Seizures of 3D guns in Australia just ‘tip of the iceberg’

By Roman de Vallance, Ginja Allen, Patrick Alphonse, Tiana Coso and Vanessa Alexandrakis

In NSW, manufacturing any firearm using a 3D printer, without a licence and the relevant manufacturing authorisation, is a criminal offense under the 1996 Firearms Act. 

But despite these pre-existing laws, access to blueprints and the sale of both 3D-firearms and accessories proliferate across social media platforms, such as Reddit, Facebook and X (formerly known as Twitter

Australia has recorded 392 reported incidents since 2013 involving 3D-printed guns, including seizures, alleged use or attempted use. 

It accounts for nearly 12 seizures a week, incidents which make up almost 17 per cent of all cases in Australia, now the third worst country in the world behind the US (44 per cent) and Canada (18 per cent) for 3D firearm incidents.

According to Andrew Hemming, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Southern Queensland, authorities are falling behind in the implementation of legislation.

“What’s happening is really only the tip of the iceberg,” he says. 

“What’s increasingly happening is the police do a big gun bust, and the guns they seize are a mixture of illegal firearms that are illegally imported and illegally made.

“The authorities are behind the times, they’re not looking where gun technology is going.”

 

Research in January from the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) revealed 2.4 per cent of the nation’s adults had seen digital firearm products for sale on the public internet. Of the almost 10,000 adults surveyed, around 1 per cent had bought a product or know someone who had.

Ads and social media pages for these products violate Meta’s (owner of Facebook and Instagram) advertising standards, which state that advertisements cannot “promote the sale or use of weapons” or “weapon modification accessories”.

But, according to research by the Tech Transparency Project in 2024, Meta approved more than 230 advertisements selling guns, gun accessories, or ammunition. 

Ads appearing on Facebook and Instagram today continue to offer pistols, knives and untraceable “ghost guns”. 

 

Ghost guns have no serial number, no registration, and no reliable way to track their origin or owner, which has increasingly made them a go-to for criminals, while social media pages, using viral memes, entice potential customers to 3D firearm blueprint online marketplaces.

Videos on these pages commonly boast thousands of views, and direct users to external websites where they can purchase their own 3D-printers and other items required to make a 3D-gun.  

Other pages share their creations and offer advice to people wanting to print their own versions of the weapons. 

One page, located in China, advertised that they have more than 10,000 3D printers operating at one time. In a link embedded on the same page, the organisation showcases various items you can request them to print and purchase. These include parts for guns, such as the grip. 

 

While many of these pages name and show various firearms and parts, others use slang and emojis in an attempt to conceal and evade content moderation. 

When contacted, Meta, declined to comment on these social media pages or ads hosted on their sites. 

People seeking 3D-printed guns can also visit a number of public websites, with some online marketplaces selling fully assembled 3D-printed firearms, as well as ‘build-it-yourself’-style kits, and blueprints for printing 3D firearm parts. 

The marketplaces allow buyers to obtain the necessary parts to build functional firearms themselves – without needing to access a printer. 

 

One such website is the US-based The Gatalog, named for its vast catalogue of 3D gun blueprints.

Even on popular video-sharing platform YouTube, users can upload both blueprints and step-by-step tutorials on how to print firearms and accessories for guns. 

Blueprints of gun accessories on these sites include items that have been classified as prohibited weapons in Australia since the introduction of tough gun laws in 1998, following the Port Arthur Massacre, and include silencers, which attach to the muzzle of a firearm to reduce noise. 

The most popular digital firearm repository is known as DEFCAD, which allows users to both download 3D-firearm blueprints and access firearm technical data. This includes an animated diagram of the components within each gun on the website.  

 

DEFCAD was launched in 2013 by American gun-rights activist Cody Wilson, the founder of Defence Distributed, who used the platform to distribute the design for a single-shot plastic pistol, called ‘the Liberator’. 

The US State Department demanded the removal of the designs from DEFCAD shortly after Wilson shared the design of the pistol, citing a violation of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. 

But following years of litigation, with DEFCAD claiming First and Second Amendment violations, the blueprints spread across the internet, and eventually, authorities dropped their legal pursuit. 

Within 24 hours of the Liberator being uploaded in 2013, there were 10,000 downloads globally. Since then, there’s been a growing trend of these files online and the production of 3D guns from consumer-grade 3D printers. 

Following the launch of the Liberator in 2013, newer and more sophisticated guns have emerged from other online communities, with hybrid designs, 3D parts, and conversion kits, gaining popularity for their improved reliability and performance. 

 

 

 

These recent advancements are documented by users on YouTube, with numerous channels regularly publishing videos talking about new prototype designs for 3D-printed guns, and sharing details on where to locate them and how to print them.

Despite YouTube’s Firearm Policy, which stipulates that users cannot instruct viewers on how to make firearms or how to install firearm accessories. These videos seem to bypass content moderation systems by placing voiceovers over unrelated content and titling the videos with unrelated information to avoid them being removed. 

Many schools and universities across Australia are home to workshops, often referred to as ‘maker-spaces’, where students can access professional-grade 3D printing technologies. 

This includes the University of Technology Sydney’s (UTS) facility ‘ProtoSpace’, featuring the largest collection of 3D-printer manufacturing in the country. 

UTS ProtoSpace technical support officer Dean Ockenden says 3D printing technologies are becoming increasingly common in everyday life, with jobs that once required $100,000 industrial machines now output by compact, user-friendly printers costing between $500 to $1,000. 

“They’re quite common in people’s houses now,” he said.

Although the facility has a strict ‘no weapons’ policy that includes non-functional prints that resemble a weapon, at home, 3D printers present effectively no barriers.

Leading manufacturers will typically have apps that are connected to 3D printing repositories, meaning users can produce parts with the quality once reserved for high-end equipment from their smartphone.

Ockenden says that as 3D printing becomes increasingly accessible, so does the likelihood of individuals producing firearms.

“You can pull up a model on your phone and tap print, and it usually does a good job,” he says. “If it’s that easy to just use something like that or buy it, it’d be so easy to just print something out like that.

“If you’re buying one of these at home, there’s nothing stopping you … from printing whatever you want.”

However, to ensure proper functionality, 3D-printed firearms typically require significant metal components. 

These parts include the barrel, hammer and firing pin. But other parts, such as bolts and springs, can be found at hardware stores. 

“You can’t really 3D print a gun because it’s not strong enough,” Ockenden says. “You 3D print some parts of the weapon, but the chamber, the barrel, you can’t, because it’s not strong enough to withstand the firing power.”

When these metal parts are integrated with 3D printed polymer frames, grips, and housings, a ‘hybrid build’ is created – the most prevalent type of 3D gun.

One of the most popular DIY weapons is called ‘FGC-9’, which requires a metal barrel, firing pin and spring to work. The gun’s name stands for ‘F— Gun Control’. 

 

On websites such as DEFCAD, it’s marketed as the easiest, smallest, strongest and cheapest 3D-printed firearm available. 

On the other hand, 3D blueprint design software allows users to simply edit blueprints. 

“It lets you use basic blocks and just put one here, put one there, and pull that up, pull that to the side. You can build something basic, but it’ll work,” says Ockenden. 

Artificial Intelligence is also accelerating the growth of weapons printing. 

“Now AI can also generate 3D models. Not well, but it can,” Ockenden adds. 

But the advancement of AI has left Professor Hemming worried. 

“As AI gets better and better, so will the capacity to download, print and make items,” he says. “You won’t need any technical knowledge at all, because it’s all been fed into the program.

“Then, coupled with your 3D printer, it will be able to make the parts faster. You could talk to an AI, say, ChatGPT or Meta, and ask it to generate you a blueprint.

“If it gets to that point where it’s so advanced, it can do that. Then with your 3D printer, it will just be able to make the parts faster and put them together.

“It’s probably already happening on the dark web.” 

In the US alone, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) seized more than 70,000 ‘ghost guns’ between 2016 and 2022. 

 

The technology has advanced rapidly in the last decade, with the latest models capable of firing multiple rounds without their plastic components breaking.

“Now we’re seeing a lot of high-grade and multishot firearms being seized by police,” Hemming says. 

“3D guns are not traceable as it’s very hard to detect plastic. People make them at home and there’s no way for policing agencies to keep account of how many there are, who’s making them, who’s distributing them or whether they are actually safe to distribute.” 

In October last year, more than 1,000 illegal firearms and parts, including 281 3D-printed firearms were seized in a transnational operation involving law enforcement services from across Australia and New Zealand. 

Shortly after the Bondi Beach shooting last December, similar gun parts were discovered at an Airbnb used by alleged gunmen, Naveed and Sajid Akram. These included 3D-printed parts for a shotgun ‘speed loader’. 

Professor Hemming says criminals are beginning to use 3D printing technology and 3D firearms more frequently. 

“In a 13-year period, the technology has improved so much that you can now make semi-automatic weapons,” he says. 

“What has really snowballed, is that criminal gangs have suddenly realised the enormous capacity of 3D printers and 3D firearms. When you’re a criminal syndicate, 3D guns are cheap and easy to manufacture.” 

The increase in police seizures reflects the burgeoning law enforcement concerns of 3D firearms in Australia, where strict gun laws have been undermined by the ease of accessing digital blueprints and printing guns without restrictions. 

With most jurisdictions in Australia now banning the possession of blueprints and design files for 3D-printed firearms, convictions carry penalties of up to two decades in prison in NSW. 

But anyone in Australia can access blueprints of 3D-firearms online without consequence. 

 

Professor Hemming says this is a gap in legislation across Australia. 

“If I download a digital blueprint prior to the legislation changes it’s just, well, I downloaded it. There’s no implications,” he adds. 

“But for whatever reason, if my computer was confiscated and the police found 3D gun blueprints on it, then the laws would apply.

“If you’re manufacturing the weapons, and they’re passing through your hands from your little factory, you’ve actually got to be caught in possession with the printout or the polymer plastics. It’s very hard to track down the source of these weapons.”

By accessing these blueprints online, anyone who has access to a blueprint and a 3D printer can print their own gun. No background checks, licence or training required. 

This creates an uphill battle for police when locating offenders. 

“They’re making one in their back in their garage,” says Hemming. “It’s Joe Soap, he’s got no criminal record, he’s not on any radar, there’s no red flags.

“He’s just decided I’m going to make a gun because he wants to put one under his pillow at night because he doesn’t feel safe.

“It’s virtually impossible to track someone like that. That person doesn’t represent a threat to society.” 

Hemming says it’s down to the Government to stop criminals from accessing and using 3D-firearms. He suggests the government should consider forcing internet service providers to block blueprints on overseas websites and pressure social media companies to remove gun-related content.

“About 99% of 3D printers are being used for legal purposes,” he says. “But the government should make it required in 3D printer coding, that their printer cannot print out firearm parts.”  

Such moves are underway in the US, with lawmakers in the state of California recently proposing new legislation to prevent the creation of ghost guns.

It’s Joe Soap, he’s got no criminal record, he’s not on any radar, there’s no red flags. He’s just decided I’m going to make a gun because he wants to put one under his pillow at night… it’s virtually impossible to track someone like that.

Associate Professor Andrew Hemming, University of Southern Queensland

Titled the Assembly Bill 2047 (AB 2047), it would introduce strict requirements on the sale, transfer and functionality of the 3D printers themselves. 

The bill introduces mandatory firearm blocking technology, already dubbed ‘censorware’, which scans all files and blueprints for prohibited items.  

The legislation is highly contentious in the US, where the constitution preserves the right to bear arms, and many in the 3D-printing community argue it represents a fine line between regulation and surveillance.  

With advancements in the material makeup of 3D guns, forensic researchers have been left scrambling for new processes and methods to analyse and identify 3D-printed weapons. 

In the past, the forensic procedure for traditional firearms has been generally straightforward, with forensic examiners performing a cartridge case analysis to match ammunition to a weapon before swabbing the gun in specific spots for DNA and finger prints.

However, associate lecturer in Forensic Science at UTS, Dr Teneil Hanna, says 3D-printed illicit objects challenge the typical process of this analysis.  

“It’s really interesting because we don’t have a workflow for these very new traces,” she adds.

“They’re very unusual substrates. They’re also very rigid, and some of our enhancement techniques melt the plastic. So it’s a very, very new [process] and we don’t really know what to do with them.” 

Developing new forensic analysis methods has been a process of trial and error, according to Dr Hanna. 

At UTS, the forensic research team examines the markings on 3D-printed objects, which are unique to each printer and the specific conditions under which it operates.

 

“Because there’s so many components to a 3D printer, it’s kind of like pattern recognition. We’re kind of like microscopically trying to find these impressions to link it back to a printer,” she says.

“Maybe even linking it back to the coding or anything with the backing.”

The inability to trace a large majority of 3D-printed firearms is another reason the objects have earned themselves the nickname ghost guns. 

The privately made firearms are designed to evade gun-control laws, lacking identifying information such as serial numbers, and being available without a background check. 

Hemming explains that ghost guns pose a threat to authorities attempting to combat firearms as they are harder to locate. 

“They don’t have any serial numbers because they were just generated at home rather than like a manufacturing facility, police don’t have that serialisation and identification of where the manufacturer was like normal guns,” she says. 

As an alternative, less intrusive measure, Dr Hanna suggests embedding recognition software that enables police to track firearm blueprints back to specific printers. 

Looking at the striations, markings, formats that are generated on the 3D-printed item… we can identify the printer that made them.

Dr Teneil Hanna, associate lecturer in forensic science

Tracing these firearms back to their source printer has become one of the primary concerns of Dr Hanna’s research. 

“When you test traditional metal firearms and they discharge a bullet, we look at the striations, the scratches and any markings that are on the bullet and we compare that to see if that bullet came from that gun,” Hanna says. 

“But, looking at the striations, markings, formats that are generated on the 3D-printed item we can identify the printer that made them.

“When an item is 3D-printed, it’s generated layer by layer and the nozzle can create etchings or scratches in the actual item. Those are specifically what can be looked at to identify a link between the item and the printer.” 

Dr Hanna acknowledges that implementing recognition software could be equally, if not more challenging than the AB 2047 bill. 

“It’s very restricted to the manufacturers of those printers,” she says. 

“They have a client base that they want to work with and I think for them, you know, it’s not their fault that people are doing these things with these printers.

“It’s the freedom to manufacture, and they do excellent things with these 3D printers. So, where do you draw the line, or where is the capability to draw that line?”

As new laws and security countermeasures continue to be explored, Dr Hanna believes further forensic research is the first step to mitigating risks associated with 3D-firearms. 

“We can make the laws, people will break the laws,” she says. “But obviously we need to understand it first, and then we can prevent the crime.”

Main image edited by Roman de Vallance.