29–010 

Calendar No. 23 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 113–9 

STOP ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS ACT OF 2013 

APRIL 5, 2013.—Ordered to be printed 

Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of 

March 23 (legislative day, March 22), 2013 

Mr. LEAHY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS 

[To accompany S. 54] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill 

(S. 54) to increase public safety by punishing and deterring firearms trafficking, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon, with an amendment, and recommends that the bill, as 

amended, do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Background and Purpose of the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms 

Act of 2013 .................................................................................................. 2 

II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration ....................................... 7 

III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill ...................................................... 9 

IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ................................................ 11 

V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation ...................................................................... 12 

VI. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 12 

VII. Additional and Minority Views ..................................................................... 13 

VIII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................... 19 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

1On December 24, 2012, William Spengler Jr. set fire to his house and ambushed firefighters 

from the West Webster, New York fire company. Mr. Spengler killed two firefighters and seriously wounded two others. Two of the firearms used in the attack were purchased for Mr. Spengler, who was prohibited under Federal law from purchasing firearms. The firearms were purchased by his neighbor on his behalf. Marc Santora, Woman Helped Firefighters’ Killer Get Gun 

He Used in Ambush, Police Say, N.Y. Times, December 28, 2012. 2Over half of trafficking investigations initiated between July 1996 and December 1998 involved at least one diverted firearm used in a crime. Twenty-five percent of the investigations 

involved one or more firearms used in an assault, and 17 percent involved one or more firearms 

used in a homicide. See ATF, Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws Against Firearms 

Traffickers. June 2000. 3Wintemute GJ. Background Checks for Firearms Transfers. February 2013, at 3. 4Twenty-five percent of traffickers identified by investigations initiated between July 1996 

and December 1998 were convicted felons. 5Wintemute GJ. ‘‘Frequency of and responses to illegal activity related to commerce in firearms: findings from the Firearms Licensee Survey.’’ Inj Prev. Published Online First: March 11, 

2013, doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2012-040715, at 3. 

I. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE STOP ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING

IN FIREARMS ACT OF 2013 

Illegal trafficking of firearms to violent criminals, gangs, and 

drug trafficking organizations presents a grave threat to public 

safety.1 Investigations by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, 

and Explosives (ATF) have revealed that trafficked firearms are 

often diverted to criminals or criminal organizations and then used 

in serious and violent offenses.2 An estimated 467,321 firearm-related violent crimes occurred in the United States in 2011, a 26 

percent increase since 2008.3 Investigations show that convicted 

felons are heavily involved in firearms trafficking and its tragic 

consequences.4

Individuals known as ‘‘straw purchasers’’ play key roles in many 

firearms trafficking operations. Straw purchasers are typically individuals without a criminal record who buy firearms for drug dealers, violent criminals, or other prohibited persons, sometimes for 

payment in money or drugs. Straw purchasers are often friends, 

relatives, spouses, or partners of firearms traffickers. Straw purchasers usually acquire a relatively small number of firearms in 

each transaction, which helps to circumvent the background check 

requirements of Federal law. Firearms traffickers then sell and resell illegally obtained guns and transport them across state lines, 

contributing to the gun violence in our communities and along our 

borders. 

Straw purchasing is common. In a 2011 survey of Federally licensed firearms dealers and pawn brokers, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), over 67 percent reported experiencing at 

least one attempted straw purchase in the preceding year, and almost 10 percent reported monthly attempts.5 In the 46 percent of 

ATF trafficking investigations initiated between July 1996 and December 1998, straw purchasers were the source of the trafficked 

firearms. This was more than double the percentage of the next 

closest source. 

Notably, prohibited persons such as felons and drug dealers currently are able to purchase firearms themselves through private 

sales that require no background check, yet these individuals continue to employ straw purchasers to buy from FFLs. Straw purchases from FFLs are favored in part because FFLs usually carry 

a greater variety of firearms, FFLs sell ‘‘clean’’ firearms with no 

link to criminality, and also because straw purchasing is easy. As 

one former gang member said, ‘‘Straw purchases are so easy it’s a 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

6Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Inside Straw Purchasing: How Criminals Get Guns Illegally. 

April 15, 2009, at 2. 7Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice, A Review of ATF’s Operation 

Fast and Furious and Related Matters, September 19, 2012. 8Operation Fast and Furious: Reckless Decisions, Tragic Outcomes: Hearing Before the H. 

Comm. on Oversight and Government Reform, 112th Cong. 108 (2011) (statement of Peter 

Forcelli). 9 Id. 

10The minority views assert that straw purchasers ‘‘likely would be deterred by current sentencing levels if the laws were actually being enforced’’. To the contrary, law enforcement officials have consistently reported that straw purchasers are not deterred by current laws, none 

of which directly address straw purchasing. The minority views cite supposed expert testimony 

at Committee hearings that ‘‘the lack of prosecutions for attempts to purchase a gun on behalf 

of a prohibited person is a major problem.’’ The witnesses at these hearings said no such thing. 

Rather, they faulted the Department of Justice for not prosecuting individuals who failed backContinued 

no-brainer. Why buy a hot gun on the street when you can easily 

do a straw purchase?’’ 6

Gun shows are another source of firearms for traffickers. In 

many States, both FFLs and unlicensed sellers sell firearms at gun 

shows. While FFLs must perform background checks, unlicensed 

sellers are not required to do so, so prohibited purchasers can buy 

firearms directly from unlicensed sellers. 

Federal law enforcement officials lack the legal tools necessary to 

effectively combat illegal firearms trafficking, and for years they 

have raised the alarm that the existing legal framework is insufficient to deter those who would traffic in firearms. There is presently no Federal statute specifically prohibiting firearms trafficking 

or straw purchasing. This requires prosecutors to try to find other 

gun-related criminal statutes that can be applied to the facts of a 

particular trafficking scheme. 

A report from the Department of Justice Inspector General concerning certain investigative tactics used by ATF relative to straw 

purchasing and firearms trafficking in Arizona illustrated the extent of the problem and the difficulties that law enforcement officials have in using existing laws to combat these practices.7 In testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, an ATF agent witness, Peter Forcelli, who appeared to describe the investigative tactics that were the subject of congressional inquiry, described current Federal laws as ‘‘toothless,’’ 8 and 

characterized the common perception that the penalties for a straw 

purchasing offense ‘‘were no more consequential than doing 65 in 

a 55 zone.’’ 9

The most common criminal statutes used to charge straw purchasers do not specifically prohibit buying a firearm on behalf of 

another. Rather, they prohibit making material false statements in 

connection with the purchase of a firearm from an FFL. These offenses are too often perceived by judges and juries as ‘‘paperwork’’ 

violations, and the actual penalties for such offenses are too low to 

serve as either a meaningful deterrent or an effective incentive for 

defendants to cooperate with law enforcement against other members of the trafficking organization. In addition, prosecutions of 

these offenses can be challenging, given that the Government must 

prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the purchaser intentionally 

lied on the form, and did not merely make a mistake. In this context, it is important to note that simply failing a background check 

is not a crime, and there is no Federal criminal statute that specifically criminalizes the conduct of straw purchasing or gun trafficking.10


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

ground checks. Straw purchasers do not fail background checks; their ability to pass a background check is what makes them a suitable straw purchaser. 11The minority views claim that the bill ‘‘expands the reach of federal gun laws by prohibiting 

the purchase of a firearm on behalf of not only a prohibited person, but any person.’’ In reality, 

however, the bill does not prohibit any conduct that is currently allowed. Purchases on behalf 

of others are not permitted at FFLs currently, and the bill only prohibits purchases from nonFFLs on behalf of individuals already prohibited from possessing a firearm. The additional views 

of Senator Grassley recognize that the bill is ‘‘directed only at straw purchasers.’’ The additional 

views go on to state, however, that ‘‘[t]his allows people to buy for people as part of a legitimate 

business.’’ To be clear, the bill prohibits purchases on behalf of others from FFLs, and purchases 

on behalf of other prohibited persons from non-FFLs, regardless if the purchaser has a ‘‘legitimate business’’. 12The minority views raise an unfounded concern with the raffle exception. Contrary to their 

suggestion, a volunteer or employee cannot be held liable under Section 932 for purchasing a 

firearm for a to-be-determined raffle winner if that raffle winner turns out to be a prohibited 

person. Liability under Section 932 is tied to the time of purchase of the firearm. If a purchaser 

has no knowledge of the identity of the raffle winner, the purchaser cannot be prosecuted under 

Section 932. Moreover, even if the identity of the raffle winner were known at the time of purchase, the purchaser could not be prosecuted unless he knew or had reasonable cause to believe 

that the winner was a prohibited person. 

The Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 addresses 

this problem, and fills in a gap in the criminal statutes. Contrary 

to the assertion in the minority views that this bill ‘‘is not tailored 

to suit the needs of law enforcement,’’ this legislation was in fact 

drafted at the request of, and with the direct input of law enforcement. The bill directly responds the long-standing complaint of law 

enforcement officials that no Federal statute specifically prohibits 

straw purchasing and gun trafficking, and accordingly has been endorsed by numerous national law enforcement organizations, including the National Fraternal Order of Police, the Federal Law 

Enforcement Officers Association, the Major Cities Chiefs Association, the FBI Agents Association, and the National Organization of 

Black Law Enforcement Executives. Notably, the minority views do 

not cite to any law enforcement officials who claim that the bill is 

not tailored to suit their needs. 

This legislation creates, for the first time, specific Federal crimes 

prohibiting straw purchasing and gun trafficking. A new section 

932 in the firearms statute makes it a crime to purchase a firearm 

from an FFL for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of any 

other person. This codifies an intended restriction; anyone purchasing a firearm from an FFL must already sign a Form 4473 

stating that he or she is the ‘‘actual buyer’’ of the firearm.11 For 

purchases made from an unlicensed seller, this new section makes 

it a crime to purchase a gun for, on behalf of, or at the request or 

demand of a person prohibited from possessing a firearm, such as 

a convicted felon or a person adjudicated as mentally ill. The maximum sentence for this offense would be 15 years imprisonment, or 

25 years imprisonment if the defendant knew or had reasonable 

cause to believe that any firearm involved would be used to commit 

a crime of violence. 

The bill is narrowly tailored to target straw purchasers. The bill 

exempts legitimate transactions that are allowed under current 

law, including the purchase from an FFL of a firearm as a legitimate gift for another person, the retrieval by a third person of a 

firearm that is being repaired by a gunsmith, and the purchase of 

a firearm to be given to a bona fide winner of an organized raffle, 

contest, or auction conducted in accordance with law and sponsored 

by a national, State, or local organization or association.12

With regard to private sales that do not involve an FFL, the bill 

only prohibits purchases in which the seller knows or has reasonVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:47 Apr 06, 2013 Jkt 009010 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR009.XXX SR009

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

able cause to believe that he or she is purchasing the firearm on 

behalf of a person who belongs to one of the groups of individuals 

prohibited from possessing a firearm under Federal law. A purchaser who has no reasonable cause to believe that the other person is a convicted felon or has been adjudicated mentally ill, for instance, does not violate the law. This reasonable cause standard is 

the standard in current law for similar offenses. 

With regard to private sales, the bill also makes it a crime to 

purchase a firearm from a private seller on behalf of someone who 

the purchaser knows or has reasonable cause to believe intends to 

use, carry, possess, sell, or otherwise dispose of the firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime, or intends 

to export the firearm in violation of law. This straightforward provision targets the most dangerous straw purchases: those where 

the firearm is intended for use in a dangerous crime or will be sent 

to another country. Prohibiting these straw purchases should not 

be controversial, yet surprisingly the minority views object to these 

provisions. 

The chief complaint in the minority views appears to be that Section 932(b)(2)(J) creates a new category of persons prohibited from 

being sold a firearm in a private sale: would-be criminals. The minority views suggest that a straw purchaser should not be subject 

to criminal liability because the actual buyer may decide not to use 

the firearm to commit a crime. Contrary to the suggestion in the 

minority views, however, Section 932(b)(2)(J) does not hold ‘‘the 

purchaser of a firearm, who later resells it, criminally liable for the 

future potential actions of a future buyer.’’ First, liability under 

Section 932 is tied to the time of purchase of the firearm. Thus, 

someone who buys a firearm but decides sometime after its purchase to re-sell the firearm is not covered by Section 932. Second, 

Section 932 holds the purchaser responsible only for what he 

knows or has reasonable cause to believe at the time of purchase. 

If the purchaser has little or no reason to know that the firearm 

will be used in a crime, he has not violated Section 932. Nor would 

the purchaser be criminally liable for crimes committed with the 

firearm—which would be violations of other laws, not Section 932. 

The minority views complain that Section 932 places an undue 

burden on purchasers to determine whether the actual buyer plans 

to use the firearm in a crime or transfer the firearm to a third person who intends to use the firearm in a crime. Although it is reasonable to expect that one who purchases a gun for someone else 

at a private sale should have a duty to perform some due diligence 

to ensure that he is not buying a firearm for someone who intends 

to use it in a crime, Section 932(b)(2)(J) does not even require this. 

The provision simply prohibits these purchasers from buying firearms for people they know or have reasonable cause to believe intend to use the firearms in certain illegal activities like violent 

crime, based on the information known to them. The provision does 

not require purchasers to take affirmative steps to investigate the 

actual buyers, nor will it affect innocent parties who unwittingly 

purchase firearms for criminals. Simply put, under the provisions 

of this bill, a purchaser may not buy a gun for someone else at a 

private sale if the purchaser knows or has reasonable cause to believe—at the time of purchase—that the actual recipient intends to 

use the firearm in a crime. This is a commonsense measure that 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

13The minority views erroneously state that ‘‘a violation of Section 932(b)(J) carries a maximum sentence of 15 years while Section 932(c)(2) carries a 25 year maximum penalty for the 

same crime, transferring the firearm with reasonable cause to believe it will be used in a crime 

of violence.’’ Setting aside the fact that (as the minority views consistently fail to recognize) the 

new Section 932 prohibits the purchase of a firearm, not its transfer, Section 932(b) does not 

contain the penalties for the crimes enumerated in the first place; those penalties are listed in 

Section 932(c)(1) and (2). A violation of Section 932(b)(2)(J), like a violation of any part of Section 932(b), has a maximum penalty of 15 years unless it was committed knowing or with reasonable cause to believe that a firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence, in which 

case the maximum penalty is 25 years. 

The minority views also criticize the penalties in the bill as ‘‘unnecessarily high’’ while simultaneously suggesting that the higher 25-year maximum penalty should apply more broadly. The 

25-year maximum penalty is appropriately reserved for organizers, leaders, supervisor, and 

managers of larger trafficking organizations, i.e. those consisting of five or more other persons. 

Providing enhanced penalties for leaders of organizations of this size is neither arbitrary nor 

unprecedented. See United States Sentencing Guidelines § 3B1.1. 

has the support of law enforcement, and it should not be controversial. The bill also creates a new Federal firearms trafficking crime 

(Section 933) that makes it illegal to ship, transport, transfer, 

cause to be transported, or otherwise dispose of two or more firearms to someone that was known or reasonably believed to be prohibited from using or possessing a firearm under Federal law. This 

section also makes it a crime to receive from another person two 

or more firearms if the recipient knows or has reasonable cause to 

believe that such receipt would be in violation of Federal law. Violators of this new trafficking measure would be subject to a maximum sentence of 15 years imprisonment, or 25 years imprisonment if the defendant was an organizer, leader, supervisor, or manager of the trafficking activity.13

Besides creating new Federal crimes, the bill gives law enforcement the tools it needs to successfully investigate gun trafficking 

and break up sophisticated trafficking organizations. The bill authorizes the use of electronic surveillance for such cases, as well as 

for the felony firearms violations set forth in sections 922 and 924 

of Title 18, and adds new sections 932 and 933 as predicate violations for racketeering and money laundering violations. The legislation also includes a forfeiture provision to deprive firearms traffickers and their organizations of proceeds that are often used to 

acquire additional weapons or otherwise support their illicit activities. Under this new forfeiture provision, a judge would be authorized to impose a fine equal to twice the amount of the gross proceeds acquired through the relevant criminal conduct. 

The bill directs the United States Sentencing Commission to review and amend its guidelines and policy statements to ensure that 

persons convicted of offenses related to straw purchasing and firearms trafficking are subject to increased penalties in comparison to 

those currently provided by the guidelines and policy statements. 

This section makes clear Congress’ intent that the applicable guideline penalties be increased and the guidelines and policy statements reflect the extremely serious nature of the straw purchasing 

and firearms trafficking offenses, and the need for an effective deterrent and appropriate punishment to prevent such offenses. 

In addition to the creation of new crimes specifically prohibiting 

straw purchasing and firearms trafficking, the bill amends existing 

firearms law to further combat these offenses. Section 922(d) prohibits the sale or disposition of firearms or ammunition to certain 

categories of individuals who are known, or reasonably believed to 

be, prohibited under law from possessing a firearm. The bills expands this provision to prohibit the sale or disposition of firearms 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

14 ATF Firearms Tracing System. 

or ammunition to anyone whom the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe intends, after receipt of the item, to then 

transfer the item to a prohibited person, export the item illegally, 

or transfer the time in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug 

trafficking offense. This provision is designed to target sophisticated gun trafficking schemes that use multiple levels of straw purchasers to avoid detection and prosecution. The bill increases the 

maximum sentence from 10 to 15 years for violations of section 

922(d), and also for 922(g), which prohibits those same categories 

of individuals (e.g., convicted felons) from possessing firearms or 

ammunition. 

Current law prohibits individuals from transferring a firearm 

with knowledge that the firearm will be used to commit a crime of 

violence or a drug trafficking crime. This statute, 18 U.S.C. section 

924(h), requires the Government to prove that the defendant knew, 

at the time of transfer, that a firearm would actually be used in 

furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. This 

high standard allows traffickers to escape punishment in cases 

where they can claim that they strongly suspected, but did not 

know for certain, that a firearm would be used to commit a crime 

of violence or drug trafficking crime. The bill amends section 924(h) 

to prohibit the transfer of firearms or ammunition where the individual knows or has reasonable cause to believe that they will be 

used to commit one of the predicate offenses. In order to assist the 

efforts of law enforcement, particularly along the Southwest border, 

the bill also extends the prohibition to include violations of the 

Arms Export Control Act, the International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act, and the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act. 

In recent years, trafficking organizations have exported large 

quantities of firearms from the United States to Mexico to support 

Mexican drug trafficking organizations. The Mexican government 

submitted to the ATF for tracing 112,287 firearms recovered between 2007 and June 30, 2012. Tracing revealed that 76,853 of the 

firearms (68.4 percent) were sourced to the United States, meaning 

that the firearms were either manufactured in or legally imported 

to the United States.14 Current law, 18 U.S.C. Section 924(k), prohibits individuals from smuggling or otherwise bringing a firearm 

into the United States with the intent to engage in or promote a 

drug crime or violent crime. The bill expands this prohibition on 

firearms smuggling to cover the smuggling of firearms out of the 

United States in furtherance of drug trafficking or violent crimes. 

The bill also extends the prohibition to cover the smuggling of ammunition. The existing maximum sentence for smuggling firearms 

into the United States is increased to 15 years imprisonment, and 

the maximum sentence for the new crime of smuggling firearms 

out of the United States is set at 15 years imprisonment. 

II. HISTORY OF THE BILL AND COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL

The Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013, S. 54 was 

introduced on January 22, 2013, by Senators Leahy and Durbin. 

The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. After the 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

bill’s introduction, Senator Blumenthal joined as a co-sponsor. 

Since the bill was reported out of the Committee, Senators Collins, 

Gillibrand, Kirk, King, and Shaheen have joined as cosponsors. 

B. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

1. Hearings 

In the aftermath of the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, the 

Senate Committee on the Judiciary and the Subcommittee on the 

Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights held two hearings 

relevant to straw purchasing and firearms trafficking. The Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing titled, ‘‘What Should America Do About Gun Violence?’’ on January 30, 2013. The witnesses 

at the hearing were Captain Mark Kelly, Americans for Responsible Solutions; David Kopel, Adjunct Professor at Denver University, Strum College of Law; James Johnson, Chief of the Baltimore 

County Police Department; Gayle Trotter, Attorney and Senior Fellow for the Independent Women’s Forum; and Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer of the National 

Rifle Association. Former United States Representative Gabrielle 

Giffords gave brief remarks at the beginning of the hearing. 

The Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human 

Rights held a hearing titled ‘‘Proposals to Reduce Gun Violence: 

Protecting Our Communities While Respecting the Second Amendment,’’ on February 12, 2013. The witnesses at the hearing were 

Timothy Heaphy, United States Attorney for the Western District 

of Virginia; Laurence Tribe, Professor at Harvard Law School; Dr. 

Daniel Webster, Director and Professor at the John Hopkins Center 

for Gun Policy and Research; Sandra Wortham; Charles Cooper, 

Partner at Cooper & Kirk; and Suzanna Hupp. 

The witness testimony for these hearings is available at: 

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id= 

8ddfce272f36de81e62e30d8153a7d3a 

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id= 

eed1f8b2e83fd7365bee9cb8432af898 

2. Executive Business Meetings 

This legislation, S. 54, was placed on the Committee’s agenda for 

consideration on February 28, 2013. It was held over on that date. 

On March 7, 2013, the Committee considered S. 54. Chairman 

Leahy offered a substitute amendment to the bill, and explained 

that the text of the substitute amendment was identical to S. 443, 

a bipartisan bill introduced earlier that week by Senators Leahy, 

Collins, Durbin, Gillibrand, and Kirk. The substitute amendment 

was adopted by unanimous consent. 

Senator Grassley offered an amendment that would require the 

Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant Attorney 

General for the Criminal Division to personally authorize any Department of Justice operation where a Federal firearms licensee 

(FFL) is directed, instructed, enticed, or otherwise encouraged to 

sell a firearm to a straw purchaser. The amendment was adopted 

by unanimous consent. 

The Committee then voted to report S. 54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act, as amended, favorably to the Senate. The 

Committee proceeded by roll call vote as follows: 

Tally: 11 Yeas, 7 Nays 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

15 It is important to note that anyone purchasing a firearm from an FFL must already sign 

a Form 4473 stating that he or she is the ‘‘actual buyer’’ of the firearm. 

Yeas (11): Leahy (D–VT), Feinstein (D–CA), Schumer (D–NY), 

Durbin (D–IL), Whitehouse (D–RI), Klobuchar (D–MN), Franken 

(D–MN), Coons (D–DE), Blumenthal (D–CT), Hirono (D–HI), 

Grassley (R–IA). 

Nays (7): Hatch (R–UT), Sessions (R–AL), Graham (R–SC), Cornyn (R–TX), Lee (R–UT), Cruz (R–TX), Flake (R–AZ). 

III. SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY OF THE BILL

Sec. 1. Short title 

The short title of the bill is the ‘‘Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013.’’ 

Sec. 2. Table of Contents 

This section contains the table of contents for the bill. 

Sec. 3. Hadiya Pendleton and Nyasia Pryear-Yard anti-straw purchasing and firearms trafficking amendments 

This section would create a new Section 932 in the firearms statute that would make it a crime to purchase a gun from a Federal 

Firearms Licensee (FFL) for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of any other person.15 For purchases made from a private 

seller, this new section would make it a crime to purchase a gun 

for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of someone who is 

prohibited from possessing a firearm (e.g., a convicted felon or 

someone adjudicated as mentally ill). The maximum sentence for 

this offense would be 15 years imprisonment, or 25 years imprisonment if the defendant knew or had reasonable cause to believe that 

any firearm involved would be used to commit a crime of violence. 

This section also ensures that convicted felons and other prohibited 

persons may not use pawn or consignment shops to circumvent this 

law, while including provisions expressly exempting other transactions that are allowed under current law, including: the lawful 

purchase from an FFL of a firearm as a legitimate gift for another 

person; the retrieval by a third person of a firearm repaired by a 

gunsmith; and the purchase of a firearm to be given to bona fide 

winners of an organized raffle, contest, or auction conducted in accordance with law and sponsored by a national, State, or local organization or association. 

This section also creates a new Federal firearms trafficking statute (Section 933) that would make it illegal to ship, transport, 

transfer, cause to be transported, or otherwise dispose of two or 

more firearms to someone that was known or reasonably believed 

to be prohibited from using or possessing a firearm under Federal 

law. This section also makes it a crime to receive from another person two or more firearms if the recipient knows or has reasonable 

cause to believe that such receipt would be in violation of Federal 

law. In addition, the section makes it a crime to attempt or conspire to violate this gun trafficking statute. Violators of this new 

trafficking statute would be subject to a maximum sentence of 15 

years imprisonment, or 25 years imprisonment if the defendant 

acted in concert with five or more other persons and was an organizer, leader, supervisor, or manager of the trafficking activity. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

This section also includes a forfeiture provision that would deter 

straw purchasers and other firearms traffickers and deprive them 

and their organizations of proceeds that are often used to acquire 

additional weapons or otherwise support their illicit activities. 

Under this new forfeiture provision, a judge would be authorized 

to impose a fine equal to twice the amount of the gross proceeds 

acquired through the criminal conduct. 

This section also authorizes the use of electronic surveillance for 

investigating cases involving straw purchasers and firearms traffickers, as well as the felony firearms violations set forth in 18 

U.S.C. 922 and 924. This section also adds new sections 932 and 

933 as predicate violations for racketeering and money laundering 

violations. 

Finally, this section directs the United States Sentencing Commission to review and amend its guidelines and policy statements 

to ensure that persons convicted of offenses related to straw purchasing and firearms trafficking are subject to increased penalties 

in comparison to those currently provided by the guidelines and 

policy statements. This section makes clear Congress’ intent that 

the applicable guideline penalties be increased and the guidelines 

and policy statements reflect the extremely serious nature of the 

straw purchasing and firearms trafficking offenses, and the need 

for an effective deterrent and appropriate punishment to prevent 

such offenses. 

Sec. 4. Amendments to Section 922(d) 

Under current law, 18 U.S.C. Section 922(d), it is unlawful for 

any person to sell or otherwise dispose of a firearm or ammunition 

to any person, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that 

the person is prohibited from possessing a firearm for any of the 

reasons set forth in Section 922(d). This section of the bill prohibits 

the transfer of firearms to individuals the transferor knows or has 

reasonable cause to believe intend to: sell or otherwise dispose of 

the firearm or ammunition to a prohibited person, or in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking offense, or export the 

firearm or ammunition in violation of law. 

Sec. 5. Amendments to Section 924(a) 

This section increases the maximum sentence from 10 to 15 

years for violations of Sections 922(d) and 922(g). Section 922(d) 

prohibits the sale or disposition of firearms or ammunition to certain categories of individuals who are known, or reasonably believed to be, prohibited under law from possessing a firearm. Section 922(g) prohibits those same categories of individuals (e.g., convicted felons) from possessing firearms or ammunition. 

Sec. 6. Amendments to Section 924(h) 

Current law prohibits individuals from transferring a firearm 

with knowledge that the firearm would be used to commit a crime 

of violence or a drug trafficking crime. This statute, 18 U.S.C. Section 924(h), requires the government to prove that the defendant 

knew, at the time of transfer, that a firearm would actually be used 

in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. This 

section of the bill amends Section 924(h) to prohibit the transfer of 

firearms or ammunition when the individual knows or has reasonVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:47 Apr 06, 2013 Jkt 009010 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR009.XXX SR009

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

able cause to believe that they will be used to commit one of the 

predicate offenses. In order to assist the efforts of law enforcement, 

particularly along the Southwest border, this section also extends 

the prohibition to include violations of the Arms Export Control 

Act, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and the 

Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act. This section also 

makes it unlawful to attempt or conspire to violate this provision. 

Sec. 7. Amendments to Section 924(k) 

Current law, 18 U.S.C. 924(k), prohibits individuals from smuggling or otherwise bringing a firearm into the United States with 

the intent to engage in or promote a drug crime or violent crime. 

This section expands this prohibition on firearms smuggling to 

cover the smuggling of firearms out of the United States in furtherance of drug trafficking or violent crimes. This section would also 

make it a crime to attempt or conspire to violate this provision, and 

extends the prohibition to cover the smuggling of ammunition. 

These amendments would assist law enforcement in their efforts to 

combat trafficking organizations that export large quantities of 

firearms and ammunition from the United States into Mexico to 

support Mexican drug trafficking organizations. The existing maximum sentence for smuggling firearms into the United States 

would be increased to 15 years imprisonment, and the maximum 

sentence for the new crime of smuggling firearms out of the United 

States would be set at 15 years imprisonment, as well. 

Sec. 8. Limitation on Operations by the Department of Justice 

This section would require the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal 

Division to review and approve certain investigative operations 

concerning firearms. 

IV. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

The Committee sets forth, with respect to the bill, S. 54, the following estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974: 

MARCH 20, 2013. 

Hon. PATRICK J. LEAHY, 

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 

S. 54—Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 

CBO estimates that implementing S. 54 would have no significant cost to the federal government. Enacting the bill could affect 

direct spending and revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

apply. However, CBO estimates that any effects would be insignificant for each year. 

S. 54 would establish new federal crimes, expand or modify existing crimes, and increase penalties for offenses related to firearms 

trafficking. The bill would specifically ban the purchase of firearms 

on behalf of individuals who are prohibited from buying or possessing a firearm (known as ‘‘straw purchases’’). As a result, the 

government might be able to pursue cases that it otherwise would 

not be able to prosecute. CBO expects that S. 54 would apply to 

a relatively small number of additional offenders, however, so any 

increase in costs for law enforcement, court proceedings, or prison 

operations would not be significant. Any such costs would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds. 

Because those prosecuted and convicted under S. 54 could be 

subject to criminal fines, the federal government might collect additional fines if the legislation is enacted. Criminal fines are deposited as revenues in the Crime Victims Fund and later spent. CBO 

expects that any additional revenues and direct spending would not 

be significant because of the relatively small number of cases likely 

to be affected. 

S. 54 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). S. 54 would impose a 

private-sector mandate, as defined in UMRA, by banning the purchase of firearms under certain conditions. CBO expects that relatively few transactions would become unlawful under the bill. 

Therefore, CBO estimates that the cost, if any, of complying with 

the mandate would be minimal and would fall well below the annual threshold for private-sector mandates ($150 million in 2013, 

adjusted annually for inflation). 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Mark Grabowicz, for 

federal costs, and Paige Piper/Bach, for impacts on the private sector. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

V. REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee finds that no significant regulatory impact will 

result from the enactment of S. 54. 

VI. CONCLUSION

Straw purchasing and firearms trafficking contribute to violent 

crime across the United States, yet no existing Federal law specifically targets these practices. Law enforcement has complained for 

years that current laws are insufficient and new tools are needed 

to combat sophisticated trafficking organizations. The Stop Illegal 

Trafficking in Firearms Act is a bipartisan bill that gives law enforcement the tools it needs to address these issues, while ensuring 

that innocent transfers remain legal. The Committee believes that 

Congress should come together to pass this vital legislation. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(13) 

VII. ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

ADDITIONAL VIEWS FROM SENATOR GRASSLEY 

Federal legislation addressing straw purchasing and gun trafficking will help strengthen efforts to combat illicit firearms. 

When I conducted my oversight of the Justice Department’s 

failed Operation Fast and Furious, I was told by whistleblowers 

that there were gaps in federal law concerning straw purchasers 

that should be addressed. And I agree. 

As originally introduced, S. 54 contained no trafficking provisions. And it was far broader than the bill the Committee reported. 

For instance, it would have prohibited with minor exceptions all 

purchases of firearms by a person on behalf of someone else. That 

would have led to criminal liability for law-abiding gun owners, severely limited private sales of firearms, and destroyed legitimate 

business operations. Fortunately, during the time that the Committee considered the bill, Chairman Leahy adopted many, although not all, of my requested changes to the bill. These changes 

made the bill better and reduced the negative side effects of previous versions. 

At the same time, the bill was broadened to include prohibitions 

on gun trafficking that Senator Gillibrand had originally proposed. 

In my view, that bill as introduced also raised significant concerns. 

I asked Senator Gillibrand to make changes to her bill as well, 

some of which were the same as I raised with regard to S. 54. The 

sponsors must have believed that these changes improved the bills 

because so many were included in the combined bill that the Committee reported. It is worth describing some of the many changes 

that have been made. 

As introduced, the trafficking bill would have made a federal 

crime of transporting two or more guns if the person knew that the 

result would be a violation of state or local law. That would have 

given states and localities a one-way incentive to add new gun control measures and foist the cost of prosecution and incarceration on 

the federal government. It also would have created for the first 

time a situation in which violation of a state criminal law was an 

element of a federal offense. Similar problems arose with respect 

to language in the original S. 54. All of that language from both 

the trafficking and straw purchasing bills has been removed. 

For the trafficking bill, I requested major and minor drafting 

suggestions, including clarifying what intent was necessary to commit the crime, harmonizing penalties, changing the gift exception, 

altering the directive for the Sentencing Commission, and others. 

For the straw purchasing bill, it is now directed only at straw 

purchasers, not all transfers on behalf of another. This allows people to buy for people as part of a legitimate business. It preserves 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

private sales. Now the bill is directed to actual straw purchasers: 

those who purchase a gun on behalf of a prohibited person. And 

changes were made to the penalties the bill would impose. Language regarding sales to persons who do not reside in a state was 

revised at my suggestion. Language was removed concerning materiality of false statements on the forms. Rules for purchases from 

licensed dealers were separated from those for private sales. Unlike 

the original S. 54, the bill is now limited to engaging indirectly in 

conduct that is already illegal. It expressly tracks the language of 

current law in many respects. As a result of all these changes, the 

rights of law-abiding citizens are far more protected in ways that 

were not the case in either the original straw purchasing bill or the 

original trafficking bill. 

With these positive changes, including inclusion of an amendment of mine that I will describe below, I voted to report this bill 

to the full Committee. 

At the same time that I announced my willingness to report the 

bill, I noted that a number of Committee members believe that the 

bill needs more work before the Senate considers it. I myself have 

concerns regarding penalties the bill imposes compared with penalties for existing crimes, as well as concerns that the bill may establish traps for the unwary but law-abiding citizen. At the Committee markup, Chairman Leahy promised to work with me to address my concerns. Based on that understanding, and the adoption 

of my amendment, I voted to report the bill to the full Senate. 

As part of my investigation into the Justice Department’s flawed 

Operation Fast & Furious, an operation where nearly 2,000 firearms were sold to straw purchasers without plans to interdict or 

disrupt the firearms from falling into the wrong hands, we learned 

that the tactics used by the ATF were disclosed to the Assistant 

Attorney General for the Criminal Division, prior to their use. Specifically, we learned that the tactics used by the ATF in this flawed 

operation were disclosed to the Assistant Attorney General for the 

Criminal Division as part of wiretap applications. Those applications contained a detailed description of these flawed tactics of letting guns walk from gun dealers, into the hands of known or suspected straw purchasers. We later learned through interviews and 

public testimony from others, this information was provided to the 

Assistant Attorney General, Lanny A. Breuer. 

The applications were signed by various Deputies of the Assistant Attorney General. These deputies claimed they were unaware 

of the tactics because signing these applications was a formality. 

They claimed they didn’t understand that they were explicitly authorizing the risky tactics—even though field level supervisors 

through Main Justice were on board. This apparent lack of understanding by senior leadership about the risky strategies employed 

by the ATF represents a major failure at the Justice Department. 

It has cost the lives of at least one Federal agent, Border Patrol 

Agent Brian Terry, and others in violence throughout Mexico. 

Given the volume of firearms that were allowed to ‘‘walk’’ by the 

ATF, nearly 2,000, we won’t know the true human cost of this failure and the countless victims it caused for years to come. A failure 

of this magnitude should never be repeated and it is our duty to 

expressly prohibit the Justice Department from conducting future 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

operations that employ similar tactics to those used in Fast & Furious. 

To correct this, I offered an amendment at mark-up to provide 

reasonable limitations on the conduct of the Justice Department to 

prevent future operations of this sort. My amendment would require that the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division sign off on law 

enforcement operations where federal firearms licensees are directed or enticed into selling firearms to individuals the Justice Department believes are purchasing guns on behalf of another for illegal purposes. 

This amendment would ensure better communication by requiring explicit written authorization for these types of tactics. It also 

requires that in these instances, the Justice Department have a 

plan that includes sufficient safeguards to prevent firearms from 

being transferred to third parties without reasonable steps for law 

enforcement to interdict the firearms. Operations with these types 

of tactics and risks should be signed off on at the highest level to 

ensure appropriate safeguards exist to prevent guns from walking. 

My amendment provides a modest limitation to Justice Department operations, not by specifically limiting conduct, but by requiring approval from political appointees who should be held accountable for authorizing risky operations. If the Government is going to 

employ these types of tactics—and they shouldn’t—at the least, the 

Department owes the American people an understanding of how 

these tactics came to be approved. This is a modest amendment designed to keep operational flexibility at the Department, provided 

senior officials acknowledge the tactics, approve them, and can be 

held responsible should the tactics fail. It is important and the 

Committee’s vote to adopt it unanimously—despite the vocal opposition of the Justice Department—shows it. 

Despite the adoption of my amendment, I continue to have reservations concerning the bill. Unless my concerns are fully resolved 

when S. 54 is considered by the full Senate, I will not vote for final 

passage of the bill. I reserve the right to support amendments on 

the floor that I believe would improve the bill. And I also reserve 

my right to oppose the bill when the full Senate considers it if 

amendments are added that I cannot support. 

Nonetheless, I continue to believe that gun trafficking and straw 

purchasing are serious crimes that federal law does not adequately 

address. I very much hope that the process of improving the bill 

will continue when the full Senate considers S. 54. 

CHUCK GRASSLEY. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(16) 

1 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A); 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6). 

2 18 U.S.C. § 922(d); 18 U.S.C. § 922(g); 18 U.S.C. § 924(h). 

MINORITY VIEWS FROM SENATORS HATCH, SESSIONS, 

GRAHAM, CORNYN, LEE, CRUZ, AND FLAKE 

In response to the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, the 

President proposed a plan calling for new gun laws that impose serious penalties for straw purchasing and gun trafficking. All members of the Committee agree straw purchasing and gun trafficking 

are serious problems. However, we cannot support S. 54 because it 

is not tailored to suit the needs of law enforcement and unnecessarily infringes on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. 

The bill creates new categories of persons prohibited from being 

sold a firearm and establishes a number of vague new federal 

criminal offenses, the potentially far-reaching consequences of 

which are unclear. 

As the majority views note, existing gun laws do not specifically 

prohibit the act of buying a firearm on behalf of another. But, current law does prohibit making a material false statement in connection with the purchase of a firearm from a federal firearm licensee (FFL) or making a false or fictitious oral or written statement, including stating you are the ‘‘actual buyer’’ rather than ‘‘acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person,’’ or furnishing 

any false identification meant to deceive an FFL in connection with 

the purchase of a firearm.1 It is also unlawful for any person to sell 

a firearm to a prohibited person, for a prohibited person to possess 

a firearm, and for a person to transfer a firearm knowing it will 

be used to commit a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime.2

This bill creates a new category of prohibited people—those who 

intend to break the law, but have not done so yet and may never 

act. Thus, this bill would make it illegal to purchase a firearm for 

a person who intends to sell or dispose of the firearm or ammunition to a prohibited person, or who intends to use, possess, or sell 

the firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking 

offense, or who intends to export the firearm in violation of law. In 

current law, all of the existing classes of ‘‘prohibited persons’’ are 

categorized as such because they are capable of being identified in 

an objective manner based on their actions. Holding the purchaser 

of a firearm, who later resells it, criminally liable for the future potential actions of a future buyer is too attenuated. To be sure, it 

is the seller’s responsibility to reasonably know whether the person 

who seeks to purchase a firearm is prohibited from doing so under 

the law. However, it is dangerous to extend criminal liability to a 

seller of a firearm based on the subjective intent of the non-prohibited person who seeks to purchase a firearm with the intent to 

transfer it to someone else who may commit a crime. Under this 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

3 ATF, Firearms Trace Data—2011, http://www.atf.gov/statistics/trace-data/2011-tracedata.html 

bill, the seller has a duty to accurately judge the intent of the purchaser regarding the yet unaccomplished acts of another. 

According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), in 2011, the average time between the initial purchase of a firearm and the recovery of that firearm in a crime was 

more than 11 years.3 Judging whether the actual purchaser intends to use the firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence is difficult enough, but this bill goes a step further by asking a seller 

to judge whether the purchaser intends to sell the gun to another 

person who will then use it in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime at some point in the future. The connection is far too 

attenuated to justify criminal liability on its account. 

Similarly, the bill’s raffle exception is not clear with respect to 

who would be liable for the purchase of a weapon that is given to 

a raffle or contest winner who is subsequently found to be a prohibited person. As the language of the exception states, the raffle, contest, or auction must be sponsored by a national, State, or local organization or association. As Senator Cornyn stated at the Executive Business Meeting, this bill could ensnare an innocent purchaser of a firearm who is merely a volunteer or employee of the 

organization and who plays no role in transferring the firearm to 

the raffle winner. According to the bill, this innocent volunteer or 

employee could be liable for purchasing a firearm for the winner 

of a raffle—who at the time of the purchase is unknown—and who 

is suffering from a mental disorder or is a convicted felon. The confusion surrounding this exception is exacerbated when one considers the penalty of forfeiture that would accompany a violation 

by someone who was not connected with the actual transfer of the 

firearm to the raffle winner. 

Another concern is some of the penalties in this bill are unnecessarily high and some provisions will create confusion in the code. 

For example, a violation of Section 932(b)(J) carries a maximum 

sentence of 15 years while Section 932(c)(2) carries a 25 year maximum penalty for the same crime, transferring the firearm with 

reasonable cause to believe it will be used in a crime of violence. 

While it is important to send a message to criminals that violations 

of federal gun laws will have serious consequences, it is widely 

known that most straw purchasers do not have criminal records 

and likely would be deterred by current sentencing levels if the 

laws were actually being enforced. This Committee has held three 

hearings on the issue of gun violence during which we heard expert 

testimony stating the lack of prosecutions for attempts to purchase 

a gun on behalf of a prohibited person is a major problem. The Department of Justice argues it needs better tools to address these 

problems because they do not have enough resources to prosecute 

‘‘lie and buy’’ offenses, which are perceived as ‘‘paperwork’’ violations and have low jury appeal. However, increasing statutory 

maximums to levels that far surpass current, unenforced statutory 

levels does not achieve the stated goal. Penalties are irrelevant if 

criminals are not prosecuted. It also seems incongruous to increase 

the maximum sentence for someone who sells a firearm to a proVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:47 Apr 06, 2013 Jkt 009010 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\SR009.XXX SR009

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

hibited person, such as a drug user, when some are contemplating 

legislation that would circumvent mandatory minimums for those 

who use guns in drug trafficking crimes. 

Additionally, the bill creates a new federal firearms trafficking 

crime that carries a maximum sentence of 25 years if a violation 

is committed by a person who acts in concert with five or more persons and occupies a position of leadership in the group. We commend the effort to target organizations engaged in gun trafficking; 

however, designating a set number of persons with whom an organizer must act in concert to receive an increased sentence runs the 

risk of making the increased penalty irrelevant. Arbitrarily setting 

the number of persons who must act in concert at five could serve 

to encourage organizations to commit gun trafficking operations in 

smaller groups to evade the higher penalty. 

We support the concept of legislation that directly addresses the 

issue of straw purchasing and trafficking. However, we cannot support S. 54, as it is needlessly complicated and expands the scope 

of the Committee’s efforts past the issue of straw purchasing to include the criminalization of acts that should not be criminal. This 

bill does not narrowly address the existing ‘‘lie and buy’’ provisions. 

This bill expands the reach of federal gun laws by prohibiting the 

purchase of a firearm on behalf of not only a prohibited person, but 

any person. It is no consolation to the American people that the 

Department of Justice ‘‘assures’’ Congress it will not use these provisions to target law-abiding citizens who are ‘‘inadvertently’’ swept 

up by the unintended consequences of this bill, particularly when 

the only stated justification for that policy is a lack of resources at 

the Department. 

ORRIN G. HATCH. JEFF SESSIONS. LINDSEY GRAHAM. JOHN CORNYN. 

MICHAEL S. LEE. TED CRUZ. 

JEFF FLAKE. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

VIII. CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by S.54, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

UNITED STATES CODE 

TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL 

PROCEDURE 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 44—FIREARMS 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 921. Definitions 

Sec. 922. Unlawful acts 

Sec. 923. Licensing 

Sec. 924. Penalties 

Sec. 925. Exceptions: Relief from disabilities 

Sec. 925A. Remedy for erroneous denial of firearm 

Sec. 926. Rules and regulations 

Sec. 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms 

Sec. 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers 

Sec. 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers 

Sec. 927. Effect on State law 

Sec. 928. Separability 

Sec. 929. Use of restricted ammunition 

Sec. 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities 

Sec. 931. Prohibition on purchase, ownership, or possession of body armor by violent 

felons 

Sec. 932. Straw purchasing of firearms 

Sec. 933. Trafficking in firearms 

Sec. 934. Forfeiture and fines 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 922. UNLAWFUL ACTS 

* * * * * * * 

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person— 

(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any 

court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; 

(2) is a fugitive from justice; 

(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances 

Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); 

(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been 

committed to any mental institution; 

(5) who, being an alien— 

(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or 

(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26))); 

(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under 

dishonorable conditions; 

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; 

(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from 

harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such 

person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging 

in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that 

this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that— 

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and 

(B) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a 

credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; øor¿ 

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted 

use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected 

to cause bodily injury; or 

(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime 

of domestic violence. This subsection shall not apply with respect to the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to 

a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or 

licensed collector who pursuant to subsection (b) of section 925 

of this chapter is not precluded from dealing in firearms or ammunition, or to a person who has been granted relief from disabilities pursuant to subsection (c) of section 925 of this 

chapterø.¿; 

(10) intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm or ammunition to a person described in any of paragraphs (1) 

through (9); or 

(11) intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearms or ammunition in furtherance of a crime of violence or drug trafficking offense or to export the firearm or ammunition in violation of law. 

This subsection shall not apply with respect to the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to a licensed importer, licensed 

manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector who pursuant to 

subsection (b) of section 925 is not precluded from dealing in firearms or ammunition, or to a person who has been granted relief 

from disabilities pursuant to subsection (c) of section 925. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 924. PENALTIES 

(a) * * * 

(2) Whoever knowingly violates subsection (a)(6), ø(d), (g),¿ 

(h), (i), (j), or (o) of section 922 shall be fined as provided in 

this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. 

* * * * * * * 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

(8) Whoever knowingly violates subsection (d) or (g) of section 

922 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 

15 years, or both. 

* * * * * * * 

ø(h) Whoever knowingly transfers a firearm, knowing that such 

firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence (as defined in 

subsection (c)(3)) or drug trafficking crime (as defined in subsection 

(c)(2)) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both.¿ 

(h)(1) Whoever knowingly receives or transfers a firearm or ammunition, or attempts or conspires to do so, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such firearm or ammunition will be 

used to commit a crime of violence (as defined in subsection (c)(3)), 

a drug trafficking crime (as defined in subsection (c)(2)), or a crime 

under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the 

International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et 

seq.), the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (21 U.S.C. 

1901 et seq.), or section 212(a)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(C)) shall be imprisoned not more than 

25 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both. 

(2) No term of imprisonment imposed on a person under this subsection shall run concurrently with any term of imprisonment imposed on the person under section 932. 

* * * * * * * 

ø(k) A person who, with intent to engage in or to promote conduct that— 

ø(1) is punishable under the Controlled Substances Act (21 

U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.), or chapter 705 of title 46; 

ø(2) violates any law of a State relating to any controlled 

substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 802); or 

ø(3) constitutes a crime of violence (as defined in subsection 

(c)(3)), smuggles or knowingly brings into the United States a 

firearm, or attempts to do so, shall be imprisoned not more 

than 10 years, fined under this title, or both.¿ 

(k)(1) A person who, with intent to engage in or to promote conduct that— 

(A) is punishable under the Controlled Substances Act (21 

U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.), or chapter 705 of title 46; 

(B) violates any law of a State relating to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances 

Act, 21 U.S.C. 802); or 

(C) constitutes a crime of violence (as defined in subsection 

(c)(3)), smuggles or knowingly brings into the United States, a 

firearm or ammunition, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall 

be imprisoned not more than 15 years, fined under this title, or 

both. 

(2) A person who, with intent to engage in or to promote conduct 

that— 

(A) would be punishable under the Controlled Substances Act 

(21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Controlled Substances Import and 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

Export Act (21 U.S.C. 951 et seq.), or chapter 705 of title 46, 

if the conduct had occurred within the United States; or 

(B) would constitute a crime of violence (as defined in subsection (c)(3)) for which the person may be prosecuted in a court 

of the United States, if the conduct had occurred within the 

United States, smuggles or knowingly takes out of the United 

States, a firearm or ammunition, or attempts or conspires to do 

so, shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years, fined under 

this title, or both. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 932. STRAW PURCHASING OF FIREARMS 

(a) For purposes of this section— 

(1) the term ‘‘crime of violence’’ has the meaning given that 

term in section 924(c)(3); 

(2) the term ‘‘drug trafficking crime’’ has the meaning given 

that term in section 924(c)(2); and 

(3) the term ‘‘purchase’’ includes the receipt of any firearm by 

a person who does not own the firearm— 

(A) by way of pledge or pawn as security for the payment 

or repayment of money; or 

(B) on consignment. 

(b) It shall be unlawful for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed collector, or licensed dealer) 

to knowingly purchase, or attempt or conspire to purchase, any firearm in or otherwise affecting interstate or foreign commerce— 

(1) from a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed 

collector, or licensed dealer for, on behalf of, or at the request 

or demand of any other person, known or unknown; or 

(2) from any person who is not a licensed importer, licensed 

manufacturer, licensed collector, or licensed dealer for, on behalf of, or at the request or demand of any other person, known 

or unknown, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that 

such other person— 

(A) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any 

court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year; 

(B) is a fugitive from justice; 

(C) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled 

substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); 

(D) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has 

been committed to any mental institution; 

(E) is an alien who— 

(i) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or 

(ii) except as provided in section 922(y)(2), has been 

admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant 

visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(26)); 

(F) has been discharged from the Armed Forces under 

dishonorable conditions; 

(G) having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his or her citizenship; 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

(H) is subject to a court order that restrains such person 

from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this subparagraph shall only apply 

to a court order that— 

(i) was issued after a hearing of which such person 

received actual notice, and at which such person had 

the opportunity to participate; and 

(ii)(I) includes a finding that such person represents 

a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate 

partner or child; or 

(II) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against 

such intimate partner or child that would reasonably 

be expected to cause bodily injury; 

(I) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor 

crime of domestic violence; 

(J) intends to— 

(i) use, carry, possess, or sell or otherwise dispose of 

the firearm or ammunition in furtherance of a crime of 

violence or drug trafficking crime; or 

(ii) export the firearm or ammunition in violation of 

law; 

(K)(i) does not reside in any State; and 

(ii) is not a citizen of the United States; or 

(L) intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm or 

ammunition to a person described in any of subparagraphs 

(A) through (K). 

(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who violates subsection (b) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for 

not more than 15 years, or both. 

(2) If a violation of subsection (b) is committed knowing or with 

reasonable cause to believe that any firearm involved will be used 

to commit a crime of violence, the person shall be sentenced to a 

term of imprisonment of not more than 25 years. 

(d) Subsection (b)(1) shall not apply to any firearm that is lawfully purchased by a person— 

(1) to be given as a bona fide gift to a recipient who provided 

no service or tangible thing of value to acquire the firearm, unless the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe such 

recipient is prohibited by Federal law from possessing, receiving, selling, shipping, transporting, transferring, or otherwise 

disposing of the firearm; or 

(2) to be given to a bona fide winner of an organized raffle, 

contest, or auction conducted in accordance with law and sponsored by a national, State, or local organization or association, 

unless the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe such 

recipient is prohibited by Federal law from possessing, purchasing, receiving, selling, shipping, transporting, transferring, 

or otherwise disposing of the firearm. 

SEC. 933. TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS 

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to— 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

(1) ship, transport, transfer, cause to be transported, or otherwise dispose of 2 or more firearms to another person in or otherwise affecting interstate or foreign commerce, if the transferor 

knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the use, carrying, 

or possession of a firearm by the transferee would be in violation of, or would result in a violation of, any Federal law punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding 1 year; 

(2) receive from another person 2 or more firearms in or otherwise affecting interstate or foreign commerce, if the recipient 

knows or has reasonable cause to believe that such receipt 

would be in violation of, or would result in a violation of, any 

Federal law punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding 1 

year; or 

(3) attempt or conspire to commit the conduct described in 

paragraph (1) or (2). 

(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for 

not more than 15 years, or both. 

(2) If a violation of subsection (a) is committed by a person in concert with 5 or more other persons with respect to whom such person 

occupies a position of organizer, leader, supervisor, or manager, the 

person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more 

than 25 years. 

SEC. 934. FORFEITURE AND FINES 

(a)(1) Any person convicted of a violation of section 932 or 933 

shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of 

State law— 

(A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds 

the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such 

violation; and 

(B) any of the person’s property used, or intended to be used, 

in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation. 

(2) The court, in imposing sentence on a person convicted of a violation of section 932 or 933, shall order, in addition to any other 

sentence imposed pursuant to section 932 or 933, that the person 

forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1). 

(b) A defendant who derives profits or other proceeds from an offense under section 932 or 933 may be fined not more than the 

greater of— 

(1) the fine otherwise authorized by this part; and 

(2) the amount equal to twice the gross profits or other proceeds of the offense under section 932 or 933. 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 58—UNITED STATES SENTENCING 

COMMISSION 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 994. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION 

* * * * * * * 

DIRECTIVE TO SENTENCING COMMISSION.—Pursuant to 

its authority under section 994 of title 28, United States Code, and 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

in accordance with this section, the United States Sentencing Commission shall review and amend its guidelines and policy statements to ensure that persons convicted of an offense under section 

932 or 933 of title 18, 1 United States Code and other offenses applicable to the straw purchases and firearms trafficking of firearms 

are subject to increased penalties in comparison to those currently 

provided by the guidelines and policy statements for such straw 

purchasing and firearms trafficking offenses. The Commission shall 

also review and amend its guidelines and policy statements to reflect the intent of Congress that a person convicted of an offense 

under section 932 or 933 of title 18, United States Code, who is affiliated with a gang, cartel, organized crime ring, or other such enterprise should be subject to higher penalties than an otherwise unaffiliated individual. 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 95—RACKETEERING 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 1956. LAUNDERING OF MONETARY INSTRUMENTS 

* * * * * * * 

(c) As used in this section— 

* * * * * * * 

(7) the term ‘‘specified unlawful activity’’ means— 

* * * * * * * 

(D) an offense under section 32 (relating to the destruction of aircraft), section 37 (relating to violence at international airports), section 115 (relating to influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a Federal official by threatening or injuring a family member), section 152 (relating 

to concealment of assets; false oaths and claims; bribery), 

section 175c (relating to the variola virus), section 215 (relating to commissions or gifts for procuring loans), section 

351 (relating to congressional or Cabinet officer assassination), any of sections 500 through 503 (relating to certain 

counterfeiting offenses), section 513 (relating to securities 

of States and private entities), section 541 (relating to 

goods falsely classified), section 542 (relating to entry of 

goods by means of false statements), section 545 (relating 

to smuggling goods into the United States), section 549 

(relating to removing goods from Customs custody), section 

554 (relating to smuggling goods from the United States), 

section 555 (relating to border tunnels), section 641 (relating to public money, property, or records), section 656 (relating to theft, embezzlement, or misapplication by bank 

officer or employee), section 657 (relating to lending, credit, and insurance institutions), section 658 (relating to 

property mortgaged or pledged to farm credit agencies), 

section 666 (relating to theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds), section 793, 794, or 798 

(relating to espionage), section 831 (relating to prohibited 

transactions involving nuclear materials), section 844 (f) or 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

(i) (relating to destruction by explosives or fire of Government property or property affecting interstate or foreign 

commerce), section 875 (relating to interstate communications), section 922 (l) (relating to the unlawful importation 

of firearms), øsection 924(n)¿ section 924(n), 932, or 933 

(relating to firearms trafficking), section 956 (relating to 

conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim, or injure certain property 

in a foreign country), section 1005 (relating to fraudulent 

bank entries), 1006 (relating to fraudulent Federal credit 

institution entries), 1007 (relating to Federal Deposit Insurance transactions), 1014 (relating to fraudulent loan or 

credit applications), section 1030 (relating to computer 

fraud and abuse), 1032 (relating to concealment of assets 

from conservator, receiver, or liquidating agent of financial 

institution), section 1111 (relating to murder), section 1114 

(relating to murder of United States law enforcement officials), section 1116 (relating to murder of foreign officials, 

official guests, or internationally protected persons), section 1201 (relating to kidnaping), section 1203 (relating to 

hostage taking), section 1361 (relating to willful injury of 

Government property), section 1363 (relating to destruction of property within the special maritime and territorial 

jurisdiction), section 1708 (theft from the mail), section 

1751 (relating to Presidential assassination), section 2113 

or 2114 (relating to bank and postal robbery and theft), 

section 2252A (relating to child pornography) where the 

child pornography contains a visual depiction of an actual 

minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct, section 2260 

(production of certain child pornography for importation 

into the United States), section 2280 (relating to violence 

against maritime navigation), section 2281 (relating to violence against maritime fixed platforms), section 2319 (relating to copyright infringement), section 2320 (relating to 

trafficking in counterfeit goods and services), section 2332 

(relating to terrorist acts abroad against United States nationals), section 2332a (relating to use of weapons of mass 

destruction), section 2332b (relating to international terrorist acts transcending national boundaries), section 

2332g (relating to missile systems designed to destroy aircraft), section 2332h (relating to radiological dispersal devices), section 2339A or 2339B (relating to providing material support to terrorists), section 2339C (relating to financing of terrorism), or section 2339D (relating to receiving military-type training from a foreign terrorist organization) of this title, section 46502 of title 49, United States 

Code, a felony violation of the Chemical Diversion and 

Trafficking Act of 1988 (relating to precursor and essential 

chemicals), section 590 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 

1590) (relating to aviation smuggling), section 422 of the 

Controlled Substances Act (relating to transportation of 

drug paraphernalia), section 38 (c) (relating to criminal 

violations) of the Arms Export Control Act, section 11 (relating to violations) of the Export Administration Act of 

1979, section 206 (relating to penalties) of the InterVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:47 Apr 06, 2013 Jkt 009010 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR009.XXX SR009

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

national Emergency Economic Powers Act, section 16 (relating to offenses and punishment) of the Trading with the 

Enemy Act, any felony violation of section 15 of the Food 

and Nutrition Act of 2008 (relating to supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits fraud) involving a quantity of benefits having a value of not less than $5,000, any 

violation of section 543(a)(1) of the Housing Act of 1949 

(relating to equity skimming), any felony violation of the 

Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, any felony violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or section 92 of 

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2122) (relating 

to prohibitions governing atomic weapons) environmental 

crimes. 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 96—RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT 

ORGANIZATIONS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 1961. DEFINITIONS 

* * * * * * * 

(1) ‘‘Racketeering Activity’’ means— 

* * * * * * * 

(B) any act which is indictable under any of the following 

provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating 

to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 

471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeiting), section 659 (relating to theft from interstate shipment) if the act indictable 

under section 659 is felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from pension and welfare funds), sections 891–894 (relating to extortionate credit transactions), section 932 (relating 

to straw purchasing), section 933 (relating to trafficking in firearms), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in 

connection with identification documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices), section 1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling 

information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 

(relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1425 (relating to the procurement of 

citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers), 

section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461–1465 (relating to obscene matter), 

section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 

(relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 

(relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement), 

section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or 

an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a 

witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542 (relating to false 

statement in application and use of passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport), section 1544 (relating 

to misuse of passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581– 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

1592 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons)., 

[1] section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to interstate transportation of wagering 

paraphernalia), section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund 

payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of illegal 

gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to the laundering 

of monetary instruments), section 1957 (relating to engaging in 

monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity), section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), section 

1960 (relating to illegal money transmitters), sections 2251, 

2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and 2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen property), section 

2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for phone 

records, computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging and copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works), section 2319 (relating to criminal infringement 

of a copyright), section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of 

live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to trafficking 

in goods or services bearing counterfeit marks), section 2321 

(relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts), sections 2341–2346 (relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes), sections 2421–24 (relating to white slave traffic), sections 175–178 (relating to biological weapons), sections 

229–229F (relating to chemical weapons), section 831 (relating 

to nuclear materials), 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 119—WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS INTERCEPTION AND INTERCEPTION OF ORAL 

COMMUNICATIONS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2516. AUTHORIZATION FOR INTERCEPTION OF WIRE, ORAL, OR 

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS 

* * * * * * * 

(1)(n) any felony violation of sections 922 øand 924¿, 924, 932, 

933 of title 18, United States Code (relating to firearms); 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 531. LIMITATION ON OPERATIONS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. 

The Department of Justice, and any of its law enforcement coordinate agencies, shall not conduct any operation where a Federal firearms licensee is directed, instructed, enticed, or otherwise encouraged by the Department of Justice to sell a firearm to an individual 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
29 

if the Department of Justice, or a coordinate agency, knows or has 

reasonable cause to believe that such an individual is purchasing 

on behalf of another for an illegal purpose unless the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or the Assistant Attorney General 

for the Criminal Division personally reviews and approves the operation, in writing, and determines that the agency has prepared an 

operational plan that includes sufficient safeguards to prevent firearms from being transferred to third parties without law enforcement taking reasonable steps to lawfully interdict those firearms. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS