Any real attempt would need to be at the national level, not that I would advocate for it, but it's simply a pipe dream to create a "gun free zone" in a country with 100s of millions of firearms. There are plenty of gun enthusiasts in California, they just don't flaunt it or talk about it.

> what's special about 3d printers?

They can make guns made out of plastic and metal detectors are kind of the primary way we try to find guns on people.

You are probably right about the lobbying group, I agree.

I've seen more by others but can't recall them all. Without going too far down a conspiracy theory rabbit hole, the momentum for this seems to be coming from a variety of sources:

    * New York being New York and trying to make thinking about guns a thought crime
    * There's European company (forget the name) that makes specialized software that can do this.  They're lobbying so they can inject themselves for some tasty rent seeking.
    * A variety of companies that see right-to-repair (and thus home 3D printers, CNC-milling, etc.) a threat to their business.
    * General ignorance by our law makers

If they wanted a gate on designs it would have to happen in slicing software, not the actual printer.

carbon, sulphur, and potassium nitrate, in a particular ratio.

potassium nitrate is watched, and reported in large quantities, or particular form, but can be manufactured by most people that can follow a recipe.

regulating the propellant cant stop it from being made.

also someone really didnt think it through by regulating "receivers"

they regulated what is most often the easiest part to manufacture. the core parts [barrel, bolt, chamber] are difficult to build, require tech to build from stock, and are sold off the shelf, while receiver needs 4473 as if it was a fully functional firearm, and that is the part that can be built, from a 2x4 or a billet of material, depending how long you want it to last.

Happy Patriot's Day this weekend (April 19th)!

Could probably create exceptions for bullets used at the gun range, so you can become proficient and safe.

Tricky part would be hunting, but restricting such a tax to ammo used for handguns is probably an 80% solution.

California gun laws in a nutshell.

Hey, my printer might be going up in value.

In the United States we even have a word for an assault weapon on four legs—pitbulls. Most breed-specific legislation, where it exists, targets pitbulls which are not a single breed nor group of related breeds, but basically any large muscular dog with a short snout and blocky head. The American Pit Bull Terrier is one such breed but far from the only one targeted by BSL.

I think it was Toyotomi Hideyoshi who said something like, the law is not obligated to logic, but it still must be followed.

Most people in California who vote on these matters have not held a BB gun, let alone a semi automatic.

They have 0 idea that you just cannot buy actual guns in California anymore!

They think you can just buy a gun at Walmart like you can buy a can of Coke.

A few years ago a local Walmart was clearing our their air rifle selection. Since ammo have become really expensive, I bought out the whole shelf of air rifles so I could continue to target practise.

People called the cops on me.

The local sherrif's department received nearly a 100 calls that hour when we spoke. When I asked them why they even bothered to turn up because they know no Walmart in a 300 mile radius have ever sold a rifle in the last 20 years as was described to them over the phone, they just shrugged and said "politics".

This is akin to trying to require all image editors to detect currency and refuse to process images of it. Making open source image processing software would probably have be illegal because end users could trivially modify it to illegally process currency, or having general-purpose computers that can run software the government hasn't approved would need to be banned.