Overview

Title

To modernize Federal firearms laws to account for advancements in technology and less-than-lethal weapons, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

H. R. 2189 is a plan to change laws about guns to include new technologies and safer weapons that don't hurt as much. It wants to make sure the law understands these safer devices and helps police use them.

Summary AI

H. R. 2189 seeks to update U.S. federal firearms laws by recognizing changes in technology and the existence of less-than-lethal weapons. The bill introduces an exemption in the law for certain less-than-lethal projectile devices, clarifying that these devices are not intended to cause death or severe injury and cannot be easily modified to use conventional ammunition. Additionally, the Attorney General is required to determine whether a device meets the definition of a less-than-lethal device within 90 days of receiving a request. This law is proposed to encourage safer methods in law enforcement and align legal definitions with current technological advancements.

Published

2025-03-18
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2025-03-18
Package ID: BILLS-119hr2189ih

Keywords AI

less-than-lethal weapons firearms laws projectile devices law enforcement attorney general determination federal firearms exemption legal definitions non-lethal devices technology advancements u.s. congress legislation

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
461
Pages:
3
Sentences:
13

Language

Nouns: 116
Verbs: 37
Adjectives: 28
Adverbs: 5
Numbers: 13
Entities: 23

Complexity

Average Token Length:
3.83
Average Sentence Length:
35.46
Token Entropy:
4.73
Readability (ARI):
17.37

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The proposed legislation, titled the Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act of 2025, aims to modernize federal firearms laws by accounting for advancements in technology. Specifically, it introduces the concept of "less-than-lethal projectile devices" and seeks to exempt these devices from certain restrictions that currently apply to firearms under Title 18 of the United States Code. The bill delineates criteria for what qualifies as a less-than-lethal projectile device, emphasizing that they should not be capable of discharging projectiles at a velocity exceeding 500 feet per second or cause death or serious bodily injury.

Summary of Significant Issues

Several notable issues arise from the bill's text:

  1. Terminology Clarity and Implications: The term "less-than-lethal" may be misleading. While intended to suggest a safer alternative to traditional firearms, such devices can still cause serious harm or even be fatal in specific circumstances.

  2. Legal Ambiguity: The bill lacks specificity regarding what categorically defines "less-than-lethal" and which types of projectiles apply to the velocity limitation. This ambiguity could lead to inconsistent enforcement and challenges in legal compliance.

  3. Administrative Burden: The bill mandates that the Attorney General determines whether a device meets the criteria of a less-than-lethal projectile device within 90 days of receiving a request. If numerous applications are submitted, this requirement could impose a significant administrative burden, potentially affecting the effectiveness of the law’s implementation.

  4. Enforcement Gaps: The proposed legislation does not outline penalties or consequences for the misclassification of devices, which might weaken the overall enforcement of the law.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

The potential effects of this bill on the general public and specific stakeholders are varied:

  • Public Safety Concerns: The introduction of less-than-lethal projectile devices is aimed at promoting non-lethal options for law enforcement and personal defense. While the intent is to reduce fatalities, the ambiguous definition and potential risks associated with these devices might lead to public safety concerns if misused or misrepresented as completely safe.

  • Law Enforcement: Law enforcement agencies might benefit from having access to alternative devices intended to minimize fatalities and injuries. However, there is a need for clear guidelines to ensure that officers use these devices appropriately and understand their capabilities and limitations.

  • Legal and Regulatory Bodies: The Attorney General’s office, alongside other regulatory agencies, would need to establish a robust framework for evaluating these devices. The potential administrative burdens and lack of clear enforcement mechanisms might require these bodies to allocate additional resources and personnel to manage requests and compliance effectively.

  • Manufacturers: Manufacturers of less-than-lethal devices might see new opportunities if their products are more easily acceptable under federal law. However, they could also face challenges in adhering to any clarified definitions and velocity constraints that may arise from future legislation or court interpretations.

In summary, while the bill intends to modernize firearms regulations and enhance options for de-escalation, significant considerations surrounding its execution, interpretation, and impact on public safety require careful deliberation and possibly further legislative refinement.

Issues

  • The term 'less-than-lethal projectile device' is potentially misleading as it suggests safety when such devices can still cause serious injury or death, leading to possible legal and ethical concerns. (Section 2)

  • The lack of specificity in the term 'less-than-lethal' for projectile devices could lead to ambiguity in legal interpretation, creating potential challenges in enforcement and compliance with regulations. (Section 2)

  • Assigning the Attorney General the responsibility to determine whether a device meets the 'less-than-lethal projectile device' definition within 90 days might become burdensome if there is a high volume of requests, potentially impacting the effective administration of the law. (Section 2)

  • The amendment does not specify penalties or consequences if a 'less-than-lethal projectile device' is misclassified, which represents a substantial enforcement issue that could diminish the efficacy of the law. (Section 2)

  • There is ambiguity in the phrase 'projectile at a velocity exceeding 500 feet per second', and clarification is needed on whether this applies to any type of projectile or only those similar to traditional ammunition to avoid confusion and inconsistent application of the law. (Section 2)

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section introduces the short title of the act, which is officially named the “Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act of 2025.”

2. Exemption of certain less-than-lethal projectile devices from restrictions under title 18, United States Code Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The bill proposes to amend the legal definition of firearms to exempt certain "less-than-lethal projectile devices" which are not capable of and cannot be converted to fire ammunition at velocities above 500 feet per second, are not likely to cause death or serious injury, and do not use typical firearm ammunition feeding mechanisms. It also requires the Attorney General to determine within 90 days whether a device meets this definition when requested.