New York governor to 3D-printed gun leader: 'Tell Cody I will get ahead of him'

New York Governor Kathy Hochul is not backing down from a fight with the man who made the first 3D-printed gun. In this week's episode of The Verge's Decoder, Hochul responded directly to Cody Wilson's 'Hochulization' tool, a piece of software designed to help people skirt New York's law banning 3D-printed firearms. 'You can tell Cody I will get ahead of him next,' Hochul said. 'I can't always be on the forefront when I see someone intentionally thwarting a law. It is the law that you cannot have 3D-printed guns in the state of New York.' The governor's warning lands as a direct challenge to Wilson, who has built a career on testing the limits of firearm regulation through technology.

Wilson, the creator of the first 3D-printed gun, announced the 'Hochulization' tool last week, naming it as a taunt aimed squarely at the governor. The tool is designed to circumvent New York's law preventing 3D printers from making firearms, a statute that Hochul has championed. By putting the tool in the hands of anyone with a 3D printer, Wilson is effectively daring the state to enforce its ban in the face of rapidly evolving technology. Hochul's response, delivered on a national tech podcast, signals that she sees Wilson's move not as a harmless stunt but as a direct threat to public safety and the rule of law.

The exchange is the latest flashpoint in a long-running battle over 3D-printed guns, a fight that has pitted tech innovators against regulators for over a decade. Wilson first made headlines in 2013 when his organization, Defense Distributed, released the blueprints for the Liberator, the first fully 3D-printed handgun. The files were downloaded hundreds of thousands of times before the State Department forced their removal, but Wilson has continued to push boundaries, arguing that digital information cannot be regulated. His legal battles have reached the Supreme Court, and his tactics have evolved from releasing blueprints to building tools that automate the circumvention of state laws.

For Hochul, the stakes are personal and political. New York has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and the state has been a leader in trying to close the loopholes that 3D-printed guns create. The 'Hochulization' tool is designed to make a mockery of those efforts, and the governor's response suggests she is prepared to escalate. 'I will get ahead of him next' is not just a warning to Wilson; it is a signal to other states and regulators that New York will not be passive in the face of technological workarounds. The question is how a state can 'get ahead' of a tool that can be updated, shared, and distributed faster than legislation can move.

The regulatory challenge is not unique to guns. The same dynamics that allow Wilson to distribute a tool that skirts New York's law are at play in other industries, from encrypted messaging to drone delivery to AI-generated content. When a technology is designed to operate outside the reach of traditional regulation, the burden shifts to regulators to innovate as quickly as the technologists. Hochul's comments suggest she understands this, but her options are limited. She can push for new laws, but Wilson's tool is designed to exploit the gaps in existing ones. She can pursue legal action, but Wilson has shown a willingness to fight in court for years. And she can use her platform to shame him, but Wilson seems to thrive on the attention.

For executives and policymakers watching this unfold, the exchange is a case study in the limits of regulatory power in the digital age. Wilson's 'Hochulization' tool is not just a gun rights statement; it is a demonstration that a single determined actor can use technology to challenge the authority of a state government. The same playbook could be used by anyone with a grievance and a technical skill set, from activists to criminals to foreign adversaries. The response from New York will set a precedent for how other states and countries handle similar challenges, and it will be watched closely by both sides of the debate.

Hochul's warning also highlights the growing importance of state-level action in the absence of federal leadership on gun policy. With Congress gridlocked on the issue, states like New York have become the primary battlegrounds for gun regulation. That has created a patchwork of laws that Wilson and others can exploit, moving their operations to more permissive jurisdictions or using technology to make geography irrelevant. The 'Hochulization' tool is a direct attack on that patchwork, and Hochul's response is a defense of it. The outcome of this particular fight will depend on whether New York can match Wilson's technical agility with regulatory agility.

The broader lesson for decision-makers is that technology has made it easier than ever to challenge the status quo, and regulators are struggling to keep up. Whether the issue is 3D-printed guns, cryptocurrency, or AI, the pattern is the same: a small group of innovators moves fast, regulators react slowly, and the public is left to deal with the consequences. Hochul's promise to 'get ahead' of Wilson is admirable, but it remains to be seen whether any government can truly stay ahead of the pace of technological change. For now, the governor has drawn a line in the sand, and Wilson has shown he is willing to cross it. The next move in this game is likely to come from Wilson, who has never been one to back down from a challenge.

For peers in similar roles, the takeaway is clear: when a technology directly challenges your regulatory authority, you cannot afford to ignore it. Hochul's decision to engage publicly with Wilson, rather than dismiss him, signals that she understands the stakes. But engagement is only the first step. The real test will be whether she can translate her words into action that outpaces the next iteration of Wilson's tool. In the meantime, the rest of us are left to watch a high-stakes game of cat and mouse that will shape the future of digital regulation.