If anything could be said about 3D printing guns, it is that it’s a highly controversial subject. Last year the United Kingdom and Philadelphia banned 3D printed guns and the United States extended the Undetectable Firearms Act for another ten years. On the other side of the debate stands Cody Wilson, the creator of the notorious Liberator, the first-ever 3D printed gun.
After creating the 3D gun he put the blueprints online, after which they’ve been downloaded over 100,000 times in only two days. The US Government directly forced him to take the files off the Internet, which turned him into being as controversial as his guns. Distrusted by the government, closely followed by the press. In other words: great material for a book.
Simon & Schuster, one of the biggest American book publishers, is seeing a story in this and pays Wilson a quarter-million dollars to write a book on his journey of creating the first 3D printed weapon. Wilson will write about his ideological motivations behind creating a dangerous 3D printed gun that anyone could print out at home, but according to him it won’t be a philosophical book.
He’ll call the book Negative Liberty, a title which quite obviously has something to do with the name of his 3D printed gun and his conflict with the US Government. This conflict is quite big, as the 25-year-old expects the Government will soon start to take legal action against him. Wilson expects to possibly need some of the earnings of his new book to pay for his lawyers.
Whether this book will be something to consider good or bad, is something that’s upon you. But first of all: what’s the book about, then? Wilson has stated the following in an interview with Andy Greenberg of Forbes magazine:
“The whole point to me is to add to the hacker mythology and to have a very, very accurate and contentious portrayal of what we think about the current political situation, our attitude and political orientation, a lasting remark. It won’t be a manifesto. But culturally I hope to leave a couple of zingers…a touchstone for the young, disaffected radical towards his own political and social development, that kind of thing.”