Luigi Mangione’s 3D-printed gun and the problem of untraceable firearms

On Monday, after a five-day search to find the man who shot and killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City, police arrested a suspect, 26-year-old Luigi Mangione, and charged him with murder. When asked to provide identification, investigators say that Mangione — a former high school valedictorian and software engineer from a prominent family in Baltimore — gave the same fake ID used to check into a New York City hostel in the days before the assassination. A search of Mangione yielded a manifesto apparently saying that “these parasites had it coming.” Law enforcement also found a “black 3D-printed pistol and a black silencer” in Mangione’s backpack, according to the police report. The gun, the report noted, had “one loaded Glock magazine with six nine-millimeter full metal jacket rounds.” Officials say they believe it’s the same weapon the shooter is seen wielding in surveillance footage of the killing. Investigators and online sleuths are now going through Mangione’s digital footprint, including his Goodreads and Reddit accounts, in an effort to understand his character. For the official investigation, though, one of the most important details will be where and how Mangione obtained his weapon. The fact that the suspect allegedly used a “ghost gun” — a gun that is essentially homemade and often lacks a serial number like the ones required on guns sold by major manufacturers — would usually make the weapon harder to trace. But this case may be a bit simpler: As 404media has reported, and several 3D gun printing hobbyists on the internet have pointed out, the gun found on Mangione has the same frame characteristics as the Chairmanwon V1, a weapon named after its designer. Chairmanwon’s designs are well-known among homemade gun hobbyists. (Vox reached out to Chairmanwon for confirmation but did not hear back by publication time.) And while this might be the first high-profile shooting attempt using a 3D-printed gun, the fact that a ghost gun was likely used shouldn’t come as a surprise. In the last few years, they’ve become much more frequent at crime scenes, presenting serious challenges for investigators trying to solve crimes. Ghost guns are meant to be untraceable Federal gun regulations require manufacturers to print serial numbers on their weapons. They also require that federally licensed firearms dealers perform background checks when someone comes to them looking to purchase a gun. Background checks are meant to ensure that people who aren’t legally allowed to own a gun, including minors and people convicted of felonies, aren’t able to buy them. In the event of a crime, the serial numbers help investigators know who purchased the weapon, allowing them to determine whether the person who purchased the gun used it in a crime or whether someone else did. But with ghost guns, people can avoid the regulations. As 3D printers have become more accessible, so has a niche market of people designing, printing, and selling weapons kits for home assembly. Because they lack serial numbers, ghost guns aren’t easily traceable. And selling them online, as kits, has allowed both manufacturers and purchasers to evade the regulations required for other gun purchases. That has made ghost guns an especially appealing option for people who aren’t able to purchase guns legally, or want to use them for illegal purposes. As a consequence, the number of ghost guns recovered from crime scenes has exploded. The number of these privately made guns submitted to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing increased more than 1,000 percent between 2017 and 2021. Gun violence researchers have also pointed to the popularity of ghost guns among teenagers amid an epidemic of youth gun violence. Ghost guns’ uncertain future Ghost gun makers have frustrated lawmakers in part because the gun makers have been able to get around the existing regulations. But in 2022, ATF broadened the definition of firearms under the Gun Control Act of 1968 as part of the Biden administration’s promise to crack down on ghost guns. Essentially, the change forced ghost gun makers to operate like regular gun manufacturers and dealers, requiring them to include serial numbers on their products and do background checks on prospective buyers. Gun rights groups challenged the decision in court in Garland v. VanDerStok, which asked a judge to consider whether ghost gun kits and the frames used to assemble them could be counted as firearms subject to gun control laws. In 2023, a judge ruled in favor of the gun rights groups. But the Supreme Court issued a stay, allowing the law to stay in effect while they heard the case. In oral arguments in October, it appeared that the justices were likely to uphold the regulations on ghost guns when they issue a decision later this term. Meanwhile, the regulations do seem to have made an impact on the number of ghost guns being used in crime scenes. According to analysis by The Trace, the number of ghost guns being recovered from crime scenes seems to have dropped significantly since the 2022 rule in cities that collect relevant data. Legal challenges to one of the major producers of ghost guns found at crime scenes also almost certainly played a role. Forcing private gun makers to operate like gun manufacturing companies seems to have helped, but it won’t entirely take care of the problem. As long as people can easily print and manufacture their own 3D weapons, they’re likely to find ways to keep printing guns without serial numbers, and some of them will surely show up at crime scenes. But as certain gun makers become more prominent, it will likely become easier for some of the guns to be identified. In Mangione’s case, the police — assuming they have the right suspect — got lucky: When they approached him five days after the crime, he still had the weapon on him.