The 114 th Congress debated several gun control proposals following two high-fatality mass shootings in December 2015 and June 2016. In both cases, the offenders attempted to justify their murderous rampages with, and were quite possibly influenced by, radical Islamic views. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), one of the offenders had been watch-listed as a suspected terrorist, but had been removed from the watchlist before he purchased his firearm from a federally licensed gun dealer. After both shootings, congressional gun control debate coalesced around the following issues: Should the Attorney General be given the authority to deny firearms (and explosives) transfers to persons she determines to be "dangerous terrorists"? Should federal background check requirements be expanded to include intrastate firearms transfers among private, unlicensed persons? Should grants be provided or withheld to encourage state, local, municipal, tribal, and territorial authorities to increase computer access to records on persons prohibited from possessing firearms for the purposes of background checks? Should definitions related to mental incompetency in federal gun control regulations be codified or revised? Debate on the latter three issues mirrored congressional debate in the Senate that followed the December 2012, Newtown, CT, mass shooting. While Congress did not pass any of these proposals, Congress included a provision in the 21 st Century Cures Act ( P.L. 114-255 ) that codified certain Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) procedures that address benefit claims, mental incompetency determinations, and firearms transfer and possession eligibility. For context, this report provides background on the two major federal gun control statutory frameworks: the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA), as amended, and the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), as amended. It also provides analysis of several Senate-considered amendments in the 114 th Congress that would have addressed the above listed issues. Since 1998, the VA has been providing records on beneficiaries for whom a fiduciary (a person selected to manage veterans' benefits) has been appointed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for firearms-related background checks, because the appointment of a fiduciary is based on a determination that the beneficiary is "mentally incompetent" under veterans law. Based on this VA determination, the beneficiary is also considered "adjudicated as a mental defective" under the GCA, because he or she "lacks the mental capacity to contract or handle their own affairs." Pursuant to the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA; P.L. 110-180 ), the VA has been required to notify beneficiaries of the ramifications of mental incompetency determinations and a potential loss of their gun rights. The act also required the VA to provide those beneficiaries with an avenue of administrative relief, by which they could appeal such determinations and have their rights restored. In the 21 st Century Cures Act ( P.L. 114-255 ), Congress included a provision that codified certain VA procedures related to mental incompetency determinations and potential loss of gun rights. Following the December 2015, San Bernardino, CA, mass shooting, President Barack Obama called on Congress to pass a "No Fly, No Buy" act. In the 109 th Congress, Representative Carolyn McCarthy introduced the "No Fly, No Buy" act ( H.R. 1195 ), a bill that would have prohibited any individual from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition if he or she were known to pose, or suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety and, hence, were watch-listed on either the "No Fly" or "Automatic Selectee" watchlists. It would have also prohibited anyone from knowingly transferring a firearm or ammunition to such a person. This proposal, however, has not been introduced since the 111 th Congress. Over time, it was superseded by a proposal that has become known as the "Terror Gap" proposal (described below). Under current law, simply being on a terrorist watchlist is not grounds to deny a firearms transfer. Nevertheless, after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Department of Justice (DOJ) began screening individuals against a watchlist of known or suspected terrorists during firearms- and explosives-related background checks. In addition, under then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, DOJ developed a proposal that would authorize the Attorney General to deny a firearms transfer to any person deemed to be a particularly "dangerous terrorist." Senator Frank Lautenberg and Representative Peter King first introduced this proposal ( S. 1237 / H.R. 2074 ) in the 110 th Congress, and it became known as the "Terror Gap" proposal. In the 114 th Congress Senator Dianne Feinstein and Representative King reintroduced this proposal ( S. 551 and H.R. 1076 ). On December 3, 2015, the Senate debated several gun control amendments during consideration of the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act ( H.R. 3762 ). Senator Feinstein offered an amendment ( S.Amdt. 2910 ) that included the text of S. 551 , the "Terror Gap" proposal. It is noteworthy that this proposal made no specific mention of the "No Fly" list or any other terrorist watchlist maintained by the federal government. Neither would the "Terror Gap" proposal, nor any of the related amendments described below, have provided for a blanket prohibition for all persons on the "No Fly" list, or any other terrorist watchlist maintained by the federal government, from receiving or possessing firearms. All the same, under the "Terror Gap" proposal, a terrorist watchlist check during a firearms- or explosives-related background check could possibly be the precipitating event that would prompt the Attorney General to make a "dangerous terrorist" determination about some individual. Senator John Cornyn offered a related amendment ( S.Amdt. 2912 ) that would have provided judicial review of a "dangerous terrorist" determination prior to a firearms-related background check denial. Senators Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey offered an amendment ( S.Amdt. 2908 ) that would have amended the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 ( P.L. 110-180 ) to encourage state and local authorities to make firearms eligibility disqualifying records available to the FBI for the purposes of firearms-related background checks. This amendment would have also expanded federal firearms background check requirements to cover private, intrastate transfers between non-gun dealers, when such transfers were arranged in a public forum, such as on the Internet or at a gun show or flea market. Supporters of the Manchin-Toomey amendment maintain that this bill would have provided for "comprehensive" background checks. Senator Chuck Grassley offered an amendment ( S.Amdt. 2914 ) that also included provisions intended to improve background checks, but did not include any provisions that would have expanded background check requirements. Alternatively, the Grassley amendment included provisions that would have loosened certain restrictions on interstate handgun commerce between federally licensed gun dealers and private persons. In addition, the Grassley amendment included several provisions that would have increased penalties for certain violations of the GCA (e.g., providing a firearm to a convicted felon), while modifying mandatory sentencing provisions for other provisions of that act. While the Senate and House Committees on the Judiciary have reported standalone bills with those penalty and sentencing provisions, the Senate blocked the amendments discussed on procedural grounds. Similar, but unsuccessful, efforts were made in the House of Representatives to bring gun control proposals to the floor for general debate and votes. Following the June 12, 2016, Orlando, FL, mass shooting, Senator Christopher Murphy and other Democrats successfully advocated for the consideration of gun control legislation. In the House, Representative John Lewis and other Democrats made an unsuccessful bid to convince the Leadership to bring gun control legislation up for general consideration. When the Senate took up the FY2017 Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations bill ( H.R. 2578 , the expected vehicle for S. 2837 ), several gun control-related amendments were debated. Senator Murphy offered an amendment ( S.Amdt. 4750 ) that would have expanded federal background check requirements and captured more private, intrastate firearms transfers than under the Manchin-Toomey amendment. Supporters of the Murphy amendment maintain that it would have required "universal" background checks, although it too included exceptions, albeit under narrower circumstances than under the Manchin-Toomey amendment. The Senate, however, rejected further consideration of the Murphy amendment on procedural grounds. While the Manchin-Toomey amendment (S.Amdt. 4716) was also filed, the Senate did not take it up. The Senate also rejected a procedural motion on an amendment offered by Senator Grassley ( S.Amdt. 4751 ) that included some provisions that were identical to those included in the amendment he previously offered in December 2015 to the Health Care Reconciliation bill ( H.R. 3762 ) . In addition, the Senate considered several other amendments ( S.Amdt. 4720 , S.Amdt. 4749 , S.Amdt. 4858 , and S.Amdt. 4859 ) that would have authorized the denial of firearms and explosives transfers to any person whom the Attorney General deemed to be a "dangerous terrorists." While some of those amendments made reference to the "No Fly" list, all of these amendments were loosely modeled on the "Terror Gap" proposal. None of these amendments would have prohibited anyone from receiving or possessing a firearm simply because they were on the "No Fly" list, a claim mistakenly but repeatedly made by many media outlets. All but one of those "Terror Gap" amendments were blocked on procedural votes.