In the past couple weeks (May 19th, 2022), Senator Cory Booker introduced a bill to the Senate. The bill was then referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The bill, concise and relatively straightforward, is distinctly troubling to firearm owners for a number of reasons.
What follows is a breakdown of the key elements in the proposed legislation, which I’m sure will be changed and modified as time goes on. The best case would be to scrap this and go a different route, but I’m not a politician, so…
Key words and elements will be bolded and underlined. These formatting elements don’t exist in the original bill. And please remember – I’m not a lawyer or legislator. I’m a guy who likes to read. Sometimes, as you’ll see below, I read things that I don’t like.
2(a) The General Idea
§ 932. License for the acquisition or receipt of firearms
“(a) In General.—Except as provided in subsection (d), it shall be unlawful for any individual to purchase or receive a firearm unless the individual has a valid Federal firearm license.
Spelled out right there at the top, we see the core idea – everyone that wants to acquire a firearm must have an FFL. This isn’t like the currently existing FFLs, which allow gunsmiths, gun dealers, and firearm manufacturers to sell, modify, or make firearms. This is something new.
2(b) What FFL is this?
“(b) Establishment Of Federal License To Purchase Or Receive Firearms.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall establish a Federal system for issuing a Federal firearm license to eligible individuals for firearms transferred to such individual.
This is a license that would directly affect the individual gun purchaser. Much like a gun dealer, who has to have an FFL to buy, sell, or transfer firearms, you (an individual) would need a license to receive a firearm. This license isn’t for everyone, though. You need to be eligible to get the license.
“(A) an individual shall be eligible to receive such a license if the individual—
“(i) has completed training in firearms safety, including—
“(I) a written test, to demonstrate knowledge of applicable firearms laws; and
“(II) hands-on testing, including firing testing, to demonstrate safe use and sufficient accuracy of a firearm; and
In order to be allowed to purchase a firearm, you need to show that you know how to use a firearm. I suppose this isn’t much different from getting your driver’s license: you need to pass the driving test to show that you know how to drive… before you’re really allowed to drive. And, much like the driver’s license test, there’s a written test on the rules.
Of course, those driver’s license tests come bundled with a familiar organization that oversees the whole process: the DMV. This bill doesn’t quite mention a particular department or testing standards for acquiring these FFLs, which I’m sure will translate into some serious legal problems for gun purchasers as the system is implemented. The Attorney General is supposed to establish whatever system ends up being used… which at least gives us someone to write to if there’s a problem.
Don’t worry, though – there’s even more requirements for the FFL.
“(ii) as part of the process for applying for such a license—
“(I) has submitted to a background investigation and criminal history check of the individual;
“(II) has submitted proof of identity;
“(III) has submitted the fingerprints of the individual; and
“(IV) has submitted identifying information on the firearm that the person intends to obtain, including the make, model, and serial number, and the identity of the firearm seller or transferor;
This is a pretty familiar process to people in California, but may not be elsewhere. Still, you’ve now got 6 steps (at least) on the road to acquiring a new firearm.
2(b) One and Done, Right?
“(D) each license issued under this section shall be valid for the purchase of a single firearm, which shall be purchased not later than 30 days after the date on which the license is issued;
Another key difference between these FFLs and those used by gun dealers (and the one issued for you to drive a car): you will need a license for each individual gun. You don’t even get a general license that allows you to purchase a particular class of firearms. This would be like returning to the DMV for a brand new license every time you got a new car. If they want to scare us with long lines and extra paperwork, this is a pretty good way to do it.
I’m not certain if you’d simply need to run through the background check, fingerprint, proof of identity, and firearm identification for each purchase, or if you’d also need to complete the education requirements. We’ll see how that shakes out.
“(E) a license issued under the system shall expire on the date that is 5 years after the date on which the license was issued; and
Regardless of a clean record or anything else, you’d need to re-up every 5 years. And remember, this is an individual license for each individual firearm.
Goodness, how much will the fees be?
2(b) Acquiring the License
“(B) a license issued under the system is available at a designated local office, which shall be located in both urban and rural areas;
A firearm registry, with a license for each individual firearm? It’s sounding a bit like Red Dawn in here. I doubt all these records will be kept solely on paper. In today’s world, this could be a politically-minded hacker’s dream.
“(C) the Attorney General shall issue or deny a license under this section not later than 30 days after the date on which the application for such license is received;
California has a waiting period already, which will have a problem with overlapping the proposed time period. In Cali, you need to submit a request to purchase the firearm (including the background check and such), then wait 10 days before picking it up. However, have to pick the firearm up within 30 days, or else you have to start over again. The 30-day turnaround proposed by this bill, plus any mailing time if it’s a physical letter of approval, could cause purchases in California to stay on a cycle of mismatched days and invalid pickup/wait times.
3(B) Getting Denied
“(II) JUDICIAL REVIEW.—An applicant denied a license under subclause (I) may file an action in the appropriate district court of the United States for seeking review of the denial.
And now, so we have all the bases covered: subclause (I)
“(I) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General may deny a license under this section if the Attorney General determines that the applicant poses a significant danger of bodily injury to self or others by possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm, after examining factors the Attorney General considers are relevant to the determination, including—
The included reasons to deny an application are just about as you’d expect: history of threats or acts of violence, domestic violence or restraining orders, prior arrests and convictions involving serious crimes or violence, drug and alcohol abuse, history of unsafe use or storage of firearms, and so on. However, one particular reason for denial stands out:
“(gg) any recent acquisition of firearms, ammunition, or other deadly weapons; and
If you’ve recently bought another firearm, ammunition, or other deadly weapons, you may be denied on this particular Federal firearm license. It’s the Attorney General’s way of saying, “I think you have enough firearms for now.” Which really begs the question: How recent is recent? Do you have to wait 30 days after you pick up ammo?
By now, I’m sure you realize that I’m not a fan of this bill. There’s just too many problems and open-ended caveats that make it incredibly difficult to acquire a new firearm. Don’t worry, though. I’ve only scratched the surface on this legislation.
Subsection 4+
Or, “A Slew of Difficulties”
Despite how short the bill seems on paper, each individual line presents a potential problem. This last section in the breakdown is a montage of other issues… largely to keep this post from ending up even longer than is conscionable.
“4(A) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall revoke a license issued under this section if the Attorney General determines that—
Let’s pretend that some legal issue came up in the course of purchasing another firearm. Would the Attorney General be able to revoke your other licenses? Sub-subsections (i) and (ii) of this clause indicate that the AG very well could. In colloquial speech, ‘deny’ means to prevent something, while ‘revoke’ means to take back something that has already been granted. And this particular section is separate from the section on ‘denial of a license.’ This indicates to me that a license could be taken away after it is granted.
“4(C) PROCEDURES.—The Attorney General shall establish procedures to ensure that any firearm is removed from any individual when the individual’s license is revoked under this paragraph
And once your license is revoked, your firearm may be taken away. Potentially any (meaning: all) firearms you possess.
“Sec. 3. (1) IN GENERAL.—It shall be unlawful for any person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not so licensed, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (t).
That sounds like the end of private party transfers. All purchases and transfers must go through a (traditional) FFL.
Also, how are we going to differentiate the acronyms when talking about an FFL (business) and an FFL (for individual purchase)?
Wrapping This Up
If you’ve read this far, then I have to applaud you. As troubling as this legislation appears to be, the legal writing is still dry and formulaic. I’m certainly not the first to declare legal writing a tough read. Still, you’ve stuck it out. I’d encourage you to apply that reading skill to the bill in question, mostly to get a full look at all the other interesting bits.
This bill modifies Title 18 of the United States Code. That chunk of laws details federal crimes and criminal procedure. More specifically, this bill proposes changes to Section 922 (detailing purchase, transfer, and possession of firearms) and the creation of Section 932 (“License for the acquisition or receipt of firearms”) of Chapter 44 (discussing firearms).
The long and short of it is: If you want to require a license for each individual firearm and you’d like to create a centralized gun registry, S4263 is the bill for you.
Personally, I say no thank you.
Mindful Munitions 