H.R.3115 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3115, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2025, seeks to regulate assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. The bill amends Title 18 of the United States Code, defining semiautomatic assault weapons based on specific features and characteristics. It prohibits the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of these weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices, with certain exceptions.
Expected Effects
If enacted, the bill would significantly restrict the availability of certain types of firearms and ammunition devices. This could lead to a decrease in mass shootings and gun violence, according to proponents. However, it may also lead to legal challenges from gun rights advocates and impact the ability of law-abiding citizens to own certain firearms for self-defense or sport.
Potential Benefits
- Potential reduction in gun violence and mass shootings due to the ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines.
- Increased public safety by limiting access to firearms perceived as particularly dangerous.
- Standardized definitions of 'assault weapon' and 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' to aid law enforcement.
- Funding for buy-back programs, potentially removing existing assault weapons from circulation.
- Requirement for secure storage of grandfathered weapons, reducing the risk of unauthorized access.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential infringement on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.
- Increased costs for gun owners due to required background checks for transfers of grandfathered weapons.
- Possible creation of a black market for banned weapons and devices.
- Difficulty in defining 'assault weapon' leading to potential bans on firearms used for legitimate purposes.
- Impact on the firearms industry and related jobs due to restrictions on manufacturing and sales.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is complex and subject to interpretation. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, but this right is not unlimited, according to Supreme Court precedent. The central question is whether the restrictions imposed by the bill are reasonable and serve a legitimate government interest, such as public safety.
Proponents argue the bill is consistent with the Second Amendment because it does not ban all firearms, only specific types deemed particularly dangerous. Opponents argue that it infringes on the right to self-defense by restricting access to commonly owned firearms.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).