Summary

4/10/2013--Introduced.Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act - Amends the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 to: (1) delay the repeal date for 10 years; and (2) extend coverage of, and exemptions... Read More

Status

This bill was introduced on Apr 10, 2013, in a previous session of Congress, but was not passed.

Bill Text

A BILL

To reauthorize the ban on undetectable firearms, and to extend the ban to undetectable firearm receivers and undetectable ammunition magazines.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds that-- (1) according to data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 8,583 of the 12,664 murders in the United States in 2011 were committed using a firearm, and more than 57 percent of the murders that occurred in New York State were perpetrated with a firearm; (2) the ability to produce a receiver for a firearm in the home would circumvent a number of laws, because the receiver is the component of the firearm that bears its serial number, as required by regulations; (3) digital manufacturing technologies, including but not limited to computer numerical control mills (``CNC mills''), 3- dimensional printers (``3D printers''), and laser cutting machines, are quickly advancing to a point where it will soon be possible to fabricate fully operational firearm components; and (4) some commercially available products that utilize digital manufacturing technologies to manufacture objects are able to manufacture these objects using materials that are unable to be detected by traditional metal detectors, and may not present an accurate image on an x-ray.

SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF BAN ON UNDETECTABLE FIREARMS.

Section 2(f)(2) of the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended...

Read Full Text

Sentiment Map

Select:

Nation

105 Supporting
2173 Opposing
5% 95%

State: CA

11 Supporting
109 Opposing
9% 91%

District: 1st

1 Supporting
0 Opposing
100% 0%

Popularity Trend

Organizations Supporting

I am writing on behalf of the more than 26,000 members of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA) regarding the expiration of legislation governing the production of "undetectable" guns. Obviously, any weapon if undetectable poses a threat to all law enforcement as well as the public at large. Since it’s our government’s responsibility to ensure Americans are protected, allowing this type of legislation to expire appears as malfeasance on the Congresses part. Any weapon made via a 3-D printer or entirely out of plastic poses a significant threat to the safety and integrity of various entities across the U.S. Many of those same entities, including our airports, incorporate magnetometer screening to stop suspected weapons from entering areas deemed secure and safe. If this legislation was to expire and production of "undetectable" weapons allowed to be manufactured, why bother continued the above screening? The current legislation requires a manufactured firearm to contain a certain amount of metal, so that they are able to be detected via standard security screening. This practice should continue. If the current legislation does expire, no venue whether it be planes, schools or government buildings can ever again be deemed completely safe. While detractors cite the exorbitant 3-D Printer Cost (approx. $100K to produce a functional firearm), the cost of an advanced 3-D printer should not minimize its real threat. In fact, international criminal enterprises, including terrorists, drug traffickers, gun traffickers and human traffickers, all amass a considerable amount of wealth from their illegal activities. While a deranged individual, on average, may not be able to afford an advance 3-D printer, the above referenced violent criminals can.FLEOA strongly supports S1149 and HR1474 "Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act” that would continue the ban on the production of undetectable firearms and close any existing loopholes. This being said, there should be no confusion that FLEOA fully supports the Second Amendment and its import, and does not see this as an encroachment on the sacred right to bear arms. On behalf of the membership of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, we thank you for your attention to this issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if we can provide any additional information or assistance. http://www.fleoa.org/news-story.aspx?id=4208

Share

Organizations Opposing

H.R. 1474 seeks to reauthorize the ban on undetectable firearms, and to extend the ban to undetectable firearm receivers and undetectable ammunition magazines. If passed, H.R. 1474 would make it unlawful for any person to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive: - any firearm that, after removal of grips, stocks, and magazines, is not as detectable as the by walk-through metal detectors calibrated and operated to detect the Security Exemplar - any major component of a firearm which, when subjected to inspection by the types of x-ray machines commonly used at airports, does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of the component. - any receiver for a rifle, or receiver for a handgun, manufactured by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer that is not as detectable as the Receiver Security Exemplar for a rifle or for a handgun, as the case may be, by walk-through metal detectors calibrated and operated to detect that Receiver Security Exemplar - any receiver for a rifle, or receiver for a handgun, manufactured by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer which, when subjected to inspection by the types of x-ray machines commonly used at airports, does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of the receiver. - any ammunition magazine, manufactured by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer that, after removal of the spring and follower, is not as detectable as the Magazine Security Exemplar, by walk-through metal detectors calibrated and operated to detect the Magazine Security Exemplar - any ammunition magazine, manufactured by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer which, when subjected to inspection by the types of x-ray machines commonly used at airports, does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of the magazine. Under H.R. 1474, the term “Receiver Security Exemplar” means, with respect to a rifle or a handgun, an object, to be fabricated at the direction of the Attorney General, that is constructed of, during the 12-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph, 3.7 ounces of material type 17-4 PH stainless steel in a shape resembling the lower receiver for a rifle or for a handgun, as the case may be, and suitable for testing and calibrating metal detectors. The term “Magazine Security Exemplar” means an object, to be fabricated at the direction of the Attorney General, that is constructed of, during the 12-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph, 1 ounce of material type 17-4 PH stainless steel in a shape resembling an ammunition magazine, and suitable for testing and calibrating metal detectors.

Share

Users Supporting

I support H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because I read the bill and the opposition. Both say that it should be illeagle to manufacture gun components that are not detectable by metal detectors and x-ray machines used to protect airports, courts, borders and other places where terrorism or crime could occur. Terrorists will not be deterred from any of the above by this law but unwary people who obey the law might manufacture firearms that they could steal. There is huge opposition by citizens to this bill but I cannot see where it violates the spirit of the second amendment. If I have missed something please vote no however I think the opposition to this bill is a result of a massive amount of bills that do violate the 2nd amendment recently.

Share
MN
7
Dave63US
MN-7
1 year ago

I support H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because...Representative Coffman ~ Few things are more insidious and reprehensible than making pistols and paraphernalia that are unrecognizable by metal detectors. Allowing the ban to expire is just pandering to the NRA re-election campaign coffers. We the People deserve safety on aircraft. Please vote to support H.R. 1474.

Share
CO
6
PORTERLANSING
CO-6
1 year ago

I support H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because it would renew a ban that has already been passed and is in place, and it will only ban guns that cannot be detected by metal detectors, which is a fairly reasonable thing to do.

Share
OH
1
alexschrank
OH-1
1 year ago

I support H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because there is no simply no legitimate need for undetectable firearms and the risks they pose are very serious.

Share
MA
5
ironick
MA-5
1 year ago

I support H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because it has been demonstrated that such a gun is viable to produce. Although the demo may have only fired 6 shots before malfunctioning, the design will no doubt be improved upon over time. A person could wreak havoc in a courthouse or a passenger plane with a gun that could be easily brought through security. Banning such weapons will not, as some already claim, be any kind of infringement. I am certain that the Founding Fathers would cringe at the way the NRA has hijacked the 2nd Amendment. I urge you to support this bill.

Share
AR
3
JudHanson
AR-3
1 year ago

I support H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act. Why would any honest civilian need an undetectable weapon unless they have dishonest and violent intentions? Vote NO.

Share
FL
16
freethinker1
FL-16
1 year ago

Users Opposing

I oppose H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because I support the Second Amendment.

Share
NV
4
TonysTake
NV-4
6 months ago

I oppose H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because...The 2nd Amendment “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Infringe – to fail to obey a law or regulation or observe the terms of an agreement; to take over land, rights, privileges, or activities that belong to somebody else, ESPECIALLY IN A MINOR OR GRADUAL WAY. Encarta Dictionary (emphasis added) Synonym – Break; Disobey; Breach; Violate; Contravene; Flout Any limit; requirement; stipulation placed on the people (citizenry) in an infringement; and therefore unconstitutional.

Share
NC
4
RevRob
NC-4
7 months ago

I oppose H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because efforts should be focused on the undetectable mentally sick people. Focusing on tools of the violence will not make anyone safer.

Share
WA
3
Mr5rB
WA-3
9 months ago

I oppose H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because... The government proved that they are not interested in preventative control of violence by criminals, when for years they failed to fund background checks of firearms purchases. They are only interested in removing firearms from our society.

Share
CA
49
paythedeficit
CA-49
9 months ago

I oppose H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because...I will become outdated in the very near future either by laws that conflict or technology.

Share
CO
6
RioVonWolf
CO-6
11 months ago

I oppose H.R. 1474: Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act because...this is pointless and further infringements upon my rights.

Share
MI
5
M.J.P
MI-5
1 year ago

Bill Summary

4/10/2013--Introduced.Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act - Amends the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 to: (1) delay the repeal date for 10 years; and (2) extend coverage of, and exemptions under, the Act to undetectable firearm receivers and ammunition magazines. Prohibits the manufacture, importation, sale, shipment, delivery, possession, transfer, or receipt of any receiver for a rifle or handgun, or of any ammunition magazine, that: (1) is manufactured by a person who is not a licensed manufacturer; (2) is not as detectable as the Receiver Security Exemplar or the Magazine Security Exemplar by walk-through metal detectors; or (3) does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of a receiver or a magazine when subjected to inspection by airport x-ray machines. Allows barium sulfate or other compounds to be used in the fabrication of a firearm receiver. Defines a "Receiver Security Exemplar" and a "Magazine Security Exemplar" as objects fabricated at the direction of the Attorney General that are: (1) constructed, respectively, of 3.7 ounces of material type 17-4 PH stainless steel in a shape resembling the lower receiver for a rifle or handgun or of 1 ounce of material type 17-4 PH stainless steel in a shape resembling an ammunition magazine; and (2) suitable for testing and calibrating metal detectors. Directs the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to permit receivers or magazines that were previously prohibited but that become as detectable as the respective Exemplar in view of advances in weapons detection technology.

H.R. 1473The Standard of Care Protection Act H.R. 1475 To amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for suppleme...