New York governor to 3D printed gun leader: ‘tell Cody I will get ahead of him’
New York Governor Kathy Hochul has publicly hit back at Cody Wilson, creator of the first 3D-printed gun, after he unveiled a tool designed to bypass a New York law banning 3D-printed firearms. Speaking on the Decoder podcast, Hochul vowed to stay ahead of Wilson's efforts, defending the state's ban as necessary to prevent unregulated, untraceable weapons being manufactured at home without background checks. The exchange highlights a wider clash between gun-safety regulation and digital rights advocates who see such laws as a form of surveillance overreach.
Wilson's "Hochulization" tool alters the digital hashes of gun-design files so they evade government detection systems, while leaving the finished firearm's functionality unchanged; he has said he plans to apply it to a repository of more than 200,000 gun-related files and open-source the technique. Hochul stood firmly behind New York's ban, citing the state's low gun-homicide rate as evidence the rules work, though she acknowledged grey areas, such as a Kentucky-made e-reader case shaped like a gun, and said she would need to "figure out" how such cases are handled. The Verge's Nilay Patel noted parallels between this backlash and bipartisan criticism of Flock surveillance cameras, with Hochul conceding that any misuse of such technology "has to stop".
- Hochul vows to outpace Cody Wilson's tool for evading NY's 3D gun ban
- Wilson's "Hochulization" tool alters gun file hashes to dodge detection
- Case reflects broader tension between gun laws and digital surveillance concerns
New here? Start with this
Three-dimensional (3D) printed guns are firearms made using digital design files and a 3D printer. Some designs can be downloaded and adapted, raising questions about how rules on making and owning weapons apply when production happens at home.
New York bans making 3D-printed firearms, as part of its efforts to regulate weapons and reduce risks from guns that may be hard to trace. Cody Wilson, who created an early 3D-printed gun, argues for wider access to gun-design files; supporters of digital rights also question whether restrictions on these files give governments too much control over information.
The dispute touches on a broader question: how can governments enforce safety laws when digital files can be copied and changed? It also connects to concerns about surveillance tools, which can be used to identify or monitor people and have faced criticism over privacy.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
New York can argue that 3D-printed firearms made outside ordinary checks may be difficult to trace and could weaken safeguards intended to reduce gun violence. A ban, the state’s strongest case would say, is a reasonable way to limit that risk, while enforcement can be refined to address ambiguous items such as a gun-shaped e-reader case.
The case against
Digital-rights advocates can argue that restricting access to weapon-design files gives the government broad power to monitor and control information, including lawful technical material. They may also contend that changing a file’s digital hash without changing its function exposes how easily detection rules can become a contest of evasion and surveillance, rather than a reliable way to prevent harm.