Order Code IB10071
Issue Brief for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Gun Control Legislation in the 107th Congress
Updated June 28, 2002
William Krouse
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CONTENTS
SUMMARY
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Pro/Con Debate
Gun-Related Statistics
Number of Guns
Criminal Use
Gun Violence and Youth
Suicides, Accidents, and Other Deaths
Self-defense
Recreation
Federal Regulation of Firearms
Federal Regulation of Firearm Transfers
Brady Act Implementation
Federal Firearm Prosecutions
Major Federal Firearm Statutes
Possible Issues for the 107th Congress
Gun Shows
Project Exile
Other Possible Issues
Background Check Record Retention and Fees
FY2002 Gun Violence Reduction Initiatives

---

IB10071
06-28-02
Gun Control Legislation in the 107th Congress
SUMMARY
Congress continues to debate the efficacy
licensing requirements for manufacturers,
and constitutionality of the federal regulation
importers, and dealers. Crime and mortality
of firearms and ammunition. Various federal
statistics are often used in the gun control
laws have been enacted since1934 to promote
debate. The number of homicides committed
such regulation. Gun control advocates argue
annually with a firearm by persons in the 14-
that they curb access by criminals, juveniles,
to 24-year-old age group increased by 173%
and other “high-risk” individuals. They
from 1985 to 1993, and then decreased by
contend that only federal measures can suc-
47% from 1993 to 1999. Firearm fatalities
cessfully reduce the availability of guns.
from all causes and for all age groups
Some seek broad policy changes such as
decreased by 22%. For juveniles, they de-
near-prohibition of non-police handgun own-
creased by 40%, from 1993 to 1998.
ership or the registration of all firearm owners
or firearms. They assert that there is no con-
The 106th Congress considered several
stitutional barrier to such measures and no
measures to regulate firearms. They included
significant social costs. Others advocate less
1) requiring background checks at gun shows,
comprehensive policies that they maintain
2) requiring firearm safety locks, and 3) in-
would not impede ownership and legitimate
creasing controls on assault weapons and
firearm transfers.
handguns. None, however, were enacted.
With the change in the Senate during the 107th
Opposition to federal controls is strong.
Congress, there was an expectation that gun
Gun control opponents deny that federal
show legislation would see action, but none
policies keep firearms out of the hands of
has thus far advanced. Congress, meanwhile,
high-risk persons; rather, they argue, controls
has increased funding for gun violence reduc-
often create burdens for law- abiding citizens
tion programs. In the FY2002 Treasury-
and infringe upon constitutional rights
Postal appropriations act (P.L. 107-67), Con-
provided by the Second Amendment. Some
gress has provided the Bureau of Alcohol,
argue further that widespread gun ownership
Tobacco, and Firearms with $823 million, a
is one of the best deterrents to crime as well as
6.8% increase. In the Defense Department
to potential tyranny, whether by gangs or by
appropriations act (P.L. 107-117), Congress
government. They may also criticize the
has provided ATF with $31 million in emer-
notion of enhancing federal, as opposed to
gency counter-terrorism funding. In the
state, police powers. The two most significant
Commerce-Justice-State appropriations act
federal statutes controlling firearms in the
(P.L. 107-77), for various Department of
civilian population are the National Firearms
Justice programs, Congress has provided $9
Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of
million to hire additional federal gun prosecu-
1968. The 1934 Act established strict regis-
tors, $50 million to hire additional state and
tration requirements and a transfer tax on
local prosecutors, $15 million to establish
machine guns and short-barreled long guns.
joint federal-state safe school task forces to
The 1968 Act prohibits mail-order sales and
reduce gun violence, and $50 million to pro-
the interstate sales of firearms, prohibits
vide safety locks for every handgun in the
transfers to minors, limits access to “new”
United States.
assault weapons, and sets forth penalties and
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

IB10071
06-28-02
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
While several dozen gun control-related proposals have been introduced in the 107th
Congress, none has been reported from committee. Congress, meanwhile, has provided
increased funding for programs to reduce gun violence. In the FY2002 Treasury-Postal
appropriations act (P.L. 107-67), Congress has provided the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms (ATF) with $823 million, a 6.8% increase over the agency’s FY2001
appropriation and $20 million more than the Administration’s request. In addition, in the
Defense Department appropriations act (P.L. 107-117), Congress has provided ATF with
$31 million in emergency supplemental funding for Homeland Security efforts. For various
programs in the Department of Justice, in the Commerce-Justice-State appropriations act
(P.L. 107-77), Congress has provided $9 million to hire additional federal gun prosecutors,
$50 million to hire additional state and local prosecutors, $15 million to establish joint
federal-state task forces to reduce gun violence and promote safe schools, and $50 million
to provide safety locks for every handgun in the United States.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Pro/Con Debate
Through the years, legislative proposals to restrict the availability of firearms to the
public have raised the following questions: What restrictions on firearms are permissible
under the Constitution? Does gun control constitute crime control? Can the nation’s rates
of homicide, robbery, and assault be reduced by the stricter regulation of firearm commerce
or ownership? Would restrictions stop attacks on public figures or thwart deranged persons
and terrorists? Would household, street corner, and schoolyard disputes be less lethal if
firearms were more difficult and expensive to acquire? Would more restrictive gun control
policies have the unintended effect of impairing citizens’ means of self-defense?
In recent years, proponents of gun control legislation have often held that only federal
laws can be effective in the United States. Otherwise, they say, states with few restrictions
will continue to be sources of guns that flow illegally into restrictive states. They believe
that the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which states that “A well regulated Militia,
being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms
shall not be infringed,” (1) is obsolete; or (2) is intended solely to guard against suppression
of state militias by the central government and therefore restricted in scope by that intent;
or (3) does not guarantee a right that is absolute, but one that can be limited by reasonable
requirements. They ask why a private citizen needs any firearm that is not designed
primarily for hunting or other recognized sporting purposes.
Proponents of firearm restrictions have advocated policy changes on specific types of
firearms or components that appear to be useful primarily for criminal purposes or that pose
unusual risks to the public. Fully automatic firearms (i.e., machine guns) and short-barreled
rifles and shotguns have been subject to strict regulation since 1934. Fully automatic
firearms have been banned from private possession since 1986, except for those legally
owned and registered with the Secretary of the Treasury on May 19, 1986. More recently,
“Saturday night specials” (loosely defined as inexpensive, small handguns), “assault
CRS-1

---

IB10071
06-28-02
weapons,” ammunition feeding devices with capacities for more than seven rounds, and
certain ammunition have been the focus of control efforts.
Opponents of gun control vary in their positions with respect to specific forms of
control but generally hold that gun control laws do not accomplish what is intended. They
argue that it is as difficult to keep weapons from being acquired by “high risk” individuals,
even under federal laws and enforcement, as it was to stop the sale and use of liquor during
Prohibition. In their view, a more stringent federal firearm regulatory system would only
create problems for law-abiding citizens, bring mounting frustration and escalation of bans
by gun regulators, and possibly threaten citizens’ civil rights or safety. Some argue that the
low violent crime rates of other countries have nothing to do with gun control, maintaining
instead that multiple cultural differences are responsible.
Gun control opponents also reject the assumption that the only legitimate purpose of
ownership by a private citizen is recreational (i.e., hunting and target-shooting). They insist
on the continuing need of people for effective means to defend person and property, and they
point to studies that they believe show that gun possession lowers the incidence of crime.
They say that the law enforcement and criminal justice system in the United States has not
demonstrated the ability to furnish an adequate measure of public safety. Some opponents
believe further that the Second Amendment includes a right to keep arms as a defense
against potential government tyranny, pointing to examples in other countries of the use of
firearm restrictions to curb dissent and secure illegitimate government power.
The debate has been intense. To gun control advocates, the opposition is out of touch
with the times, misinterprets the Second Amendment, or is lacking in concern for the
problems of crime and violence. To gun control opponents, advocates are naive in their faith
in the power of regulation to solve social problems, bent on disarming the American citizen
for ideological or social reasons, or moved by irrational hostility to firearms and gun
enthusiasts.
Gun-Related Statistics
Number of Guns. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) reported in a national
survey that in 1994, 44 million people, approximately 35% of households, owned 192
million firearms, 65 million of which were handguns. Seventy-four percent of those
individuals were reported to own more than one firearm. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms (ATF) estimates that as of the end of 1996, approximately 242 million firearms
were available for sale to or were possessed by civilians in the United States. That total
includes roughly 72 million handguns (mostly pistols, revolvers, and derringers), 76 million
rifles, and 64 million shotguns.
Most guns available for sale are produced domestically. In recent years, one to two
million handguns were manufactured each year, along with one million rifles and less than
one million shotguns. Annual imports are considerably fewer — from 200,000 to 400,000
handguns, 200,000 rifles, and 100,000 to 200,000 shotguns. Retail prices of guns vary
widely, from $50 or less for inexpensive, low-caliber handguns to more than $1,500 for
high-quality rifles or shotguns. Data are not available on the number of “assault weapons”
in private possession or available for sale, but estimates prepared in 1989 by a firearms
CRS-2

---

IB10071
06-28-02
expert associated with the Smithsonian Institution placed the number of such firearms at that
time in the range of one to four million, less than 3% of the number of guns estimated to
exist in the civilian market.
Criminal Use. Reports submitted by state and local law enforcement agencies to the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and published annually in the Uniform Crime Reports
indicate that both the crime rate and the violent crime rate have declined since 1981. Of the
homicides in which the type of weapon could be identified, from 60% to almost 70% have
involved firearms each year. The number of homicides and the proportion involving
firearms have declined in recent years. In 2000 of the 12,943 homicides reported, 66%
(8,493) were committed with firearms. Of those committed with firearms, 79% (6,686)
involved handguns. From 1993 to1999, the number of firearm-related homicides decreased
by an average rate of nearly 11% annually, for an overall decrease of 49%. In 2000, firearm-
related homicides increased slightly (by 13 homicides) to 8,493.
The other principal source of national crime data is the National Crime Victimization
Survey (NCVS) conducted by the Bureau of the Census and published by the Bureau of
Justice Statistics. The NCVS database provides some information on the weapons used by
offenders, based on victims’ reports. Based on data provided by survey respondents in
calendar year 1999, BJS estimated that, nationwide, there were 6.3 million violent crimes
(rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault). Weapons were used
in about 1.6 million of these criminal incidents. Firearms were used by offenders in about
533,000 of these incidents, or roughly 8%. For further information, see Criminal
Victimization 2000: Changes 1999-2000 with Trends 1993-2000, by Callie Marie Rennison
[http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv00.pdf].
Gun Violence and Youth. Youth crime statistics have often been used in the gun
control debate. The number of homicides committed annually with a firearm by persons in
the 14- to 24-year-old age group increased sharply from 1985 to 1993; they have declined
since then, but not to the 1985 level. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, from
1985 to 1993, the number of firearm-related homicides committed by 14- to 17-year-olds
increased by 294%, from 855 to 3,371. From 1993 to 1999, the number of firearm-related
homicides committed by persons in this age group decreased by 65%, from 3,371 to 1,165.
From 1985 to 1993, firearm-related homicides committed by 18- to 24-year-olds
increased by 142%, from 3,374 to 8,171. From 1993 to 1999, firearm-related homicides
committed by persons in this age group decreased by 43%, from 8,717 to 4,973. For further
information, see Homicide Trends in the United States, by James Alan Fox, at
[http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/homtrnd.htm].
Although gun-related violence in schools is statistically a rare event, a Department of
Justice survey indicated that 12.7% of students age 12 to 19 reported knowing a student who
brought a firearm to school. For further information, see CRS Report RL30482, The Safe
and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Program: Background and Context, by Edith
Fairman Cooper.
Suicides, Accidents, and Other Deaths. Firearm fatalities have decreased
continuously since 1993. The source of national data on firearm deaths is the publication
Vital Statistics, published each year by the National Center for Health Statistics. Firearm
deaths reported by coroners in each state are presented in four categories: homicides and
CRS-3

---

IB10071
06-28-02
legal intervention, suicides, accidents, and unknown circumstances. In 1999, a total of
28,874 firearm deaths occurred, according to such reports. Of this total, 11,127 were
homicides or due to legal intervention; 16,599 were suicides; 824 were unintentional
(accidental) shootings; and 324 were of unknown cause. From 1993 to 1998, firearm-related
deaths decreased by an average rate of 5% annually, for an overall decrease of 27%. Also
in 1999, there were 1,776 juvenile (under 18 years of age) deaths attributed to firearms. Of
the juvenile total, 1,010 were homicides or due to legal intervention; 558 were suicides; 158
were unintentional; and 50 were of unknown cause. From 1993 to 1999, firearm-related
deaths for juveniles have decreased by an average rate of 10% annually, for an overall
decrease of 46%.
Self-defense. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCVS data from 1987
to 1992 indicate that in each of those years, roughly 62,200 victims of violent crime (1% of
all victims of such crimes) used guns to defend themselves. Another 20,000 persons each
year used guns to protect property. Persons in the business of self-protection (police
officers, armed security guards) may have been included in the survey. Another source of
information on the use of firearms for self-defense is the “National Self Defense Survey”
conducted by criminology professor Gary Kleck of Florida State University in the spring of
1993. Citing responses from 4,978 households, Dr. Kleck estimated that handguns have
been used 2.1 million times per year for self-defense, and that all types of guns have been
used approximately 2.5 million times a year for that purpose, during the 1988-1993 period.
Why do these numbers vary? Law enforcement agencies do not collect information on
the number of times civilians use firearms to defend themselves or their property against
attack. Such data have been collected in household surveys. The contradictory nature of the
available statistics may be partially explained by methodological factors. That is, these and
other criminal justice statistics reflect what is reported to have occurred, not necessarily the
actual number of times certain events occur. Victims and offenders are sometimes reluctant
to be candid with researchers. So, the number of criminal incidents can only be estimated,
making it difficult to state with certainty the accuracy of statistics such as the number of
times firearms are used in self-defense. For this and other reasons, criminal justice statistics
often vary when different methodologies are applied.
Survey research can be limited, since it is difficult to produce statistically significant
findings from small incident populations. For example, the sample in the National Self-
Defense Survey might have been too small, given the low incidence rate and the inherent
limitations of survey research.
Recreation. According to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), in 1994 recreation
was the most common motivation for owning a firearm. There were approximately 15
million hunters, about 35% of gun owners, in the United States and about the same number
and percentage of gun owners engaged in sport shooting in 1994. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service reported that 31.6 million persons purchased hunting licenses or permits
in 1993 and, according to the National Sporting Goods Association, in that year
approximately 18.5 million persons took part in firearms sporting activities.
CRS-4

---

IB10071
06-28-02
Federal Regulation of Firearms
As stated in the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended (P.L. 90-618; Title 18, United
States Code, Chapter 44), the purpose of federal firearm regulation is to assist federal, state,
and local law enforcement in the ongoing effort to reduce crime and violence. In the same
act, however, Congress also stated that the intent of the law is not to place any undue or
unnecessary burdens on law-abiding citizens in regard to the lawful acquisition, possession,
or use of firearms for hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other
lawful activity.
Indeed, issues related to federal firearm regulation currently under debate generally
revolve around the following questions. One, who should be ineligible to possess firearms?
Two, what types of firearms are appropriate for statutorily enumerated lawful firearm
activities? Three, when, where, and how is it appropriate to check persons seeking to
acquire a firearm for possession eligibility?
Federal Regulation of Firearm Transfers. Under current law, federal firearm
licensees (hereafter referred to as licensees) may ship, transport, and receive firearms that
have moved in interstate and foreign commerce. Licensees are currently required to verify
with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through a background check that nonlicensed
persons are eligible to possess a firearm before subsequently transferring a firearm to them.
Licensees must also verify the identity of nonlicensed transferees by inspecting a
government-issued identity document, e.g., a driver’s license.
Under current law, there are 9 classes of persons prohibited from possessing firearms:
1) persons convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
exceeding 1 year; 2) fugitives from justice; 3) drug users, or addicts; 4) persons adjudicated
mental defectives, or committed to mental institutions; 5) unauthorized immigrants; 6)
persons dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces; 7) U.S. citizenship renunciates;
8) persons under court-order restraints related to harassing, stalking, or threatening an
intimate partner or child of such intimate partner; and 9) persons convicted of misdemeanor
domestic violence (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)).
Licensees may engage in interstate transfers of firearms between themselves without
conducting background checks. While they may transfer long guns (rifles or shotguns) to
out-of-state residents, as long as there are in-person meetings and such transfers would not
knowingly be in violation of the laws of the state in which the nonlicensed transferees reside,
they may not transfer handguns to unlicensed out-of-state residents. Transfer of handguns
by licensees to anyone under 21-years-of-age is prohibited, as is the transfer of long guns
to anyone under 18-years-of-age (18 U.S.C. § 922(b)). Also, licensees are required to submit
a “multiple sales reports” to the Secretary of the Treasury if any person purchases two or
more handguns within 5 business days.
Furthermore, licensees are required to maintain records on all acquisitions and
dispositions of firearms. They are obligated to respond to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms (ATF) agents requesting firearm tracing information within 24 hours. Under
certain circumstances, ATF agents may inspect, without search warrants, their business
premises, inventory, and records.
CRS-5

---

IB10071
06-28-02
On the other hand, nonlicensees are prohibited from acquiring firearms from out-of-
state sources (except for long guns acquired from licensees under the scenario described
above). Nonlicensees are also prohibited from transferring firearms to any persons who they
have reasonable cause to believe are not residents of the state in which the transaction
occurs. In addition, since 1986, it has been a federal offense for nonlicensees to knowingly
transfer a firearm to prohibited persons. It is also notable that firearm transfers initiated
through the Internet are subject to the same federal laws as transfers initiated in any other
manner. (For further information, see CRS Report RS20957, Internet Firearm Sales, by T.J.
Halstead.)
Finally, since 1994, it has been a federal offense for any nonlicensed person to transfer
a handgun to anyone under 18-years-of-age. It has also been illegal for anyone under the
under 18 years-of-age to possess a handgun (there are exceptions to this law related to
employment, ranching, farming, target practice, and hunting) (18 U.S.C. § 922(x)).
Brady Act Implementation. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, since the
implementation of the Brady Act on February 29, 1994, through calender year (CY) 2000,
nearly 30 million firearm background checks were completed, resulting in 689,000 denials
(an overall 2.3% denial rate). During the interim period of the Brady Act (phase I), from
February 1994 through November 1998, there was a waiting period of up to 5 days for
handgun transfers in states without instant check systems. Nearly 13 million firearm
background checks were completed, resulting in 312,000 denials.
Phase II and the permanent provisions of the Brady Act became effective on November
30, 1998. As part of phase II, the Federal Bureau of Investigation rolled out the National
Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Through NICS, and under the
permanent Brady provisions, background checks are conducted of applicants for both hand
and long gun transfers. In 26 states, state agencies serve as points of contact (POCs) and
conduct background checks for handgun transfers. In 16 states, state agencies serve as POCs
and conduct background checks for both long gun and handgun transfers. In POC states,
federal firearm licensees contact the state agency, and the state agency contacts the FBI. In
non-POC states, federal firearm licensees contact the FBI directly through the NICS system.
During the first 25 months of NICS operation (through December 31, 2000), the FBI
completed over 17 million background checks for firearm transfer applications. Of this
number, 639,000 background checks resulted in firearm transfers being denied. Roughly
half of these background checks were submitted by federal firearm licensees, and the other
half by state agencies (POCs). The overall number of firearm transfer applications and
required background checks declined by 11% from 8.6 million in CY1999 to 7.7 million in
CY2000. Of total checks in FY2000, 2.0% (153,000) resulted in denials. Over 59% of
denials occurred because the applicant was a felon or was under felony indictment, as
compared to 72% in FY1999. The next most common reason for denial, about 12% of cases
in FY2000, was a domestic violence misdemeanor conviction or restraining order. For
further information on phase II, see Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2000
(Washington, July 2001), at [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/bcft00.htm].
According to GAO, about 75% of the NICS checks handled by the FBI resulted in
immediate determinations of eligibility. Of the remaining 25% that resulted in a non-
definitive response, neither a “proceed” nor a denial, 80% were turned around within 2
hours. The remaining 20% of delayed transactions took hours or days for the FBI NICS
CRS-6

---

IB10071
06-28-02
examiners to reach a final determination. In many cases these sales were delayed because
there was an outstanding charge without a final disposition against the person seeking to
purchase the firearm. Such cases necessitate that the FBI examiners contact local or state
authorities for additional information. Under current law, the FBI is authorized to delay the
sale for 3 business days in order to determine the outcome of the charge and, thus, establish
the eligibility of the transferee to possess a firearm.
NICS system availability -- how regularly the system can be accessed during business
hours and not delay legitimate firearm transfers -- has also been a source of complaint. GAO
found, however, that in the first year of NICS operation, the FBI had achieved its system
availability goal of 98% for 4 months. System availability for the remaining 8 months
averaged 95.4%. For further information, see GAO Report GGD/AIMD-00-64, Gun
Control: Implementation of the National Instant Criminal Background System (Washington,
February 2000).
For state agencies, background checks may not be as expeditious. Background checks
through state agencies, however, may be more thorough, since state agencies may have
greater access to databases and records that are not available through NICS. For further
information, see National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS): Operations
Report (November 30 1998 - December 31, 1999) (Washington, revised August 1, 1999), at
[http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/index.htm], click on “NICS One Year Report.”
Federal Firearm Prosecutions. Regarding enforcement of the Brady Act, from
November 1998 through June 2000, the FBI referred 134,522 Brady-related cases to the
ATF, and 37,926 of these cases were referred to ATF field offices for investigation.
According to ATF, in FY2000 there were 1,485 defendants charged with firearm-related
violations as a result of NICS checks under Brady. Of these defendants, 1,157 were charged
with providing falsified information to federal firearm licensees (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)),
another 86 were persons ineligible to posses firearms under the domestic violence gun ban
(18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(8) and (9)), and 136 were convicted felons (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)).
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, however, federal firearm prosecutions
decreased by 19% from 1992 to 1996, they leveled off through 1997, and increased in 1998
and 1999. The decline in federal prosecutions can be attributed in part to a Supreme Court
decision (Bailey v. United States (516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501)) that limited the use of the
charge of using a firearm during a violent or drug-related offense (18 United States Code,
§ 924(c)). See Federal Firearm Offenders, 1992-98 (with Preliminary Data for 1999)
(Washington, June 2000), at [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ffo98.pdf].
Major Federal Firearm Statutes. Two major federal statutes regulate the
commerce in firearms, or their ownership: the National Firearms Act of 1934 (26 U.S.C. §
5801 et seq.) and the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended (18 U.S.C. Ch. 44, § 921 et seq.).
The National Firearms Act was originally designed to make it difficult to obtain types
of firearms perceived to be especially lethal or to be the chosen weapons of “gangsters,”
most notably machine guns and short-barreled long guns. This law also regulates firearms,
other than pistols or revolvers, that can be concealed on a person (e.g., pen, cane, and belt
buckle guns). It taxes all aspects of the manufacture and distribution of such weapons. And,
it compels the disclosure (through registration with the Secretary of the Treasury) of the
production and distribution system from manufacturer to buyer.
CRS-7

---

IB10071
06-28-02
The Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended, contains the principal federal restrictions
on domestic commerce in small arms and ammunition. The statute requires all persons
manufacturing, importing, or selling firearms as a business to be federally licensed; prohibits
the interstate mail-order sale of all firearms; prohibits interstate sale of handguns generally,
sets forth categories of persons to whom firearms or ammunition may not be sold (such as
persons under a specified age or with criminal records); authorizes the Secretary of the
Treasury to prohibit the importation of non-sporting firearms; requires that dealers maintain
records of all commercial gun sales; and establishes special penalties for the use of a firearm
in the perpetration of a federal drug trafficking offense or crime of violence. Transactions
between persons “not engaged in the business” are not covered by the Act. These
transactions and other matters such as possession, registration, and the issuing of licenses
to the owners of firearms maybe covered by state laws or local ordinances. It also prohibits
federal firearm licensees from selling or delivering a rifle or shotgun to a person under 18
years of age, or a handgun to a person under 21 years of age.
Supplementing federal law, many state firearm laws are stricter than federal law. For
example, some states require permits to obtain firearms and impose a waiting period for
firearm transfers. Other states are less restrictive, but state law cannot preempt federal law.
Federal law serves as the minimum standard in the United States.
The following principal changes have been enacted to the Gun Control Act since 1968.
! The “Firearms Owners Protection Act,” McClure-Volkmer Amendments
(P.L. 99-308, 1986) eases certain interstate transfer and shipment
requirements for long guns, defines the term “engaged in the business,”
eliminates some record-keeping requirements, and bans the private
possession of machine guns not legally owned prior to 1986.
! The “Armor Piercing Ammunition” Ban (P.L. 99-408, 1986, amended in
P.L. 103-322, 1994) prohibits the manufacture, importation and delivery of
handgun ammunition composed of certain metal substances and certain full-
jacketed ammunition.
! The Federal Energy Management Improvement Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-615)
requires that all toys or firearm look-alikes have a blazed orange plug in the
barrel, denoting that it is a non-lethal imitation.
! The Undetectable Firearms Act (P.L. 100-649, 1988), also known as the
“plastic gun” legislation, bans the manufacture, import, possession, and
transfer of firearms not detectable by security devices.
! The Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-647), as originally
enacted, was ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court (United
States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), April 26, 1995). The Act prohibited
possession of a firearm in a school zone (on the campus of a public or
private school or within 1,000 feet of the grounds). In response to the
Court’s finding that the Act exceeded Congress’s authority to regulate
commerce, the 104th Congress included a provision in P.L. 104-208 that
amended the Act to require federal prosecutors to include evidence that the
firearms “moved in” or affected interstate commerce.
! The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, 1993 (P.L. 103-159) requires
that background checks be completed on all nonlicensed person seeking to
obtain firearms from federal firearm licensees.
CRS-8

---

IB10071
06-28-02
! The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L.
103-322) prohibits the manufacture or importation of semiautomatic assault
weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices (for a 10-year
period). In the case of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, the ban
on importation applies to those devices manufactured after September 1994.
This Act provides an exception for the transfer, sale, or possession of
semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding
devices lawfully possessed on the date of enactment. This Act also bans the
sale or transfer of handguns and handgun ammunition to, or possession of
handguns and handgun ammunition by, juveniles (under 18 years of age)
without prior written consent from the juvenile’s parent or legal guardian;
exceptions related to employment, ranching, farming, target practice, and
hunting are provided. In addition, the Act disqualifies persons under court
orders related to domestic abuse from receiving a firearm from any person
or possessing a firearm. It also enhances penalties for the criminal use of
firearms and makes other changes to existing law.
! Federal Domestic Violence Gun Ban (the Lautenberg Amendment, in the
Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY1997, P.L. 104-208)
prohibits persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence
from possessing firearms and ammunition. The ban applies regardless of
when the offense was adjudicated: prior to, or following enactment. It has
been challenged in the federal courts, but these challenges have been
defeated. (See CRS Report RL31143, Firearms Prohibitions and Domestic
Violence Convictions: The Lautenberg Amendment, by T.J. Halstead.)
! The Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Appropriations Act, 1999 (P.L.
105-277), requires all federal firearm licensees to offer for sale gun storage
and safety devices. It also bans firearm transfers to, or possession by,
nonimmigrants who have overstayed their the terms of their temporary visa.
! The Treasury, Postal and General Government Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-
58) requires that background checks be conducted when former firearm
owners seek to redeem a firearm that they sold to a pawnshop.
Possible Issues for the 107th Congress
The debate over the extent to which the federal government should regulate firearms and
ammunition was reignited by a rash of shootings, most notably, the incident at Columbine
High School in Littleton, CO, on April 20, 1999. Several dozen gun control-related proposals
have been introduced in the 107th Congress. For the time being, however, none of these
proposals has been reported from committee. If the gun control debate is continued in the
107th Congress, gun control issues that were considered in the 106th Congress are likely to
reemerge. In particular, the proposal to require background checks for firearm transfers by
nonlicensed persons at gun shows is likely to be the centerpiece of pro-gun control legislative
proposals. With the shift in power in the Senate, it is thought to be more likely that gun show
legislation will see action in this chamber first, but the Senate leadership has yet to advance
any gun control-related proposals.
Congress, meanwhile, has increased funding for gun violence reduction programs. In
the FY2002 Treasury-Postal appropriations act (P.L. 107-67), Congress has provided the
CRS-9

---

IB10071
06-28-02
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms with $823 million, a 6.8% increase. In addition,
in the Defense Department appropriations act (P.L. 107-117), Congress has provided ATF
with $31 million in emergency supplemental funding for Homeland Security activities. In
the Commerce-Justice-State appropriations act (P.L. 107-77), for various Department of
Justice programs, Congress has provided $9 million to hire additional federal gun prosecutors,
$50 million to hire additional state and local prosecutors, $15 million to establish joint
federal-state safe school task forces to reduce gun violence, and $50 million to provide safety
locks for every handgun in the United States.
Gun Shows. Federal law does not regulate gun shows specifically. Federal law
regulating firearms transfers, however, is applicable to such transfers at gun shows. Federal
firearm licensees – those licensed by the federal government to manufacture, import, or deal
in firearms – are required to conduct background checks on non licensed persons seeking to
obtain a firearm from them, by purchase or exchange. Conversely, non licensed persons –
those persons who transfer firearms, but who do not meet the statutory test of being “engaged
in the business” – are not required to conduct such checks. To some, this may appear to be
an incongruity in the law. Why should licensees be required to conduct checks at gun shows,
and not non licensees? To others, opposed to further federal regulation of firearms, it may
appear to be a continuance of the status quo, i.e., non-interference by the federal government
into private firearm transfers within state lines. On the other hand, those seeking to increase
federal regulation of firearms may view the absence of background checks for firearm
transfers between non licensed/private persons as a loophole in the law that needs to be
closed. At issue for Congress is whether federal regulation of firearms should be expanded
to include private firearm transfers at gun shows and other similar venues.
It is currently unclear what the Bush Administration’s position will be on gun shows and
background checks. During the presidential candidate debates, then candidate, now
President, George W. Bush stated that he favored extending background checks to all firearm
transfers at gun shows. More recently, President Bush stated that he supported such checks
if they could be completed within 24 hours. Among gun show-related bills introduced in the
107th Congress, there are basically two legislative proposals. The first, which passed the
Senate in the 106th Congress, is known by its sponsor in the 106th Congress, former Senator
Frank Lautenberg. Proposals modeled on the Lautenberg language have been included in the
following bills introduced in the 107th Congress: S. 16, S. 767, S. 940, H.R. 1990, and H.R.
4034. The last bill (H.R. 4034) was introduced by the ranking member of the Judiciary
Committee, Representative John Conyers. The second proposal, introduced as S. 890, is
known by its sponsors in the 107th Congress, Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.
This second proposal has also been introduced in the House as H.R. 2377 by Representative
Michael Castle. Both proposals address several questions.
! How would the term “gun show” be defined? The Lautenberg proposal
defines a gun show as any event at which 50 or more firearms are offered for
sale or transfer and there are not less than 10 vendors. Instead of gun show,
the McCain/Lieberman proposal uses the term “special firearms event,”
defining it as any event at which 75 or more firearms are offered for sale or
transfer.
! Should gun show promoters/special firearms event operators be required to
register with the Secretary of the Treasury? Both bills would require
promoters/operators to register with the Secretary of the Treasury. Unlike
the Lautenberg proposal, the McCain/Lieberman proposal would also require
CRS-10

---

IB10071
06-28-02
frequent operators who organize two or more of these events in a 6-month
period to be licensed, and it would require both frequent and infrequent
operators to submit ledgers of nonlicensed vendors before and after each
event to the Secretary of the Treasury.
! Should all firearms transactions at gun shows be conducted by federal
firearm licensees, or should a special licensee be responsible for conducting
background checks for nonlicensees? The Lautenberg proposal adopts the
former approach, the McCain/Lieberman, the latter. Also, the
McCain/Lieberman proposal would prohibit special licensees from
displaying firearms for sale or transfer at events where they are designated
to conduct background checks for nonlicensees.
! How many days should the FBI be given to complete background checks at
gun shows? The Lautenberg proposal does not address this issue, leaving in
place the current statutory 3 business day delayed sale. In contrast, the
McCain/Lieberman proposal would establish a certification process by which
states could opt for a maximum 24-hour delayed sale, when 95% of the
state’s disqualifying records (criminal and otherwise) going back 30 years
are made available online.
For further information on gun shows, see Gun Shows: Brady Checks and Crime Gun Traces
(Washington: January 1999). See: [http://www.atf.treas.gov/], click on “Publications.”
Project Exile. Both gun control supporters and opponents are likely to call for greater
enforcement of existing federal gun control statutes. Many maintain that “Project Exile” is
a useful model upon which to build increased federal gun prosecutions. An initiative
mounted by the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, “Project Exile” was a
concerted effort to coordinate federal, state, and local law enforcement efforts to reduce gun
violence in Richmond, Virginia. At that time, Richmond had the second highest homicide
rate for cities with populations of 100,000 or more. Of those homicides, 80% were committed
with a firearm. As part of Project Exile, the U.S. Attorneys reviewed cases that involved
felons, drug users/traffickers, domestic violence and firearms, and these cases were singled
out for prosecution in federal court. A felon caught carrying a firearm while trafficking in
drugs was very likely to be sentenced to 5 years in a federal prison (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)).
From 1997 to 1998, the number of homicides in Richmond dropped by 31%, and this
decrease has been attributed to Project Exile. U.S. Attorneys in other major metropolitan
areas have adopted this approach.
In the 106th Congress, the House passed the Project Exile: The Safe Streets and
Neighborhoods Act of 2000 (H.R. 4051). This bill would have amended the Violent Crime
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322) to create a program to provide
firearms sentencing incentive grants to encourage states to adopt programs that would be
similar to Project Exile. For similar legislation introduced in the 107th Congress, see H.R.
534, S. 16, and S. 619.
Other Possible Issues. Other issues considered in the 106th Congress that are likely
to emerge in the 107th Congress in conjunction with the gun show issue include: 1) requiring
child safety locks, 2) increasing regulation of semiautomatic assault weapons, 3) widening
the importation ban on high capacity ammunition feeding devices, and 4) prohibiting certain
violent juvenile offenders from possessing firearms.
CRS-11

---

IB10071
06-28-02
Background Check Record Retention and Fees. Attorney General John
Ashcroft recently announced that NICS records on approved sales would be destroyed after
24 hours retention. He maintains that to keep these records longer was a violation of federal
law. Previously, the Department of Justice published a rule that would reduce from 6 to 3
months the length of time that the Federal Bureau of Investigation would retain such
information on approved sales (see 64 Fed. Reg. 10263-10265, March 3, 1999). The
National Rifle Association (NRA) had challenged the DOJ rule to retain the records on
approved sales for 6 months in federal court. On July 11, 2000, however, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in the case of NRA v. Reno (No. 99-5270, 216
F. 3d 122; 2000 U.S. App. Lexis 15906), found that nothing in the Brady Handgun Violence
Prevention Act prohibits the temporary retention of information about lawful firearm
transfers.
In regard to fees, the FY2002 Commerce-Justice-State appropriations act (P.L. 107-77)
includes a provision that prohibits user fees being charged for background checks under the
Brady Handgun Prevention Act.
FY2002 Gun Violence Reduction Initiatives. For FY2002 gun-violence reduction
initiatives, Congress has provided increased funding in three categories: 1) federal, state, and
local prosecutors for gun-related offenses, 2) safety locks and smart gun research, and 3)
funding for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). Funding for ATF is
provided through the Treasury-Postal appropriations act (P.L. 107-67). All other gun-
violence reduction funding is provided through the Commerce-Justice-State appropriations
act (P.L. 107-77) for various programs in the Department of Justice.
The Commerce-Justice-State appropriations conference report language includes several
earmarks for gun-violence reduction programs. For gun prosecutors, Congress has provided
an earmark of $9 million to hire additional U.S. Attorneys, matching the Administration’s
request. For state and local prosecutors, Congress has provided an earmark $50 million,
instead of the $70 million requested by the Administration. In addition, Congress provided
an earmark of $15 million for Project Sentry, a program to establish a federal-state
partnership to deter gun violence through safe school task forces.
To ensure that child safety locks are available for every handgun in the United States,
Congress has provided an earmark of $50 million, instead of the $75 million for Program
ChildSafe requested by the Administration. Conference report language indicated that the
conferees did not fund an earmark included in Senate report language of $6 million for a gun
surveillance technology pilot program that is being developed acoustically pinpoint gunshots.
Conference report language was silent as to additional funding for smart gun research.
For FY2002, Congress has provided ATF with $823 million, a 6.8% increase over the
agency’s FY2001 appropriation. This amount is $20 million more than the Administration’s
request, and includes the following budget increases: (1) $10 million for non-pay inflation
costs, (2) $3 million for pay adjustments, (3) $500,000 to improve licensing and regulatory
operations, (4) $3 million to expand the Integrated Violence Reduction Strategy, and (5)
nearly $4 million to upgrade the National Tracing Center. In addition, in the Defense
Department appropriations act (P.L. 107-117), Congress has provided ATF with $31 million
in emergency supplemental funding for Homeland Security efforts.
CRS-12

---

IB10071
06-28-02
In A Blueprint for New Beginnings, the Bush Administration singled out the Youth
Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative (YCGII) as one of Treasury’s law enforcement bureaus’
best practices. To expand the YCGII to 12 additional cities in FY2001, Congress provided
ATF with $19 million to hire 72 agents and 98 inspectors. This increase brought total funding
for this program to $76 million and expanded the program’s presence to 50 cities. The
objective of the YCGII is to reduce youth firearm violence and firearms trafficking among
youth by making federal resources, such as ATF’s firearms tracing and ballistics technology,
available to state and local law enforcement agencies, and by providing coordination of these
efforts. While Treasury-Postal appropriations report language was silent on increases for this
program, FY2002 funding for the YCGII is likely to approach $85 million.
CRS-13

---