California is picking a new fight in its long-running gun war.
This time, the target isn’t a manufacturer or a dealer. It’s websites.
This month, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against two sites accused of publishing instructions for making firearms with 3D printers.
San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu joined the case. The lawsuit was filed in San Francisco Superior Court.
The state says the sites, Gatalog Foundation and CTRLPEW, distribute computer code and step-by-step guides for making so-called “ghost guns.”
The term refers to firearms that don’t have serial numbers and aren’t tied to background checks.
According to the lawsuit, investigators were able to download the files in minutes. They say they used the material to build a Glock-style handgun.
That ease of access is central to the state’s case.
Bonta argues the sites make it possible for people who can’t pass background checks to manufacture weapons at home.
“These defendants’ conduct enables unlicensed people who are too young or too dangerous to pass background checks to print deadly weapons without a trace,” Bonta said.
Because the guns are built privately, law enforcement can’t trace them. And because no dealer is involved, background checks never happen.
The lawsuit names several individuals connected to the sites, including gun-rights attorney Matthew Larosiere.
Larosiere has previously defended home-built firearms.
In a 2019 interview, he said it has always been legal for adults to make guns for their own personal use, which goes back to early colonial times.
He also said those firearms are rarely used in crime.
State officials disagree.
The lawsuit claims ghost guns have exploded in California over the past decade, saying law enforcement recovered just 26 ghost guns in 2015. Since 2021, agencies have reportedly recovered more than 11,000 per year on average.
The filing also highlights a 2024 case in Santa Rosa. A 14-year-old was arrested after allegedly using a 3D printer to manufacture multiple firearms.
Gun-control groups say websites like these are helping people sidestep the law.
But critics see something bigger at stake.
At its core, the lawsuit isn’t just about guns. It’s about access to information.
California isn’t accusing the sites of selling firearms. It’s accusing them of publishing digital files and instructions.
That raises First Amendment questions about whether the government can ban speech based on how someone might use it.
There’s also a Second Amendment issue lurking underneath.
Federal law has never restricted individuals ability to make firearms for personal use.
Courts are still working out how far states can go in restricting that activity, especially after recent Supreme Court rulings expanding gun rights.
The defendants have not yet responded publicly. The case is still in its early stages.
But the implications reach far beyond California.
This lawsuit could help determine how much control states can claim over digital speech, emerging technology, and the future of homemade firearms.
And once again, California is first in line to test where the limits really are.
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. Digital technology was used in the research, writing, and production of this article. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
