Understanding United States Gun Laws: A Comprehensive Guide

Time to read: 25 minutes

Introduction

Gun laws in the United States are a complex and often debated topic. At the federal level, several key laws have been enacted to regulate the ownership, sale, and use of firearms. This guide provides an overview of the major federal gun laws that have shaped the U.S. gun regulation landscape over time. Let’s dive in.

This guide is broken into time periods each reflecting a unique time in America. I hope to provide some context for the decisions leading up to landmark regulations by discussing in the order they came.

Some quick vocabulary:

• Law – created by Congress and enforced by the judiciary and law enforcement agencies (AKA “The Feds”)
• Legislation – refers to the process of drafting, debating, and voting on laws prepared by legislators (AKA Senators and Representatives)
• Regulation – rule or directive created by executive agencies or departments (e.g., Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration) to carry out legislation 

For example, Congress passes the Clean Air Act (law) through legislation, which provides the framework for regulating air pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) then creates regulations specifying the limits on emissions from different industries.  The EPA also defines how these limits will be monitored and enforced.

Early American Attitudes Towards Firearms

Guns in the early days of the 13 colonies were household staples. A tool to defend the settlement against Indian attacks and for harvesting game in the surrounding forest. Bringing a matchlock or flintlock rifle every time you left the safety of the settlement was common practice and most likely required for personal safety.

Below are two short videos that show what the settlers were carrying daily through the woods. These same firearms were relied upon to establish the 13 colonies and fight the British in the Revolutionary War.

The Museums of History NSW YouTube channel has a short video on the firing process of a matchlock musket. This gives you an idea of 1600 and 1700s firearm technology. You better hope it isn’t raining.

You can see the firing process of a flintlock musket which was used during the Revolutionary War below. (god bless John Browning and Eugene Stoner)

One of the biggest challenges when using these early firearms was the rain. Your match rope going out or your powder getting wet made for a bad day.

The Second Amendment (1791)

“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.”

During the time the Founding Fathers drafted the constitution, there were two major political parties – the Federalist and the Anti-federalist. 

To oversimplify, the Federalist believed in a strong central government while the Anti-federalist believed in a strong state government to protect against tyranny.

James Madison had both the Federalist and Anti-federalist in mind when drafting the Second Amendment. The Constitution allowed Congress to raise and support armies with the Second Amendment acting as a compromise to make sure that this federal army was not going to be turned against the people. The Second Amendment allowed for a balance of power between the states and the federal government.

At the time, the Second Amendment was not primarily seen as an individual’s right to bear arms for personal protection, but rather to enable citizens to be part of a collective militia. This militia would avert the use of the national army against its citizens. The writings of colonial thinkers Noah Webster and Alexander Hamilton share these thoughts. Source: The Second Amendment: Firearms in the U.S. | History

YouTube commenter @Realmisterwolf provided additional context behind the drafting of the Second Amendment and the ideology at the time:

In conclusion, the Second Amendment was used as a compromise between the Federalist and Anti-federalist to provide security for the people against a tyrannical government.

Militia Acts (1792, 1808)

The Militia Act of 1792 was a law that required every free, able-bodied white male citizen aged 18 to 45 to enroll in the militia, provide their own weapons. These militiamen were required to bring their own gear and be prepared to defend the nation. The act aimed to create a uniform and organized militia system across the United States to ensure that the young nation could defend itself effectively. The nation would rely on its citizens rather than a standing army.

The Militia Act of 1808 provided federal funding to help states arm and equip their militias. Before this act, individual militia members had to provide their own weapons and gear, which often led to inconsistencies in the quality and readiness of the militia forces. The 1808 act aimed to address these issues by allocating money from the federal government to the states, specifically for purchasing weapons, ammunition, and other necessary equipment for the militia.

The Militia Act of 1808 was created to ensure that state militias were better prepared and equipped by providing federal financial support. This was an important step in making sure the militias were more reliably prepared to defend the country.

Dred Scott Decision (1857)

The Dred Scott Decision is often called the worst court ruling in U.S. history and I would agree.

The Dred Scott Decision was a landmark ruling because it denied citizenship and rights to African Americans. It also allowed the expansion of slavery into new territories. The ruling heightened tensions between the North and South.

Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s opinion provides some context on the motivation behind the ruling, “It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right… to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”.

The Supreme Court used the potential implications of gun ownership as part of its reasoning to deny citizenship rights to African Americans.

Post-Civil War and the Fourteenth Amendment (1868)

The 14th Amendment supported the 2nd Amendment through two clauses – the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.

The 14th Amendment’s Incorporation Doctrine (an interpretation on Due Process by the Supreme Court) applied the Bill of Rights to a state level. Meanwhile, the 2nd Amendment supporting the right to bear arms at the federal level,

The 14th Amendment prohibited states from infringing on the natural rights set forth by the Bill of Rights.

The Equal Protection Clause requires states to treat individuals equally under the law. Gun control laws that are perceived to discriminate against certain groups of people can be challenged under this clause further supporting the right to bear arms for all people..

National Firearms Act (1934)

The 1920 and ‘30s were tough times in America. Organized crime was rampant spurred by Prohibition. The Great Depression was destroying the American dream leaving many out of work fending for themselves.

Gangsters like Al Capone filled the gap between supply and demand by creating an elaborate network of liquor distribution. To defend themselves from the law, they utilized guns such as the infamous Tommy Gun. The mob also used 1911s, revolvers, and sawed off shotguns.

President Franklin Delenor Roosevelt passed the National Firearms Act of 1934 in an attempt to stop the purchase and sale of machine guns by the mob. The act worked by imposing a $200 federal tax stamp on the purchase of these firearms (about $3,500 in today’s dollars) and requiring the firearm to be registered to the owner. Criminals caught using NFA restricted firearms without a tax stamp faced a more severe fine and jail time.

The firearms subject to the NFA of 1934 were meant to target the specific weapons used at the time by organized crime. 

• Firearms subject included rifles having barrels less than 18 inches in length
• Certain firearms described as “any other weapons”
• Machine guns
• Firearm mufflers and silencers

Short barreled shotguns were later added to the NFA firearms list in 1939 after the United States v. Miller case claiming a sawed off shotgun is absent “some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia,” and thus “we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”

The original $200 tax stamp is still present today with the firearms covered in this law almost never being used in a crime as shown by Mark Follman’s Mass Shootings Database on Mother Jones. (I think paying the $200 is a joke in the 2020s but lawmakers don’t want to get their hands dirty)

*Check out my post National Firearms Act: What You Should Know to learn more about why you have to pay $200 for a tax stamp.

Federal Firearms Act (1938)

The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 (“FFA”) imposed a federal license requirement on gun manufacturers, importers, and individuals in the business of selling firearms. The FFA was designed to suppress crime by regulating firearms and ammunition traffic.

The FFA required license holders to keep and maintain customer records. It also made it illegal to transfer firearms to certain classes of persons, primarily people convicted of felonies.

The FAA prohibited interstate shipment and imposed age limits in addition to the license requirement and prohibited transfer to felons.

• Shipment of firearms in interstate commerce was prohibited except between federally licensed manufacturers, dealers, and importers.
• Federally licensed dealers were prohibited from selling shotguns and rifles to persons under 18 years of age and all other types of firearms to persons under 21 years of age. (Most 14 years old’s here in Texas know how to handle a firearm better than the politicians who passed this law)

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (1968)

The OCCSSA (I just made this acronym up) was broader in scope and focused on improving law enforcement and criminal justice practices. The OCCSSA addressed crime at a systemic level with a small portion focused on gun control.

The small portion of gun control provisions in the act prohibited interstate trade in handguns and increased the minimum age to 21 for purchasing handguns.

The OCCSSA was strengthened later in 1968 by the Gun Control Act.

Gun Control Act (1968)

The GCA was enacted in response to a series of high-profile assassinations in the 1960s, including those of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert Kennedy, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The GCA also repealed the Federal Firearms Act of 1938 (FFA); however, many components of the FFA were reenacted.

Key Provisions of the GCA:

• Licensing and Record-Keeping: The GCA required anyone involved in the business of manufacturing, importing, or dealing in firearms to obtain a federal license. These licensed dealers, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), had to maintain records of all firearms transactions, which helped in tracing guns used in crimes. (may also be used to keep a national registry of firearms owners…)
• Prohibited Persons: The GCA made it illegal for certain groups of people to buy or own firearms. This included felons, fugitives, drug addicts, and individuals with mental illnesses. It set age restrictions, prohibiting the sale of firearms to individuals under 18 for rifles and shotguns, and under 21 for all other firearms.
• Interstate Commerce Restrictions: The GCA restricted the interstate sale of firearms, meaning that firearms could not be sold across state lines unless the transaction was between licensed dealers.
• Import Restrictions: The GCA prohibited the importation of firearms that were not considered suitable for sporting purposes. This meant that only firearms used for activities like hunting and target shooting could be imported. (no fun)
• Serial Numbers: All newly manufactured and imported firearms were required to have a serial number, making it easier to track and trace them.

Firearm Owners Protection Act (1986)

The Firearms Owners Protection Act was passed in an effort to protect the rights of gun owners while still maintaining regulations to prevent crime. The main takeaway from FOPA was the ban on civilian ownership of new machine guns…

Here are what lawmakers had to say on the matter of machine guns:

“We must take steps to ensure that these weapons of war are not available to those who would use them to commit acts of terror and violence.”

– Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA)

“Machine guns are the tools of murderers, gangsters, and drug traffickers. There is no place in a civilized society for a weapon that can fire 700 rounds per minute.”

– Senator Metzenbaum (D-OH)

“While I am a strong proponent of Second Amendment rights, there is a clear distinction between the rights of law-abiding citizens and the need to prevent the spread of military-grade weapons in our society.”

– Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC)

Interstate Travel Protections:

• FOPA made it easier for gun owners to travel across state lines with their firearms. As long as the firearms were legal in both the starting point and destination, owners were protected from local gun control laws during travel.

Restrictions on ATF Inspections:

• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) had the authority to inspect gun dealers, but FOPA limited these inspections to once a year unless there were multiple violations. This aimed to reduce harassment of gun dealers.

Ban on Civilian Ownership of New Machine Guns:

• One of the most significant parts of FOPA was the ban on civilian ownership of new machine guns made after May 19, 1986. This meant no new machine guns could be bought by civilians, but those already owned or made before this date were grandfathered in and could still be owned and transferred.

Safe Passage Provision:

• This provision allowed gun owners to transport unloaded and locked firearms through states where their firearms might otherwise be illegal, as long as the trip was continuous and uninterrupted.

Corrections to Previous Law:

• FOPA corrected some legal issues and definitions from the Gun Control Act of 1968, making it clearer and fairer for gun owners and dealers.

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993)

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, often called the Brady Act, was a significant piece of gun control legislation passed by the U.S. Congress in 1993. Named after James Brady, the White House Press Secretary who was severely injured during the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981, the act aimed to implement stricter controls on handgun purchases to reduce gun violence and enhance public safety.

The Act is composed of several provisions mostly revolving around preventing criminals from purchasing firearms through various measures.

Background Checks:

• The Brady Act required federally licensed firearms dealers to conduct background checks on prospective handgun buyers. These checks were to be conducted through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which was established later as a result of the Act.

Waiting Period:

• Initially, the Act imposed a five-day waiting period for handgun purchases. This waiting period was intended to allow sufficient time for the background check to be completed and to act as a cooling-off period to prevent impulsive acts of violence.

Prohibited Persons:

• The Act reinforced the prohibition on firearm sales to individuals who were convicted felons, fugitives from justice, drug addicts, individuals with certain mental health conditions, those dishonorably discharged from the military, and individuals subject to restraining orders for domestic violence or convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses.

Permanent System:

• The Brady Act mandated the creation of a permanent, nationwide system for background checks (NICS), which became operational in 1998. The NICS streamlined the process of background checks and provided instant feedback to dealers.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994-2004)

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) aimed to reduce gun violence by restricting the manufacture, transfer, and possession of certain semi-automatic firearms defined as “assault weapons,” as well as large-capacity magazines. The ban was part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994.

The ban covered three provisions:

• Assault Weapons: The ban specifically targeted semi-automatic firearms that had certain military-style features, such as folding stocks, pistol grips, bayonet mounts, flash suppressors, and grenade launchers. The law included a list of 19 specific firearms that were banned by name, along with criteria for defining other firearms as assault weapons based on their features.
• Large-Capacity Magazines: The law prohibited the manufacture, transfer, or possession of magazines that could hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, which were considered large-capacity.
• Grandfather Clause: Firearms and magazines that were legally owned before the enactment of the ban were grandfathered in, meaning their possession remained legal even if they met the criteria of an assault weapon or large-capacity magazine.

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban included a sunset provision set it to expire after 10 years unless Congress reauthorized it.

In 2004, a bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives to extend the ban for another decade, but it never came to a vote. Consequently, on September 13, 2004, the ban expired. “Assault weapons” and large-capacity magazines became legal again unless restricted by state or local laws. The debate over the ban’s effectiveness in reducing gun crime was a component for not extending the ban.

This act helped coin the phrase “Assault Rifle” for any firearm falling under its broad provisions.

Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (2005)

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) passed in 2005 shielding gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers from being sued if their products are misused by others. This means if someone uses a gun to commit a crime, the companies that made or sold the gun can’t be held legally responsible for the harm caused by the criminal actions of the gun user, as long as the firearm was functioning as intended.

PLCAA was enacted because many lawsuits were being filed against gun manufacturers and sellers, attempting to hold them accountable for crimes committed with their products. The aim of these lawsuits was to claim damages for injuries or deaths resulting from gun violence. However, Congress believed these legal actions were unfairly targeting the gun industry, which already operates under strict federal and state regulations.

The debate around the PLCAA centers on its implications for gun control and victims’ rights. Supporters argue that it protects a lawful industry from being driven out of business by frivolous lawsuits, ensuring that citizens can still access firearms for legal purposes like self-defense, hunting, and sports. They claim it prevents an abuse of the legal system that could destabilize the gun industry and other sectors.

Opponents argue that the PLCAA gives the gun industry unique protections that other industries don’t have, which undermines accountability. They believe it prevents victims of gun violence from seeking justice and holding companies responsible for negligent practices, such as failing to implement safety measures or knowingly supplying firearms to irresponsible dealers.

Sandy Hook – Remington (Bushmaster):
The Sandy Hook – Remington Arms settlement challenged the limitations of the PLCAA’s protections. The case was initially dismissed due to the PLCAA’s legal shield. However, Remington was found in violation of Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act stating the advertising promoted the weapon’s military and assault capabilities, appealing to people like the shooter. 

The settlement highlighted a potential legal pathway for victims of gun violence to hold manufacturers accountable despite the broad immunity granted by the PLCAA. This case set a precedent for how the marketing practices of gun manufacturers could be scrutinized and potentially litigated, even under the protective umbrella of the PLCAA.

National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvements

NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA)

The NIAA Improved the NICS system by addressing the information gaps present in the NICS system. The NIAA  was a response to the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting where 32 students were killed and 23 injured. The shooter was able to purchase a Glock 19 and Walther .22 caliber pistol even though he had a history of severe mental illness. 

In December 2005 (two years prior to the shooting), a Virginia court found the shooter to be mentally ill and an imminent danger to himself, leading to a temporary detention order and a requirement for outpatient treatment.

Key provisions include:

• Improving the automation and transmittal of criminal history records, including mental health adjudications and commitments, to federal and state repositories
• Enhancing requirements for federal departments and agencies to provide relevant information to NICS.
• Providing implementation assistance to states to improve their capacity to perform NICS checks.
• Establishing penalties for noncompliance with the reporting requirements.

Major Supreme Court Decisions

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

The District of Columbia v. Heller case in 2008 was a landmark Supreme Court decision ruling in favor of the Second Amendment.

The case arose because Washington D.C. had very strict gun laws. D.C.’s gun laws included:

1. Banned handgun possession by making it illegal to carry unregistered firearms
2. Prohibited the registration of handguns
3. Required lawfully owned firearms to be kept unloaded and either disassembled or locked

Dick Heller, a D.C. special police officer, wanted to keep a handgun at home for self-defense, but was denied a license. He sued the city, arguing that these laws violated his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Heller, making two key decisions:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for lawful purposes, such as self-defense in the home. This right exists regardless of service in a militia.
2. The D.C. handgun ban and the requirement to keep lawful firearms disassembled or locked violated the Second Amendment.

However, the Court also clarified that this right is not unlimited. They stated that some gun regulations are still constitutional, such as:

• Prohibitions on gun possession by felons and the mentally ill
• Laws forbidding guns in sensitive places like schools and government buildings
• Regulations on the sale of firearms

This decision was significant because it was the first time in decades that the Supreme Court had interpreted the Second Amendment, and it established that the amendment protects an individual right to own guns, not just a collective right tied to militia service.

It’s worth noting that this case only applied to federal jurisdictions like Washington D.C

McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010)

In 2009, Chicago and its suburb Oak Park had laws that almost entirely banned private citizens from owning handguns. Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old retired maintenance engineer, along with other residents, challenged these laws. They argued that the handgun ban left them vulnerable to crime and violated their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment does apply to state and local governments. This decision meant that the handgun bans in Chicago and Oak Park were unconstitutional because they violated the Second Amendment rights of individuals.

The McDonald decision built on the earlier District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) case, which recognized an individual’s right to possess firearms for self-defense under federal law. McDonald extended this right to state and local levels, significantly limiting the power of states and municipalities to restrict gun ownership

Recent Legislation and Executive Actions

The most recent major gun control legislation was the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which was signed into law by President Joe Biden in June 2022.

Key Provisions

1. Enhanced Background Checks: The BSCA requires additional investigative steps in the background check process for individuals aged 18 to 20 who wish to purchase long guns. This includes reviewing juvenile records and mental health adjudications.
2. Federal Firearm Licensing: The act clarifies which gun sellers must obtain a federal firearms license and conduct background checks on buyers.
3. Trafficking and Straw Purchasing: It establishes federal statutes to define and penalize gun trafficking and straw purchasing (buying a gun for someone who is prohibited from owning one).
4. Domestic Violence: The BSCA prohibits individuals convicted of violent misdemeanors against current or recent former dating partners from possessing firearms for five years.
5. Funding for Crisis Intervention: The act authorizes federal funding for state crisis intervention programs, including Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs), which allow for the temporary removal of firearms from individuals deemed a threat to themselves or others.
6. Community Violence Intervention: It invests $250 million over five years in community violence intervention and prevention initiatives.
7. Mental Health and School Safety: The BSCA increases funding for mental health services and supportive services in schools, and codifies the SchoolSafety.gov clearinghouse, which provides resources on evidence-based strategies to keep schools safe.

Conclusion

The history of federal gun laws in the United States shows a balance between the need to keep people safe and the constitutional right to own guns. Since the Second Amendment was created, important events like the Militia Acts and key Supreme Court decisions in the 20th and 21st centuries have shaped gun regulation based on historical, societal, and legal factors.

Today, federal gun laws keep changing to address new challenges and tragedies. The current situation is a mix of different rules that aim to balance individual freedoms with the need to reduce gun violence. Recent changes, like improvements to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and the outcomes of cases like District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, highlight the ongoing debate about the Second Amendment’s limits.

In the future, federal gun laws will likely be influenced by new technology, changing public opinions, and the ongoing push and pull between federal and state governments. It’s important for lawmakers, advocates, and the public (most importantly) to have informed and respectful discussions, understanding the complexity of these issues and the various viewpoints involved.

Encouraging informed public discussion is vital. By learning about the history of gun laws and considering the current situation, we can have better conversations about the future. Whether supporting stricter controls or protecting individual rights, an informed and engaged public is key to a democratic society that can address the complex challenges of gun regulation..

• Author
• Recent Posts

Blaine

Blaine is a gun and gear nerd with over 20 years of experience around firearms. He has a strong background in both historic and modern firearms which he gained while attending multiple shooting courses. He holds a bachelor's degree from Texas A&M University and is a licensed realtor. Blaine is passionate about the outdoors and enjoys helping readers by giving them firsthand information backed by objective information.

Latest posts by Blaine (see all)

• The Right Gear for Upland Hunting - December 21, 2024
• How to Get a Suppressor in a Few Steps - December 5, 2024
• What is The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act? - November 15, 2024