Gun Control Legislation

William J. Krouse
Specialist in Domestic Security and Crime Policy

Congress has debated the efficacy and constitutionality of federal regulation of firearms and ammunition, with strong advocates arguing for and against greater gun control. Since March 2011, much of the gun control debate in the 112th Congress has swirled around allegations that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) mishandled a Phoenix, AZ-based gun trafficking investigation known as “Operation Fast and Furious.” Senator Charles Grassley, ranking minority Member on the Committee on the Judiciary, and Representative Darrell Issa, Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, have issued two joint staff reports on Operation Fast and Furious and the House committee has held three related hearings. On November 1, 2011, a high-ranking DOJ official testified before the Senate Judiciary’s Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee that he had identified “gun walking” as a potentially risk laden investigative technique in April 2010 in connection with another ATF investigation, Operation Wide Receiver, but failed to inform the Attorney General about the potential risks. On November 8, 2011, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary held a DOJ oversight hearing, and Attorney General Eric Holder fielded questions about Operation Fast and Furious. On November 18, 2011, the President signed into law the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-55). This act includes a provision that reflects a Senate-adopted amendment that forbids the expenditure of any funding provided under it to be used by a federal law enforcement officer to transfer an operable firearm to a person known or suspected to be connected with a drug cartel without that firearm being continuously monitored or controlled. The act, however, does not include language adopted during House full committee markup to prohibit ATF from collecting multiple rifle sales reports in Southwest border states.

On November 16, 2011, the House passed a bill (H.R. 822) that would establish a greater degree of reciprocity between states that issue concealed carry permits for handguns to civilians, than currently exists under state law. On October 11, 2011, the House passed a Veterans’ Benefits Act (H.R. 2349) that would prohibit the Department of Veterans’ Affairs from determining a beneficiary to be mentally incompetent for the purposes of gun control, unless such a determination were made by a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority based upon a finding that the beneficiary posed a danger to himself or others. In May 2011, firearms-related amendments to bills reauthorizing the USA PATRIOT Act were considered (H.R. 1800, S. 1038, and S. 990), but they were not passed.

The tragic shootings in Tucson, AZ, on January 8, 2011, in which six people were killed and 13 wounded, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, have also generated attention. Several Members introduced proposals that arguably address issues related to the shooter’s mental illness and drug use (see S. 436/H.R. 1781) and his use of large capacity ammunition feeding devices (LCAFDs) (see H.R. 308 and S. 32), as well as a proposal to ban firearms within the proximity of certain high-level federal officials (see H.R. 367 and H.R. 496).

This report concludes with discussion of other salient and recurring gun control issues that have generated past congressional interest. Those issues include (1) screening firearms background check applicants against terrorist watch lists, (2) reforming the regulation of federally licensed gun dealers, (3) requiring background checks for private firearms transfers at gun shows, (4) more-strictly regulating certain firearms previously defined in statute as “semiautomatic assault weapons,” and (5) banning or requiring the registration of certain long-range .50 caliber rifles, which are commonly referred to as “sniper” rifles. To set these and other emerging issues in context, this report provides basic firearms-related statistics, an overview of federal firearms law, and a summary of legislative action in the 111th Congress.


Date of Report: November 22, 2011
Number of Pages: 79
Order Number: RL32842
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: Federal Aggravated Identity Theft

Charles Doyle
Senior Specialist in American Public Law

Aggravated identity theft is punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for two years or by imprisonment for five years if it relates to a terrorism offense. At least thus far, the government has rarely prosecuted the five-year terrorism form of the offense. The two-year offense occurs when an individual knowingly possesses, uses, or transfers the means of identification of another person, without lawful authority to do so, during and in relation to one of more than 60 predicate federal felony offenses (18 U.S.C. 1028A). Section 1028A has the effect of establishing a mandatory minimum sentence for those predicate felony offenses, when they involve identity theft.

A sentencing court has the discretion not to “stack” or pancake multiple aggravated identity theft counts and, as with other mandatory minimums, may impose a sentence of less than the mandatory minimum at the request of the prosecution based on the defendant’s substantial assistance.

More than half of the judges responding to a United States Sentence Commission survey felt the two-year mandatory minimum penalty was generally appropriate. The commission’s report on mandatory minimum sentencing statutes is mildly complimentary of the provision.


Date of Report: November 25, 2011
Number of Pages: 14
Order Number: R42100
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Federal Laws and Legislation on Carrying Concealed Firearms: An Overview

Vivian S. Chu
Legislative Attorney

Whether an individual is permitted to carry a concealed firearm is a matter traditionally regulated by the states. State laws vary with respect to eligibility requirements to obtain a concealed carry permit (CCP). A majority of states, known as “shall-issue” jurisdictions, require the issuing authority to issue a CCP to an applicant so long as he or she meets certain statutory requirements. Another handful of states, known as “may-issue” jurisdictions, grant the issuing authority discretion to issue a CCP upon a finding of proper cause, or upon the applicant demonstrating good character. States decide which out-of-state CCPs to recognize, typically through the use of reciprocity agreements.

Although Congress has enacted federal firearm laws that govern, among other things, the possession, transfer, and sale of firearms, it has seldom legislated on the issue of concealed carry. It has passed only a few laws on concealed carry, allowing individuals in certain occupations and who meet certain qualifications to carry concealed nationwide notwithstanding state or local laws. These laws include the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-55); the Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296); the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) (P.L. 108-277); and the Credit Card Act (P.L. 111-24). However, in the 112th Congress and past years, legislation has been introduced that would permit individuals to carry concealed nationwide, or on certain federal lands. These bills include H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011; S. 176, the Common Sense Concealed Firearms Permit Act of 2011; H.R. 2900, the Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement Act of 2011; and S. 1588, the Recreational Land Self-Defense Act of 2011.

This report first provides an overview of how concealed carry is generally regulated among the states. It then summarizes the federal laws regulating concealed carry. Lastly, it examines the concealed carry legislation pending before 112th Congress. This report does not address carrying firearms on military installations by military personnel.


Date of Report: November 22, 2011
Number of Pages: 19
Order Number: R42099
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Federal Capital Offenses: An Abridged Overview of Substantive and Procedural Law

Charles Doyle
Senior Specialist in American Public Law

Murder is a federal capital offense if committed in any of more than 50 jurisdictional settings. The Constitution defines the circumstances under which the death penalty may be considered a sentencing option. With an eye to those constitutional boundaries, the Federal Death Penalty Act and related statutory provisions govern the procedures under which the death penalty is imposed.

Some defendants are ineligible for the death penalty regardless of the crimes for which they are accused. Children and those incompetent to stand trial may not face the death penalty; pregnant women and the mentally retarded may not be executed.

There is no statute of limitations for murder, and the time constraints imposed by the due process and speedy trial clauses of the Constitution are rarely an impediment to prosecution. On the other hand, the decision to seek or forgo the death penalty in a capital case must be weighed by the Justice Department’s Capital Review Committee and approved by the Attorney General.

Defendants convicted of murder are death-eligible only if they are found at a separate sentencing hearing to have acted with life threatening intent. Among those who have, capital punishment may be imposed only if the sentencing jury unanimously concludes that the aggravating circumstances that surround the murder and the defendant outweigh the mitigating circumstances to an extent that justifies execution.

The Federal Death Penalty Act provides several specific aggravating factors, such as murder of a law enforcement officer or multiple murders committed at the same time. It also permits consideration of any relevant “non-statutory aggravating factors.” Impact on the victim’s family and future dangerousness of the defendant are perhaps the most commonly invoked non-statutory aggravating factors. The jury must agree on the existence of at least one of the statutory aggravating factors if the defendant is to be sentenced to death.

The Federal Death Penalty Act permits consideration of any relevant mitigating factor, and identifies a few, such as the absence of prior criminal record or the fact that a co-defendant, equally or more culpable, has escaped with a lesser sentence.

The Federal Death Penalty Act recognizes other capital offenses that do not necessarily involve murder: treason, espionage, large scale drug trafficking, and attempted murder to obstruct a drug kingpin investigation. The constitutional standing of these is less certain or at least different.

This report is an abridged form of CRS Report R42095, Federal Capital Offenses: An Overview of Substantive and Procedural Law, without the footnotes or attribution of authority and for quotations found in the longer version.


Date of Report: November 17, 2011
Number of Pages: 12
Order Number: R42096
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Federal Capital Offenses: An Overview of Substantive and Procedural Law

Charles Doyle
Senior Specialist in American Public Law

Murder is a federal capital offense if committed in any of more than 50 jurisdictional settings. The Constitution defines the circumstances under which the death penalty may be considered a sentencing option. With an eye to those constitutional boundaries, the Federal Death Penalty Act and related statutory provisions govern the procedures under which the death penalty is imposed.

Some defendants are ineligible for the death penalty regardless of the crimes for which they are accused. Children and those incompetent to stand trial may not face the death penalty; pregnant women and the mentally retarded may not be executed.

There is no statute of limitations for murder, and the time constraints imposed by the due process and speedy trial clauses of the Constitution are rarely an impediment to prosecution. On the other hand, the decision to seek or forgo the death penalty in a capital case must be weighed by the Justice Department’s Capital Review Committee and approved by the Attorney General.

Defendants convicted of murder are death-eligible only if they are found at a separate sentencing hearing to have acted with life threatening intent. Among those who have, capital punishment may be imposed only if the sentencing jury unanimously concludes that the aggravating circumstances that surround the murder and the defendant outweigh the mitigating circumstances to an extent that justifies execution.

The Federal Death Penalty Act provides several specific aggravating factors, such as murder of a law enforcement officer or multiple murders committed at the same time. It also permits consideration of any relevant “non-statutory aggravating factors.” Impact on the victim’s family and future dangerousness of the defendant are perhaps the most commonly invoked non-statutory aggravating factors. The jury must agree on the existence of at least one of the statutory aggravating factors if the defendant is to be sentenced to death.

The Federal Death Penalty Act permits consideration of any relevant mitigating factor, and identifies a few, such as the absence of prior criminal record or the fact that a co-defendant, equally or more culpable, has escaped with a lesser sentence.

The Federal Death Penalty Act recognizes other capital offenses that do not necessarily involve murder: treason, espionage, large-scale drug trafficking, and attempted murder to obstruct a drug kingpin investigation. The constitutional standing of these is less certain or at least different.

This report is available in an abridged form as CRS Report R42096, Federal Capital Offenses: An Abridged Overview of Substantive and Procedural Law, without the footnotes or attribution of authority or for quotations found here.


Date of Report: November 17, 2011
Number of Pages: 14
Order Number: R42095
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.