I
104TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 2470
To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
OCTOBER 11, 1995
Mr. STOCKMAN (for himself, Mr. FUNDERBURK, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mrs.
CHENOWETH, and Mr. HOSTETTLER) introduced the following bill; which
was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the
Committees on Government Reform and Oversight and Ways and Means,
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case
for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned
A BILL
To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Second Amendment
Reaffirmation Act of 1995’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds:
(1) Article I, section 8, of the Constitution of
the United States gives no authority to Congress to
HR 2470 IH
require a waiting period or a background check be-
fore the sale of a firearm.
(2) The United States Supreme Court, in
United States v. Lopez, struck down gun control leg-
islation for lack of constitutional authority.
(3) A number of Federal district courts have
ruled that the Federal mandate imposed on the
States by Public Law 103–159 violates the tenth
amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(4) Public Law 103–159 violates the second
amendment to the Constitution of the United States
because it impermissibly infringes on the right of the
people to secure a firearm when necessary for the
protection of person and property and for the pur-
suit of other constitutionally protected activities.
(5) Waiting periods and background checks
have produced devastating effects for law-abiding
citizens trying to acquire firearms for self-defense.
During the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, residents
were forced to wait fifteen days before they could le-
gally buy firearms for protection, in spite of the fact
that police admitted they could not protect citizens.
(6) In addition to the problem of delays and er-
roneous denials for law-abiding citizens who need to
HR 2470 IH
protect themselves, background checks can also lend
themselves to official abuse:
(A) In 1991, the office of Technology As-
sessment commented on the possibility of gun
owner registration under Virginia’s instant
check system. It stated, ‘‘[T]he potential [for
registration] exists regardless of legal prohibi-
tions.’’
(B) A Justice Department Task Force
stated in 1989 that ‘‘[a]ny system that requires
a criminal record check prior to purchase of a
firearm creates the potential for the automated
tracking of individuals who seek to purchase
firearms.’’
SEC. 3. SECOND AMENDMENT RESTORATION.
(a) Public Law 103–159 is hereby repealed, and any
provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are
restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted.
(b) The Assault Weapon Manufacturing Strict Liabil-
ity Act of 1990 (D.C. Act 8–289, signed by the Mayor
of the District of Columbia on December 17, 1990) is
hereby repealed, and any provisions of law amended or re-
pealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act
had not been enacted.
HR 2470 IH
(c) The second sentence of paragraph (4) of sub-
section (g) of section 923 of title 18, United States Code,
is amended to read as follows: ‘‘Where discontinuance of
the business is absolute, such records shall be delivered
within thirty days after the business discontinuance to an-
other licensee.’’.
(d) Subparagraph (2)(A) of subsection (d) of section
924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding
after ‘‘chapter’’ the following: ‘‘or under chapter 53 of
subtitle E of title 26, United States Code, including a pro-
ceeding before an administrative law judge’’.
(e) Subparagraph (2)(B) of subsection (d) of section
924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding
after ‘‘chapter’’ the following: ‘‘or under chapter 53 of
subtitle of title 26, United States Code, including a pro-
ceeding before an administrative law judge’’.
(f) Subparagraph (2)(D) of subsection (d) of section
924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by strik-
ing all after ‘‘(D)’’ and inserting in lieu thereof the follow-
ing: ‘‘Any person aggrieved by the violation of any civil
or constitutional right in connection with the lawful pos-
session or use of a firearm by the Government of the
United States or any official or employee thereof or the
Government of any State or subdivision or any official or
employee thereof may bring an action for actual and puni-
HR 2470 IH
tive damages in the federal district court in which such
person resides or transacts business. The court may award
a prevailing plaintiff, other than the Government of the
United States or any State or any subdivision thereof, or
any official or employee thereof, reasonable attorneys’ fees
and costs. Nothing in this subparagraph shall be con-
strued to limit any remedies which may otherwise be avail-
able to such person.’’
(g) Section 926 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
subsections:
‘‘(d) No provision of law, nor any statute of any State
or subdivision thereof, enacted to regulate the level of any
pollutant or pollutants may be applied to the sale, trans-
portation, possession, importation, or use of any firearm
or ammunition.
‘‘(e) No officer or employee of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms may undertake any investigation
of a single individual, organization, or business which will
reasonably require expenditures in excess of $4,000 with-
out prior written approval by the Deputy Secretary of the
Treasury.
‘‘(f) No officer or employee or the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms may undertake any investigation
in consultation or cooperation with the Internal Revenue