Overview
Title
To amend title 18, United States Code, to restrict the possession of certain firearms, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 8600, or the "GOSAFE Act," is a plan to make rules about certain kinds of automatic guns, wanting people to give them back for money, and making sure new gun ideas are safe.
Summary AI
H.R. 8600, also known as the "Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion Act" or the "GOSAFE Act," proposes to amend Title 18 of the United States Code to place restrictions on the possession, sale, and manufacturing of certain gas-operated semi-automatic firearms. The bill outlines definitions and establishes prohibitions on these types of firearms and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, along with exemptions for specific entities like governmental bodies. It also introduces penalties for violations, provides for firearm buy-back programs funded by grants, and sets procedures for the review and approval of new firearm designs not covered by the restrictions.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed bill, titled the "Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion Act" or the "GOSAFE Act," aims to amend the United States Code to impose restrictions on the possession, manufacturing, and transferring of certain semi-automatic firearms and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. The bill introduces various definitions for technical terms related to firearms and details penalties for violations.
General Summary of the Bill
The GOSAFE Act seeks to restrict the handling of certain firearms, specifically those classified as gas-operated semi-automatic firearms. It outlines definitions for relevant terminologies, imposes prohibitions on various activities related to these firearms, and establishes penalties for violations. The bill also includes provisions for a buy-back program using Byrne grants and stipulates an approval process for new firearm designs through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Additionally, it allows for judicial review of any arbitrary removal from the list of prohibited firearms.
Summary of Significant Issues
One primary issue with the bill is its potential impact on law-abiding citizens who currently use such firearms for lawful purposes, as the restrictions could affect their Second Amendment rights. Additionally, the Attorney General's significant discretion in determining which firearms are prohibited raises concerns about arbitrary decision-making. The highly technical definitions present in the bill may also lead to misunderstandings among individuals who are not firearm experts. Moreover, the proposed penalties in the bill lack clarity on what specific actions would constitute an offense, which could result in legal ambiguities.
There are concerns about the unequal application of the law, as certain exemptions appear to favor government entities and specific license holders, raising ethical questions. The proposed buy-back programs lack defined criteria, creating potential inconsistencies in implementation. The undefined fee structure for firearm design applications could pose financial difficulties, especially to smaller manufacturers. The lengthy timelines for application reviews and appeals could also hinder efficient implementation and decision-making.
Public Impact
Broadly, the bill may have substantial implications for the general public, especially those who own or intend to acquire firearms for personal use. It may restrict access to certain types of firearms and ammunition, thus impacting users' recreational and security-related activities. The buy-back program may offer a means to reduce the circulation of prohibited firearms but could lead to concerns about governmental overreach.
Impact on Stakeholders
Manufacturers and Dealers: The bill could significantly impact firearm manufacturers and dealers as they would need to navigate the complex approval process for new firearm designs while managing compliance with the new restrictions. Smaller manufacturers might face financial challenges due to the undefined fee structures and lengthy review timelines.
Consumers and Gun Owners: Current owners of the targeted firearms may find themselves unable to lawfully possess or transfer their firearms, affecting their rights and established practices.
Government Entities and License Holders: These groups may benefit from the exemptions provided, ensuring they can continue their activities with the specified firearms. However, these advantages could be criticized by those who view the exemptions as unfair.
Overall, the GOSAFE Act presents thorough measures aimed at controlling specific firearms and their accessories. Yet, it also poses several challenges and concerns regarding rights implications, equitable enforcement, and operational transparency. Addressing these issues will be crucial to ensuring the bill's successful implementation in a manner that balances public safety with individual rights.
Financial Assessment
The bill, H.R. 8600, commonly referred to as the "Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion Act" or the "GOSAFE Act," includes several financial elements that warrant examination. These elements are primarily focused on penalties for violations and financial mechanisms to support the legislative goals of the bill.
Financial Penalties
One of the bill's critical financial components is the imposition of penalties for violations. The bill proposes that anyone violating the specified subsections of Section 922 (v or w) could face fines of up to $5,000, imprisonment for up to 12 months, or both. Additionally, if a person commits or attempts another federal offense while in possession of a prohibited gas-operated semi-automatic firearm, the penalties increase significantly, with fines reaching up to $250,000 and imprisonment for a term of 2 to 10 years. These penalties are intended to serve as deterrents against illegal possession, sale, or manufacture of restricted firearms.
Buy-Back Programs
The bill encourages the use of Byrne grants for implementing buy-back programs for gas-operated semi-automatic firearms and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. This financial allocation aims to incentivize the surrender of such items, presumably to reduce their prevalence and related risks. However, there is a need for clear criteria to ensure the consistent and efficient implementation of these buy-back programs, as identified in the issues section. Without clear guidelines, there is a potential for misuse or inefficient use of allocated funds.
Firearm Safety Trust Fund and Application Fees
The establishment of the Firearm Safety Trust Fund is another aspect of financial consideration in the bill. This fund is designed to collect fees associated with the approval of new firearm designs not covered by current restrictions. The fees should be substantial enough to cover the costs of processing applications, which are managed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Although this mechanism ties directly to the bill's objective of regulating firearm designs, the lack of a clearly defined fee structure could present a financial burden, especially for smaller manufacturers. This aspect could be seen as a barrier to entry for market players, affecting competition and innovation in firearm design.
Allocation of Resources
While the bill authorizes appropriations to carry out its measures, it does not specify the amounts, leaving it open to future budgetary decisions. This lack of detail may affect the implementation and oversight of the bill's provisions. There is uncertainty around how much will be allocated for enforcement, regulatory activities, and the administration of buy-back programs. Additionally, with the potential for lengthy application reviews and appeals processes, significant financial and human resources will be required to manage these aspects effectively, as noted in the associated issues.
In summary, while H.R. 8600 makes provisions for fines, buy-back programs, and supports regulatory funding through the Firearm Safety Trust Fund, there are several areas where financial clarity is necessary to ensure successful implementation and to avoid any potential economic barriers for stakeholders involved.
Issues
The broad prohibition of 'gas-operated semi-automatic firearms' and 'large capacity ammunition feeding devices' as outlined in Section 2 may impact law-abiding citizens who use such firearms for non-criminal purposes. This section could affect individuals' rights under the Second Amendment and requires clear guidelines and allowances for such scenarios.
Section 5 outlines that the Attorney General has significant discretion in determining which firearms are prohibited without clearly defined criteria. This could lead to arbitrary decision-making and inconsistent determinations, potentially impacting manufacturers and consumers alike.
The definitions of 'semi-automatic firearm' and 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' in Section 2 are highly technical and may be difficult for non-experts to understand, potentially leading to legal misunderstandings or misinterpretations.
Section 4 outlines penalties but lacks clarity on what constitutes an offense, particularly in subsections (v) and (w) of Section 922, which could lead to legal ambiguities and inconsistent enforcement.
The exemptions in Section 922(v)(2) and 922(w)(3) may be perceived as favoring government entities and certain license holders, leading to unequal application of the law and potential ethical concerns.
Section 3 introduces 'buy-back programs' for gas-operated semi-automatic firearms and large capacity ammunition feeding devices without specifying clear criteria, potentially leading to inconsistent implementation or misuse of funds.
The fee structure in Section 5 for manufacturers submitting firearm design applications is not clearly defined and may lead to high costs without oversight, posing financial challenges particularly for smaller manufacturers.
The timeline for application reviews and appeals in Section 935 is lengthy, with up to 240 days for initial review and 180 days for appeals, which may delay processes and negatively impact manufacturers.
There is a lack of oversight or review mechanisms post-enactment in Section 5 to assess the effectiveness or impact of the legislative measures, potentially leading to unchecked long-term consequences.
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 the law can be officially called the "Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion Act" or simply the "GOSAFE Act."
2. Restrictions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section defines terms related to firearms, such as "semi-automatic firearm," "gas-operated," and "large capacity ammunition feeding device." It also outlines restrictions on manufacturing, selling, transferring, possessing, and importing specific firearms and ammunition feeding devices, with some exceptions for certain government entities and activities.
3. Use of Byrne grants for buy-back programs for gas-operated semi-automatic firearms and large capacity ammunition feeding devices Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section states that Byrne grants can be used to compensate people who turn in gas-operated semi-automatic firearms and large capacity ammunition magazines as part of buy-back programs.
4. Penalties Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends U.S. law to impose penalties on anyone who violates specific parts of section 922 by allowing fines up to $5,000 and/or imprisonment for up to 12 months. Additionally, if someone commits another serious federal crime while unlawfully possessing a certain type of firearm, the penalties include fines up to $250,000 and imprisonment for 2 to 10 years.
Money References
- Section 924(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: “(9)(A) Whoever violates subsection (v) or (w) of section 922 shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned not more than 12 months, or both, for each offense.
- “(B) Whoever, while in possession of a gas-operated semi-automatic firearm in violation of section 922(v), commits, or attempts to commit, any other Federal offense punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year, shall, in addition to the punishment provided for such offense, be fined not more than $250,000, imprisoned for a term not less than 2 years and not more than 10 years, or both.”.
5. Prohibited firearm determinations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, Chapter 44 of title 18 in the United States Code is amended to require that the Attorney General, through the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, manages a list of prohibited semi-automatic firearms and oversees the approval process for new designs. The Attorney General also sets fees, handles appeals by manufacturers, and ensures that any removal of firearms from the list can be contested in court if done arbitrarily.
935. Prohibited firearm determinations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the process for the Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, to determine and publish a list of banned gas-operated semi-automatic firearms, review applications for firearm design approvals, handle appeals, establish a fee structure, and manage a Firearm Safety Trust Fund for related activities. It also allows individuals to seek judicial review if a firearm is removed from the banned list, and authorizes funding for these activities.