Overview
Title
To amend title 18, United States Code, to improve firearm destruction practices, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 7746 is a bill that wants to make sure that whenever guns have to be destroyed, all of their parts are completely destroyed so they can't be used again, and if someone doesn't follow this rule, they might get fined or lose their license.
Summary AI
H.R. 7746, titled the “Destroy Zombie Guns Act,” aims to improve practices surrounding firearm destruction. It proposes changes to Title 18 of the United States Code by making it unlawful for any person in the business of destroying firearms to fail to completely destroy every component of a firearm shipped or transported in commerce. Additionally, the bill provides a specific definition for those engaged in the firearm destruction business and introduces penalties, including fines and potential imprisonment, for violations, as well as possible suspension or revocation of licenses for repeat offenders.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, titled the "Destroy Zombie Guns Act," aims to amend title 18 of the United States Code to enhance the practices surrounding the destruction of firearms. The bill seeks to establish legal requirements for businesses involved in the destruction of firearms, particularly those that have been transported across state or international borders. Essential provisions include making it unlawful not to destroy every component of a firearm in such situations. Additionally, the bill provides definitions and penalties related to firearm destruction businesses.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the major issues identified with this bill is the ambiguity surrounding the requirement to destroy "every component of the firearm." This phrase lacks precision and could lead to varied interpretations about which parts need to be destroyed, thereby potentially resulting in inconsistent enforcement. Furthermore, the bill's definition of what constitutes being "engaged in the business" of firearm destruction is seen as overly broad. This could inadvertently encompass small businesses or individuals for whom destruction is an infrequent practice, raising concerns about overregulation.
The penalties outlined in the bill also lack specificity regarding the determination of fines, which could lead to inconsistency and unpredictability in enforcement. Additionally, the process by which the Attorney General may suspend or revoke licenses is not clearly defined, potentially infringing on due process rights by providing insufficient details on notice, hearing processes, or timelines.
Impact on the Public Broadly
If enacted, the bill could have several impacts on the general public. By ensuring the complete destruction of firearms, it could enhance public safety by reducing the likelihood of firearms being reconstructed or misused after destruction. However, the lack of clarity in the bill might lead to uneven enforcement, which could undermine its effectiveness and reputation as a tool for improving firearm safety.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
The bill could have varied effects on different stakeholders. Firearm destruction businesses, in particular, would face increased regulatory scrutiny and a need for compliance, potentially increasing operational costs. Small businesses or individuals who engage in firearm destruction only occasionally could be disproportionately affected by broad definitions and increased regulatory oversight, potentially discouraging their participation in such activities.
Additionally, the legal sector might see an increase in administrative procedures related to hearings and licensing, depending on how the Attorney General's powers to suspend or revoke licenses are exercised. Advocacy groups focused on gun control may view this bill positively as a step towards reducing gun-related risks, while industry groups might have concerns about regulatory burdens and operational complexities.
In conclusion, while the "Destroy Zombie Guns Act" aspires to improve firearm destruction practices, certain aspects of the bill require refinement to ensure clear, consistent, and fair enforcement across all relevant stakeholders.
Issues
The term 'every component of the firearm' in Section 2(a) is vague and could lead to ambiguity as it is not clear which parts must be destroyed. This lack of clarity may require further specification to ensure uniformity in application.
Section 2(b) provides a definition of 'engaged in the business' for firearm destroyers, which may be too broad. It could inadvertently include small businesses or individuals who do not predominantly engage in firearm destruction, raising potential issues concerning overregulation and impacts on small entities.
The penalties outlined in Section 2(c) do not specify guidelines or criteria for determining fines. This omission may result in inconsistent enforcement, leading to uncertainty and potential legal challenges.
The process by which the Attorney General may suspend or revoke a license, as mentioned in Section 2(c), lacks details on notice, hearing processes, or timelines, potentially infringing on due process rights and rendering the enforcement process opaque.
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 first section of this act states that it can be officially called the "Destroy Zombie Guns Act."
2. Safe firearm destruction Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The proposed amendment makes it illegal for businesses involved in firearm destruction to fail to completely destroy every component of any gun transported across state or international borders. Additionally, it defines a firearm destroyer as someone regularly involved in destroying guns for profit and sets penalties, including fines, imprisonment, and license suspension or revocation for violations.