new for Republicans and Democrats to be at odds over issues, but things have reached a point where even the idea of compromising appears to be anathema, making it more difficult to solve thorny problems.
But things are much less heated at the local level. A survey of more than 1,400 local officials by the Carnegie Corporation and CivicPulse found that local governments are “largely insulated from the harshest effects of polarization.” Communities with fewer than 50,000 residents proved especially resilient to partisan dysfunction.
Why this difference? As a political scientist, I believe that lessons from the local level not only open a window onto how polarization works but also the dynamics and tools that can help reduce it.
Problems are more concrete
Local governments deal with concrete issues – sometimes literally, when it comes to paving roads and fixing potholes. In general, cities and counties handle day-to-day functions, such as garbage pickup, running schools and enforcing zoning rules. Addressing tangible needs keeps local leaders’ attention fixed on specific problems that call out for specific solutions, not lengthy ideological debates.
By contrast, a lot of national political conflict in the U.S. involves symbolic issues, such as debates about identity and values on topics such as race, abortion and transgender rights. These battles are often divisive, even more so than purely ideological disagreements, because they can activate tribal differences and prove more resistant to compromise.
Such arguments at the national level, or on social media, can lead to wildly inaccurate stereotypes about people with opposing views. Today’s partisans often perceive their opponents as far more extreme than they actually are, or they may stereotype them – imagining that all Republicans are wealthy, evangelical culture warriors, for instance, or conversely being convinced that all Democrats are radical urban activists. In terms of ideology, the median members of both parties, in fact, look similar.
These kinds of misperceptions can fuel hostility.
Local officials, however, live among the human beings they represent, whose complexity defies caricature. Living and interacting in the same communities leads to greater recognition of shared interests and values, according to the Carnegie/CivicPulse survey.
Meaningful interaction with others, including partisans of the opposing party, reduces prejudice about them. Local government provides a natural space where identities overlap.
People are complicated
In national U.S. politics today, large groups of individuals are divided not only by party but a variety of other factors, including race, religion, geography and social networks. When these differences align with ideology, political disagreement can feel like an existential threat.
Such differences are not always as pronounced at the local level. A neighbor who disagrees about property taxes could be the coach of your child’s soccer team. Your fellow school board member might share your concerns about curriculum but vote differently in presidential elections.
These cross-cutting connections remind us that political opponents are not a monolithic enemy but complex individuals. When people discover they have commonalities outside of politics with others holding opposing views, polarization can decrease significantly.
Finally, most local elections are technically nonpartisan. Keeping party labels off ballots allows voters to judge candidates as individuals and not merely as Republicans or Democrats.
National implications
None of this means local politics are utopian.
Like water, polarization tends to run downhill, from the national level to local contests, particularly in major cities where candidates for mayor and other office are more likely to run as partisans. Local governments also see culture war debates, notably in the area of public school instruction.
Nevertheless, the relative partisan calm of local governance suggests that polarization is not inevitable. It emerges from specific conditions that can be altered.
Polarization might be reduced by creating more opportunities for cross-partisan collaboration around concrete problems. Philanthropists and even states might invest in local journalism that covers pragmatic governance rather than partisan conflict. More cities and counties could adopt changes in election law that would de-emphasize party labels where they add little information for voters.
Aside from structural changes, individual Americans can strive to recognize that their neighbors are not the cardboard cutouts they might imagine when thinking about “the other side.” Instead, Americans can recognize that even political opponents are navigating similar landscapes of community, personal challenges and time constraints, with often similar desires to see their roads paved and their children well educated.
The conditions shaping our interactions matter enormously. If conditions change, perhaps less partisan rancor will be the result.
Lauren Hall, Associate professor of Political Science, Rochester Institute of Technology
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
