View source for Gun show loophole

{{Short description|US political term for sale of firearms by private sellers}}
{{About|a U.S. political term|information about U.S. gun shows|Gun shows in the United States}}
{{Use American English|date=June 2025}}
{{good article}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=November 2024}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{NPOV|date=October 2024|talk=How should this term be labeled?}}
{{weasel|date=November 2024}}
}}
[[File:Houston Gun Show at the George R. Brown Convention Center.jpg |thumb |alt=Many handguns secured to a table with cable locks, with several people looking at them |Handguns for sale at a gun show]]
{{USgunlegalbox}}

In the United States, the absence of a federal requirement for background checks for private sales of firearms is sometimes referred to as the '''gun show loophole''' or the '''private sale exemption'''. Federal law requires that, for commercial sales of firearms – sales conducted by someone "engaged in the business" of selling guns – the seller conduct a background check of the buyer. For firearm sales or transfers by private individuals, federal law does not require background checks, although some states and localities do require them.

The term "gun show loophole" primarily<!-- is used in political contexts without a single well-accepted definition;{{cn|date=November 2024}}<!-- The following source may be a useful source, but does not say this: <ref>{{Cite web |last=Mascia |first=Jennifer |date=February 27, 2024 |title=Three Decades After the Brady Bill, Some Gun Buyers Still Don't Undergo Background Checks |url=https://www.thetrace.org/2024/02/brady-bill-anniversary-gun-show-loophole/ |access-date=November 15, 2024 |website=The Trace |language=en-us}}</ref>{{fv|date=November 2024}} --> refers to "a situation in which many sellers dealing in firearms offer them for sale at [[Gun shows in the United States| gun shows]] without becoming licensed or subjecting purchasers to background checks".<ref name=FedregisterEngaged/><ref name=DugganWaPo/> Regardless of the context of a sale, private sales to buyers known or suspected of being [[Gun law in the United States#Prohibited persons|prohibited]] from possessing firearms and "[[straw purchases]]" by others on behalf of prohibited purchasers are illegal.<ref>{{cite web| title=To whom may an unlicensed person transfer firearms under the GCA? | url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/whom-may-unlicensed-person-transfer-firearms-under-gca|website=www.atf.gov|access-date= April 8, 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=December 12, 2014 |title=Top 10 Frequently Asked Firearms Questions and Answers |url=https://www.atf.gov/file/61721/download |access-date=December 12, 2015 |website=Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms}}</ref> The background check system and the private sale exemption were established by the 1993 [[Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act]], commonly known as the Brady Bill. Under the Brady Bill anyone not "engaged in the business" of selling firearms is not required to obtain a background check on buyers seeking to purchase firearms from a seller's private collection. Along with federal laws for firearms purchases, there are also local and [[Gun laws in the United States by state|state laws]] regulating background check requirements for the purchase of firearms.<ref>{{cite web|title=Unlicensed-persons FAQ|url=https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/unlicensed-persons|website=[[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives]] (ATF)|access-date=April 18, 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Hale |first1=Steven |date=January 13, 2013 |title=Gun shows, Internet keep weapons flowing around background checks |url=http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/gun-shows-internet-keep-weapons-flowing-around-background-checks |work=[[Nashville City Paper]] |access-date=August 2, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130115014922/http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/gun-shows-internet-keep-weapons-flowing-around-background-checks |archive-date=January 15, 2013}}</ref><ref name="18USC921">{{USC2|18|921|Definitions}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=June 27, 2023|title=Federal Firearms Licenses|url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/federal-firearms-licenses|website=[[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives]] (ATF)|access-date=June 9, 2024}}</ref>

Advocates for [[Right to keep and bear arms in the United States|gun rights]] find the "gun show loophole" terminology dubious, since the applicable law says nothing that is specifically about gun shows. They argue that current laws provide rules for commercial gun sellers more broadly, and intentionally do not regulate non-commercial, intrastate transfers of legal firearms between private citizens, regardless of whether the transactions occur at gun shows or somewhere else. In 1999 the [[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms]] (ATF)<!-- The agency name used 1972–2002 --> reported that the definition of who is "engaged in the business" of firearms sales is overly narrow and that the Brady law did not help private sellers identify prohibited persons seeking to purchase firearms, while also allowing habitual arms traders to claim that they fall within the private sales exemption.<ref name=DOJ1999January/> Since the mid-1990s, [[gun control]] advocates have campaigned for requiring [[universal background check]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Goddard |first=Andrew |date=January 1, 2009 |title=A View through the Gun Show Loophole |url=https://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolpi/vol12/iss4/10/ |journal=Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=357–361}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last1=Oppel Jr. |first1=Richard A. |last2=Hassan |first2=Adeel |date=August 13, 2019 |title=How Online Gun Sales Can Exploit a Major Loophole in Background Checks |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/us/guns-background-checks.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Implementing universal background checks would affect all private sales, not just those at gun shows.

Federal law requires the holders of a [[federal firearms license]] (FFL), such as [[gun stores]], [[pawn shop]]s, [[outdoors store]]s and other licensees, to perform a background check of the buyer and [[Federal firearms license#Record keeping|keep a record of the sale]] for any commercial sale, regardless of whether the sale takes place at the seller's regular place of business or at a gun show. Firearm sales between private individuals who reside in the same state – that is, sales in the "secondary market" and with an unlicensed seller – are exempt from these federal requirements. According to a statement by the [[United States Department of Justice]] in 2024, unlicensed dealers are a significant source of firearms that are illegally trafficked into communities.<ref>{{Cite web |date=April 4, 2024 |title=Justice Department Announces Publication of Third Volume of National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment |work= [[United States Department of Justice]] Office of Public Affairs|url=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-publication-third-volume-national-firearms-commerce-and |access-date=August 31, 2024 |language=en}}</ref>

Twenty-two U.S. states, the [[District of Columbia]], and all [[U.S. territories]] have laws that require background checks for some or all private sales, including sales at gun shows. In most of these cases, such non-commercial sales also must be facilitated through a federally licensed dealer, who performs the background check and records the sale. In other states, gun buyers must first obtain a license or permit from the state, which performs a background check before issuing the license (thus typically not requiring a duplicative background check from a gun dealer).

==Provenance==

In 1993, Congress enacted the [[Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act]], amending the Gun Control Act of 1968. "The Brady Law", which went into effect in 1994, instituted federal background checks on all firearm purchasers who buy from a dealer who has a federal firearms license (FFL). This law had no provisions for private (i.e., non-business) firearms transactions or sales. The Brady Law originally imposed an interim measure, requiring a waiting period of 5 days before a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer may sell, deliver, or transfer a handgun to an unlicensed individual. The waiting period applied only in states without an alternate system that was deemed acceptable of conducting background checks on handgun purchasers. Personal transfers and sales between unlicensed Americans could also still be subject to other federal, state, and local restrictions. These interim provisions ceased to apply on November 30, 1998.<ref name=ATF-BradyLaw>{{cite web |url=https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/brady-law |title=ATF: Brady Law |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |year=2015 |publisher=Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)<!-- The agency name used after 2002 --> |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140926131823/https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/brady-law |archive-date=September 26, 2014}}</ref>

Sometimes referred to as the '''Brady bill loophole''',<ref>{{cite news |last=Cole |first=Richard |date=December 20, 1993 |title=Brady bill loophole removes waiting: Private gun-owners can sell their guns to anyone |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1290&dat=19931220&id=3fhTAAAAIBAJ&pg=5330,2581703 |newspaper=The News |location=Boca Raton, Florida |agency=Associated Press |access-date=February 16, 2015 }}</ref> the '''Brady law loophole''',<ref name=Pianin-Eilperin>{{cite news |last1=Pianin |first1=Eric |last2=Eilperin |first2=Juliet |date=June 18, 1999 |title=House Votes to Weaken Senate Gun Show Checks |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/june99/house18.htm |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |access-date=February 16, 2015}}</ref> the '''gun law loophole''',<ref>{{cite news |last=Cole |first=Richard |date=December 26, 1993 |title=Gun Law Loophole Allows Immediate Delivery, No Background Checks : Arms: Private owners can sell their weapons legally anytime, to anyone. Shows are a common sales venue. |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-12-26-mn-5670-story.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |agency=Associated Press |access-date=February 16, 2015 |archive-date=February 17, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150217010516/http://articles.latimes.com/1993-12-26/news/mn-5670_1_gun-show |url-status=live }}</ref> or the '''private sale loophole''',<ref name=Fisher111215>{{cite news |last=Fisher |first=Kristin |date=December 15, 2011 |title=Illegal Internet Gun Sales are Soaring in Virginia |url=http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/179857/158/illegal-internet-gun-sales-are-soaring-in-virginia |publisher=WUSA9 |access-date=February 7, 2015 |quote=These Internet sales really are the new gun shows. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150208000646/http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/179857/158/illegal-internet-gun-sales-are-soaring-in-virginia |archive-date=February 8, 2015 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>More ''private sale loophole'' sources:
* {{cite news |last=Taylor |first=Marisa |date=December 22, 2014 |title=Gun law loophole could have provided Brinsley's murder weapon, say experts |url=http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/12/22/illegal-guns-brinsley.html |publisher=Al Jazeera America |quote=Through something known as the private sale loophole, he could have purchased the firearm in the private market at a gun show or out of someone's trunk. |access-date=February 7, 2015 |archive-date=January 11, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150111222022/http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/12/22/illegal-guns-brinsley.html |url-status=live }}
* {{cite news |last=Dobbs |first=Taylor |date=January 16, 2015 |title=Gun Rights Group Slams Proposed Legislation |url=http://digital.vpr.net/post/gun-rights-group-slams-proposed-legislation |publisher=Vermont Public Radio }}</ref> the "loophole" characterization refers to a perceived gap in laws that address what types of sales and transfers of firearms require records or background checks.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Hale|first1=Steven|title=Gun shows, Internet keep weapons flowing around background checks|url=http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/gun-shows-internet-keep-weapons-flowing-around-background-checks|access-date=August 2, 2015|date=January 13, 2013|archive-date=January 15, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130115014922/http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/gun-shows-internet-keep-weapons-flowing-around-background-checks|url-status=live}}</ref> Private parties who are not engaged in the business of selling firearms are not legally required by federal law to: ask for identification, complete any forms, or keep any sales records, as long as the sale is not made in interstate commerce (across state lines) and does not fall under purview of the [[National Firearms Act]] (originally of 1934 and revised in 1968, which governs [[machine gun]]s, [[short-barreled rifle]]s, [[sawed-off shotguns]], [[gun suppressor|suppressors]] and [[destructive devices]]).<ref>{{cite book |last1=Wintemute |first1=Garen |title=Background Checks for Firearm Transfers |date=February 2013 |url=http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/vprp/CBC%20White%20Paper%20Final%20Report%20022013.pdf |publisher=Violence Prevention Research Program, University of California, Davis |pages=34–5}}*{{cite press release |date=February 20, 2013 |title=Background checks, permanent records needed for all firearm transfers, not just gun sales by retailers |url=http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/7521 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130509040404/http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/7521 |archive-date=May 9, 2013 |website=UC Davis Health}}</ref>

==Jurisdictions requiring background checks for private sales==
{{See also |Universal background check#States with universal background check laws}}
A number of states have background check requirements beyond federal law. Some states require universal background checks at the point of sale for all transfers, including purchases from unlicensed sellers. Pennsylvania and Nebraska laws in this regard are limited to handguns, and the Minnesota background check requirement is limited to handguns and [[assault weapon]]s.<ref name="GCPGV"/> Iowa (starting in 2011) and North Carolina (starting 2014) had state permit requirements for handgun purchases that included background checks,<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/> but Iowa repealed this requirement in 2021<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws/iowa/ |title=Iowa Gun Laws |website=[[NRA-ILA]] |date=October 1, 2021 |access-date=November 15, 2024 |quote=No state permit is required to purchase a rifle or shotgun. A "permit to acquire" is needed to purchase a handgun, but this state law is repealed and replaced with a new Iowa Code §&nbsp;724.15 effective July 1, 2021.}}</ref> and North Carolina did the same in 2023.<!-- NRA-ILA says a permit is required for a handgun in North Carolina https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws/north-carolina/, but that seems out of date. The Wikipedia article about North Carolina says "Senate Bill 41, Guarantee Second Amendment Freedom and Protections, eliminates all pistol purchase permitting laws in the state. Enacted and effective March 29, 2023." and "In 2023, the North Carolina legislature overrode the governor's veto to repeal its law requiring a permit and background check to buy a handgun. The state does not otherwise require background checks on purchases of firearms from unlicensed sellers. Federal and state purchaser prohibitions still apply." --> Indiana and Tennessee also had handgun background check requirements that were repealed around 1981 and 1994, respectively.<ref name=KagawaEpidemiology>{{cite journal |url=https://journals.lww.com/epidem/abstract/2018/07000/repeal_of_comprehensive_background_check_policies.6.aspx |journal=[[Epidemiology (journal)|Epidemiology]] |title=Repeal of Comprehensive Background Check Policies and Firearm Homicide and Suicide |first1=Rose M. C. |last1=Kagawa |first2=Alvaro |last2=Castillo-Carniglia |first3=Jon S. |last3=Vernick |first4=Daniel |last4=Webster |first5=Cassandra |last5=Crifasi |first6=Kara E. |last6=Rudolph |first7=Magdalena |last7=Cerdá |first8=Aaron |last8=Shev |first9=Garen J. |last9=Wintemute |date=July 2018 |volume=29 |issue=4 |doi=10.1097/EDE.0000000000000838 |pages=494–502|pmid=29613872 |url-access=subscription }}</ref> Hawaii, Massachusetts, Michigan and New Jersey require any firearm purchaser to obtain a permit. Illinois began requiring background checks for sales at gun shows in 2005<ref name=Blago-gun-shows>{{cite news |agency=Associated Press |date=July 30, 2005 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/30/us/national-briefing-midwest-illinois-new-checks-for-buyers-at-gun-shows.html |title=National Briefing: Midwest: Illinois: New Checks For Buyers At Gun Shows |work=The New York Times |access-date=November 14, 2024}}</ref> and began requiring checks for all private sales in 2014;<ref name=ChumleyWashTimes>{{cite news |first=Cheryl K. |last=Chumley |date=August 19, 2013 |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/19/illinois-passes-gun-law-requiring-citizen-sellers-/ |title=Illinois Passes Gun Law Requiring Citizen Sellers to Do Background Checks |newspaper=[[The Washington Times]] |access-date=November 9, 2016 |quote=Under the former law, those age 18 or older only had to submit to background checks if the purchases were made at gun shows or at gun shops. ... The new law takes effect Jan. 1 [2014].}}</ref> in 2023 the state changed its law to require private sales to go through background checks processed by FFL holders.<ref name=HowardBelleville>{{cite web |first=Meredith |last=Howard |date=January 11, 2023 |url=https://www.bnd.com/news/state/illinois/article271046422.html |url-access=subscription |title=How Will Illinois Law Banning Some Firearms Affect Gun Owners? Answers to Top Questions |work=Belleville News-Democrat |access-date=January 13, 2023 |quote=The law requires universal background checks for all private gun sales by July 1, moving up the previous deadline of January 2024. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230111203626/https://www.bnd.com/news/state/illinois/article271046422.html |archive-date=January 11, 2023 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=PritzkerPR>{{cite press release |author=<!--press release--> |date=January 10, 2023 |url=https://www.illinois.gov/news/press-release.25890.html |title=Gov. Pritzker Signs Legislation Banning Assault Weapons and Sale of High-Capacity Magazines |work=Illinois.gov |access-date=July 1, 2023 |quote=House Bill 5471 also ... enhances security around certain gun transfers by requiring such exchanges taking place after July 1, 2023 to be filed with a federally licensed firearms dealer and extending the record-keeping time from 10 to 20 years.}}</ref> Vermont passed new gun control laws in 2018, one of which requires background checks for private sales.<ref name=McCullumVermont>{{cite news |first=April |last=McCullum |date=April 10, 2018 |url=https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/government/2018/04/10/vermont-gun-restrictions-what-happen-when-scott-signs-gun-bills/494160002/ |title=Gov. Scott Signs Vermont Gun Bills: When New Steps Take Effect |newspaper=Burlington Free Press |access-date=April 13, 2018}}</ref> Nevada's revised law went into effect in 2020.<ref name=RussellNevada>{{cite news |first=Terri |last=Russell |date=February 15, 2019 |url=https://www.kolotv.com/content/news/Background-checks-for-private-gun-sales-in-Nevada-becomes-law-in-2020-505921291.html |title=Background Checks for Private Gun Sales Bill Signed |work=[[KOLO-TV]] |access-date=February 16, 2019}}</ref> Virginia also started requiring background checks in 2020.<ref name=StracqualursiVirginia>{{cite news |first=Veronica |last=Stracqualursi |date=April 10, 2020 |url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/10/politics/ralph-northam-signs-gun-bills/index.html |title=Virginia Governor Signs Background Checks, 'Red Flag' and Other Gun Control Bills into Law |work=[[CNN]] |access-date=April 10, 2020}}</ref><ref name=MoomawVirginia>{{cite news |first=Graham |last=Moomaw |date=March 7, 2020 |url=https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/virginia-general-assembly-passes-bills-to-require-background-checks-on-all-gun-sales-restore-one/article_7c80ac5a-60af-11ea-9de2-c3c02de526fe.html |title=Virginia General Assembly Passes Bills to Require Background Checks on All Gun Sales, Restore One-Handgun-a-Month Law |work=Virginia Mercury |access-date=April 10, 2020}}</ref> A majority of these jurisdictions require unlicensed sellers to keep records of firearm sales.

All populated [[territories of the United States]] require purchasers to have a territory-issued license to purchase or take possession of a firearm, and the only firearms permitted in [[Gun laws in American Samoa|American Samoa]] are [[shotgun]]s and [[.22 caliber|.22 caliber rifles]].<ref name=SamoaStatutes>{{cite web |url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/guide/american-samoa-firearms-statutes-and-codes/download |title=State Laws and Published Ordinances – American Samoa |author=American Samoa Bar Association |date=2019 |website=[[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives]] (ATF)<!-- The agency name used after 2002 --> |quote='''Title 46, Chapter 42, Section 46.4221 (a)''': It is unlawful for any person ... to have in his possession any arms without first having obtained a license therefor from the Commissioner of Public Safety. '''(b)''': A license to possess arms shall not be issued by the Commissioner of Public Safety unless the application therefor has been approved by the attorney general, and that such approval shall be given only after a background investigation has been conducted on the applicant ... '''(c)''' A license shall be issued only for the ownership and possession of 12, 16, 20 and 410 gauge shotguns and shotgun shells and 22 caliber rifles and their ammunitions.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://asbar.org/section/title-46-criminal-justice/chapter-42-weapons/ |title=Chapter 42 - Weapons |website=American Samoa Bar Association |access-date=November 11, 2024}}</ref> <!-- The following sentence is from [[Gun laws in American Samoa]], but I haven't been able to verify it: Moreover, a reason to justify gun ownership must also be provided to obtain a gun license in American Samoa, and self-defense is not an accepted reason. -->

Some cities and counties have also established local laws affecting gun ownership. For example [[Tacoma, Washington]], has a background check requirement for purchases made at gun shows on city-owned property (made redundant by a state law passed the same year requiring universal background checks), and [[New York City]] has its own gun licensing requirements (in addition to being in a state that requires universal background checks).<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/tacoma-to-require-background-checks-at-gun-shows-on-city-property#axzz3131S3ZA0 |title=Tacoma to require background checks at gun shows on city property |first=Rob |last=Mackay |work=[[Fox 13 Seattle]] |date=May 6, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://portal.311.nyc.gov/article/?kanumber=KA-01307 |title=Gun Laws |website=City of New York |access-date=November 14, 2024}}</ref>

Some states and counties have adopted "[[Second Amendment sanctuary]]" resolutions or laws in opposition to universal background check laws.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/news/local/new-mexico/legislature/2019/03/08/nm-governor-lujan-grisham-gun-background-checks-control-bill/3110079002/|title=New Mexico Governor Enacts Expanded Gun Background Checks|website=Las Cruces Sun-News|first=Mary|last=Hudetz|date=March 8, 2019|agency=[[Associated Press]]|language=en|access-date=March 9, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=David |last=Gutman |date=February 12, 2019 |url=https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/sheriffs-who-dont-enforce-washingtons-new-gun-law-could-be-liable-ag-bob-ferguson-says/ |title=Sheriffs Who Don't Enforce Washington's New Gun Law Could Be Liable, AG Bob Ferguson Says |work=The Seattle Times |access-date=April 24, 2019}}</ref>

The following table summarizes the state, territory, and [[Gun laws in the District of Columbia|District of Columbia]] laws requiring background checks.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Background checks for private sales<ref name="GCPGV">{{cite web |url=https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/background-checks/universal-background-checks/ |title=Universal Background Checks |website=[[Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence]] |access-date=November 12, 2024}}</ref> (date effective)
! 
! Background check by FFL required
! State/territory-issued permit required
|-
! All firearms
| [[Gun laws in California|California]] (1991)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><!-- 1991 also according to Giffords, although having difficulty finding it there now. --><ref>{{cite web |title=California Penal Code – Part 6 – Title 4 – Division 6 – Chapter 4 – Article 1 – 27545 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=27545 |date=January 1, 2011}} (effective January 1, 2011, operative January 1, 2012.))</ref><br />[[Gun laws in Colorado|Colorado]] (2013)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br />[[Gun laws in Connecticut|Connecticut]] (2013)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br />[[Gun laws in Delaware|Delaware]] (2013)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br />[[Gun laws in Illinois|Illinois]] (at gun shows in 2005,<ref name=Blago-gun-shows/> all sales 2014,<ref name=ChumleyWashTimes/><ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/> checks by FFL holder 2023)<ref name=HowardBelleville/><ref name=PritzkerPR/><br />[[Gun laws in Maine|Maine]] (for sales at gun shows and sales that are advertised,<ref name="GCPGV"/> 2024)<br />[[Gun laws in Maryland|Maryland]] (non-handguns included 2021<!-- TimsinaPediatrics says 2010 -->)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><ref>{{cite news |first=Hannah |last=Gaskill |date=February 9, 2021 |url=https://marylandmatters.org/2021/02/09/senate-votes-to-override-hogan-veto-of-bill-to-expand-background-checks-for-long-guns/ |title=Senate Votes to Override Hogan Veto of Bill to Expand Background Checks for Long Guns |work=Maryland Matters |access-date=November 9, 2024}}</ref><br />[[Gun laws in Nevada|Nevada]] (2020<!-- Giffords has 2019, but RusselNevada says it didn't go into effect until 2020 -->)<ref name=RussellNevada/><br />[[Gun laws in New Mexico|New Mexico]] (transfers made without payment exempt,<ref name="GCPGV"/> 2019)<br />[[Gun laws in New York|New York]] (2013)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><ref>{{Cite web | url = http://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/2012/gbs/article-39-ddd/898/ | title = 2012 New York Consolidated Laws: Article 39-DDD – (898) Private Sale or Disposal of Firearms, Rifles and Shotguns | website = Justia Law | access-date = November 12, 2024}}</ref><br />[[Gun laws in Oregon|Oregon]] (2015)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><ref>{{cite web |url=https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/universal-background-checks-in-oregon/ |title=Universal Background Checks in Oregon |website=[[Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence]] |date=December 31, 2013 |access-date=November 14, 2024}}</ref><br />[[Gun laws in Rhode Island|Rhode Island]] (1990)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics>{{cite journal |title=National Instant Criminal Background Check and Youth Gun Carrying |first1=Lava R. |last1=Timsina |first2=Nan |last2=Qiao |first3=Alejandra C. |last3=Mongalo |first4=Ashely N. |last4=Vetor |first5=Aaron E. |last5=Carroll |first6=Theresa M. |last6=Bell |journal=[[Pediatrics (journal)|Pediatrics]] |date=January 2020 |volume=145 |issue=1 |pmid=31792166 |doi=10.1542/peds.2019-1071 |pmc=6939841 |quote=We created a data set of those states that have a requirement for a background check at the point of sale of any firearm. States, including California (1991), Colorado (2013), Connecticut (2013), Delaware (2013), the District of Columbia (1975), Maryland (2010), New York (2013), Oregon (2015), Pennsylvania (2010), Rhode Island (1990), and Washington (2014), have implemented universal background checks (U/BCs) either by requiring background checks for all gun sales conducted by licensed sellers only or by requiring licensed gun sellers, in addition to private sellers, to conduct background checks on all prospective buyers. Eight states, Hawaii (2013), Illinois (2013), Massachusetts (2006), New Jersey (2011), Iowa (2011), Michigan (2006), Nebraska (2010), and North Carolina (2014), implemented firearm background check requirements on private sales primarily by prohibiting private sellers to sell to buyers who did not have a requisite state license or permit and by requiring a background check before issuing the license or permit. Two of these states, Connecticut and New York, require both U/BCs and state permits to purchase firearms.}}<!-- Also refers to Iowa (2011) and North Carolina (2014), but Iowa repealed its permitting requirement in 2021 and North Carolina repealed di the same in 2023. --></ref><br />[[Gun laws in Vermont|Vermont]] (2018)<ref name=McCullumVermont/> <br />[[Gun laws in Virginia|Virginia]] (transfers made without payment exempt,<ref name="GCPGV"/> 2020)<ref name=StracqualursiVirginia/><ref name=MoomawVirginia/><br />[[Gun laws in Washington|Washington]] (2014)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br /><br />[[Gun laws in the District of Columbia|District of Columbia]] (1976)<!-- The Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 was passed in June 1976 and went into effect in September 1976, although TimsinaPediatrics says 1975. --><ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/>
| [[Gun laws in Hawaii|Hawaii]] (2013)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br />[[Gun laws in Massachusetts|Massachusetts]] (2006)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br />[[Gun laws in Michigan|Michigan]] (2024)<ref name="GCPGV"/><!-- TimsinaPediatrics refers to 2006 in Michigan - what changed in 2024? --><br />[[Gun laws in New Jersey|New Jersey]] (2011)<ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br /><br />[[Gun laws in American Samoa|American Samoa]] (only [[shotgun]]s and [[.22 caliber|.22 caliber rifles]] permitted)<ref name=SamoaStatutes/><br />[[Gun laws in Guam|Guam]]<ref>{{cite web |url=https://law.justia.com/codes/guam/title-10/division-3/chapter-60/ |title=2023 Guam Statutes; Title 10 – Health & Safety; Division 3 – Public Safety; Chapter 60 – Firearms; 10 Guam Code §§&nbsp;60100–60129 |date=2023 |via=Justia US Law}} (esp. §&nbsp;60106, §&nbsp;60108.)</ref><br />[[Gun laws in the Northern Mariana Islands|Northern Mariana Islands]] <br />[[Gun laws in Puerto Rico|Puerto Rico]] (sometime before 2000)<ref>{{cite web |url=https://globalpressjournal.com/americas/puerto-rico/puerto-rico-buying-gun-now-easier-ever/ |title=In Puerto Rico, Buying a Gun Is Now Easier Than Ever |work=[[Global Press Journal]] |date=June 26, 2022 |first=Coraly |last=Cruz Mejías}}</ref><br />[[Gun laws in the United States Virgin Islands|U.S. Virgin Islands]]
|-
! Handguns
| [[Gun laws in Minnesota|Minnesota]] (also for assault weapons, 2023)<ref name="GCPGV"/><br />[[Gun laws in Pennsylvania|Pennsylvania]] (2010)<ref name="GCPGV"/><!-- TimsinaPediatrics says 2010 but does not say handguns-only; GCPGV says "Pennsylvania requires point of sale background checks for handguns but not for long guns, like rifles and shotguns" but does not provide a date. --><ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/>
| [[Gun laws in Nebraska|Nebraska]] (2010)<ref name="GCPGV"/><ref name=TimsinaPediatrics/><br /><br />(handguns prohibited in [[Gun laws in American Samoa|American Samoa]])<ref name=SamoaStatutes/>
|-
|}

==History==
{{See also|Gun law in the United States#History}}

The [[Federal Firearms Act of 1938]] (FFA) established the requirement that gun manufacturers, importers, and those in the business of selling firearms have a [[federal firearms license]] (FFL), and prohibited the transfer of firearms to certain classes of people, such as convicted felons.

In 1968, [[United States Congress|Congress]] passed the [[Gun Control Act of 1968|Gun Control Act]] (GCA), under which modern firearm commerce operates. The GCA mandated FFLs for those "engaged in the business" of selling firearms, but not for private individuals who sold firearms infrequently.<ref name=PPGS2010>{{cite journal |last1=Wintemute |first1=Garen J. |last2=Braga |first2=Anthony A. |last3=Kennedy |first3=David M. |date=August 5, 2010 |title=Private-Party Gun Sales, Regulation, and Public Safety |journal=The New England Journal of Medicine |volume=363 |issue=6 |pages=508–11 |doi=10.1056/NEJMp1006326 |pmid=20592291 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name=18USC922>{{USC2|18|922|Unlawful acts}}</ref> Under the Gun Control Act, firearm dealers were prohibited from doing business anywhere except the address listed on their federal firearms license. It also mandated that licensed firearm dealers maintain records of firearms sales.<ref name=PPGS2010/> An unlicensed person was only prohibited by federal law from transferring, selling, trading, giving, transporting, or delivering a firearm to any other unlicensed person if they knew or had reasonable cause to believe the buyer did not reside in the same state or was prohibited by law from purchasing or possessing firearms.<ref name=CFR478.30>{{CodeFedReg|27|478|30}} Out-of-State disposition of firearms by nonlicensees</ref><ref name=18USC922/>

In 1986, Congress passed the [[Firearm Owners Protection Act]] (FOPA), which relaxed certain controls in the Gun Control Act and permitted licensed firearm dealers to conduct business at gun shows.{{refn|group=n|According to the [[Council on Foreign Relations]] and a news report posted on the [[National Center for Policy Analysis]]' website, gun control advocates maintain that the gun show loophole appeared and was codified in FOPA.<ref name=Master130715>{{cite web |last=Masters |first=Jonathan |date=July 15, 2013 |title=U.S. Gun Policy: Global Comparisons |url=https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/192077/U.S.%20Gun%20Policy_%20Global%20...pdf |website=[[Council on Foreign Relations]] |access-date=March 11, 2022}}</ref><ref name=Steele>{{cite web |last=Steele |first=Cameron |date=February 15, 2013 |title=Sheriff Bailey, Chief Monroe: Close gun show loophole |url=http://www.ncpa.org/media/sheriff-bailey-chief-monroe-close-gun-show-loophole |website=[[National Center for Policy Analysis]] <!-- Website is now the National Community Pharmacists Association --> |access-date=January 29, 2015 |archive-date=January 29, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150129073244/http://www.ncpa.org/media/sheriff-bailey-chief-monroe-close-gun-show-loophole |url-status=dead }}</ref>}} Specifically, FOPA made it legal for FFL holders to make private sales, provided the firearm was transferred to the licensee's personal collection at least one year prior to the sale. Hence, when a ''personal'' firearm is sold by an FFL holder, no background check or [[Form 4473]] is required by federal law. FFL holders are required to keep a record of such sales in a bound book.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/licensees-records-required.html#ffl-private-sales|title=Firearms - Frequently Asked Questions - Records Required (Licensees) |work=atf.gov|access-date=March 7, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/newsletters/ffl/ffl-newsletter-2011-02.pdf |title=FFL Newsletter |website=U. S. Department of Justice – Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives |date=February 2011 |access-date=March 6, 2015}}</ref> The [[United States Department of Justice]] (USDOJ) said the stated purpose of FOPA was to ensure the GCA did not "place any undue or unnecessary federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens, but it opened many loopholes through which illegal gun traffickers can slip". The scope of those who "engage in the business" of dealing in firearms (and are therefore required to have a license) was narrowed to include only those who devote "time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms".<ref name=History-C/>

FOPA excluded those who buy and sell firearms to "enhance a personal collection" or for a "hobby", or who "sell all or part of a personal collection". According to the USDOJ, this new definition made it difficult for them to identify offenders who could claim they were operating as "hobbyists" trading firearms from their personal collection.<ref name=DOJ1999January/><ref name=History-C>{{cite web |title=History of Federal Firearms Laws in the United States Appendix C |url=https://www.justice.gov/archive/opd/AppendixC.htm |website=[[U.S. Department of Justice]] |access-date=July 4, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150204040850/https://www.justice.gov/archive/opd/AppendixC.htm |archive-date=February 4, 2015 |url-status=live}}</ref>{{refn|group=n| The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) says that the purpose of FOPA was to reduce burdens on gun dealers and record-keeping on gun owners. [[Chris W. Cox]], chief lobbyist for the NRA [[Institute for Legislative Action]], said: "To be sure, it's not a 'loophole', because FOPA made clear no license is required to make occasional sales, exchanges or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby. What some refer to as a 'loophole' is actually federal law."<ref name="Cox100121">{{cite web |last=Cox |first=Chris W. |date=January 21, 2010 |title=The War on Gun Shows |url=http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2010/the-war-on-gun-shows.aspx |website=nraila.org |publisher=National Rifle Association of America Institute for Legislative Action |access-date=July 6, 2014 }}</ref>}} Efforts to reverse a key feature of FOPA by requiring criminal background checks and purchase records on private sales at gun shows were unsuccessful.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Olinger |first1=David |date=February 13, 2000 |title=Dealers live for gun shows |url=http://extras.denverpost.com/news/shot0213.htm |website=Denverpost.com |access-date=January 29, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Baum |first1=Dan |author-link=Dan Baum|date=June 8, 2000 |title=What I saw at the gun show |url=https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/what-i-saw-at-the-gun-show-20000608 |magazine=[[Rolling Stone]] |access-date=January 30, 2015}}</ref>

==Government studies and positions==
{{Undue weight section|date=April 2025}}
Firearm tracing starts at the manufacturer or importer and typically ends at the first private sale regardless if the private seller later sells to an FFL or uses an FFL for background checks.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/national-tracing-center|quote="Firearms tracing is the systematic tracking of the movement of a firearms recovered by law enforcement officials from its first sale by the manufacturer or importer through the distribution chain (wholesaler/retailer) to the first retail purchaser. "|title=National Tracing Center}}</ref>{{Better citation needed|date=April 2025}} A 1997 report by the [[National Institute of Justice]] based on self-reported survey responses by convicted criminals found that fewer than 2% of convicted criminals said they bought their firearm at a flea market or gun show. About 12% said they purchased it from a retail store or pawnshop, and 80% said they bought it from family, friends, or an illegal source.<ref name=Harlow2001>{{cite web |last=Harlow |first=Caroline Wolf |date=November 2001 |title=Firearm Use by Offenders |url=http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf |website=[[Bureau of Justice Statistics]] |publisher=U.S. Department of Justice |access-date=February 10, 2015 |archive-date=January 6, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150106173025/http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> A 2019 study by the [[Bureau of Justice Statistics]] found that fewer than 1% of prison inmates who responded to a survey said they obtained a firearm at a gun show (0.8%).<ref>{{cite report |title=Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016 |website=Bureau of Justice Statistics |date=January 2019 |id=NCJ251776 |pages=1, 18 |url=https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/suficspi16.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190111212141/https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/suficspi16.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=January 11, 2019}}</ref>

Under Chapter 18 Section 922 of the United States Code it is unlawful for any person "except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms".

The federal government provides a specific definition of what a firearm dealer is. Under Chapter 18 Section 921(a)(11), a dealer is...

<blockquote>(A) any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail, (B) any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms, or (C) any person who is a pawnbroker.<ref name=18USC921/></blockquote>

According to a 1999 report by the ATF, legal private party transactions contribute to illegal activities, such as [[arms trafficking]], purchases of firearms by prohibited buyers, and [[straw purchase]]s.<ref>{{cite web|title=Gun Shows:Brady checks and crime gun traces|url=https://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/treas/treas-gun-shows-brady-checks-and-crime-gun-traces.pdf |website=atf.gov|publisher=The department of justice & The department of treasury|access-date=March 4, 2015}}</ref> Anyone selling a firearm is legally prohibited from selling it to anyone the seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe is prohibited from owning a firearm. FFL holders, in general, can only transfer firearms to a non-licensed individual if that individual resides in the state where the FFL holder is licensed to do business, and only at that place of business or a gun show in their state.<ref name=DOJ1999January>{{cite web |url=https://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/treas/treas-gun-shows-brady-checks-and-crime-gun-traces.pdf |title=Gun Shows: Brady Checks and Crime Gun Traces |date=January 1999 |website=atf.gov |publisher=Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) |access-date=June 27, 2014|author1=U.S. Department of the Treasury |author2=U.S. Department of Justice |author-link1=United States Department of the Treasury |author-link2=United States Department of Justice }}</ref><ref name=18USC922/><ref name=CFR478.30/>

The 1999 report said that more than 4,000 gun shows are held in the U.S. annually.<ref name=DOJ1999January />{{rp|1}} Also, between 50 and 75 percent of gun show vendors hold a federal firearms license, and the "majority of vendors who attend shows sell firearms, associated accessories, and other paraphernalia".<ref name=DOJ1999January />{{rp|4}} The report concluded that while most sellers at gun shows are upstanding people, a few corrupt sellers could move a large quantity of firearms into high-risk hands<ref name=DOJ1999January />{{rp|17}} through gaps in current law, and recommended "extending the Brady Law to 'close the gun show loophole{{'"}}.<ref name=History-C/>

In 2009 the U.S. [[Government Accountability Office]] published a report citing that many firearms trafficked to 
Mexico may be purchased through these types of private transactions, by individuals who may want to avoid background checks and records of their firearms purchases.<ref name=ATF-FTG2000>{{cite web |url=http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/pdf/followingthegun_internet.pdf |title=Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws Against Firearms Traffickers |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=June 2000 |publisher=Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms<!-- The agency name used 1972–2002 --> (ATF) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030331095704/http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/pdf/followingthegun_internet.pdf |archive-date=March 31, 2003}}</ref>{{refn|group=n|A report released in 2009 discussed the role that gun shows play in trafficking to Mexico.<ref name=GAO09709>{{cite web |url=http://www.gao.gov/assets/300/291223.pdf |title=Firearms Trafficking: U.S. Efforts to Combat Arms Trafficking to Mexico Face Planning and Coordination Challenges |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=June 2009 |website=gao.gov |publisher=United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) |id=GAO-09-709 |access-date=June 24, 2014 |archive-date=July 24, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120724042436/http://www.gao.gov/assets/300/291223.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>}}
Proposals put forth by [[United States Attorney]]s, which were never enacted, include:<ref name=DOJ1999January />{{rp|17}} 
* Allowing only FFL holders to sell guns at gun shows, so a background check and a firearms transaction record accompany every transaction
* Strengthening the definition of "engaged in the business" by defining the terms with more precision, narrowing the exception for "hobbyists", and lowering the intent requirement
* Limiting the number of individual private sales to a specified number per year
* Requiring persons who sell guns in the secondary market to comply with the record-keeping requirements applicable to federal firearms license holders
* Requiring all transfers in the secondary market to go through a federal firearms license holder
* Establishing procedures for the orderly liquidation of inventory belonging to FFL holders who surrender their license
* Requiring registration of non-licensed persons who sell guns
* Increasing the punishment for transferring a firearm without a background check, as required by the Brady Act
* Requiring gun show promoters to be licensed, maintaining an inventory of all the firearms that are sold by FFL holders and non-licensed sellers at gun shows
* Requiring one or more ATF agents be present at every gun show
* Insulating unlicensed vendors from criminal liability if they agree to have purchasers complete a firearms transaction form

===Executive branch===
On November 6, 1998, U.S. President [[Bill Clinton]] issued a memorandum for the [[United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury]] and the [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]] expressing concern about sellers at gun shows not being required to run background checks on potential buyers.<ref name="Clinton GSL Memorandum">{{cite web |last=Clinton |first=William J. |author-link=Bill Clinton |date=November 6, 1998 |title=Memorandum on Preventing Firearms Sales to Prohibited Purchasers |url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PPP-1998-book2/pdf/PPP-1998-book2-doc-pg2002-2.pdf |website=gpo.gov }}</ref> He called this absence a "loophole" and said that it made gun shows prime targets for criminals and gun traffickers. He requested recommendations on what actions the administration should take, including legislation.<ref name=DOJ1999January/><ref name="Clinton GSL Memorandum"/>

During his campaign and presidency, President [[George W. Bush]] endorsed the idea of background checks at gun shows. Bush's position was that the gun show loophole should be closed by federal legislation since the gun show loophole was created by previous federal legislation.<ref name=DugganWaPo>{{cite news|last1=Duggan|first1=Paul|title=Gun-Friendly Governor|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-03/16/054r-031600-idx.html|access-date=September 12, 2015|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=March 16, 2000}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Baum|first1=Dan|title=Bush & Guns: The art of the double deal|url=https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/bush-guns-20000706|website=rollingstone.com|date=July 6, 2000|access-date=September 9, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Yardley|first1=Jim|title=The 2000 Campaign: The Gun Issue; Bush Stand Is Used to Turn Election Into a Showdown|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/07/us/2000-campaign-gun-issue-bush-stand-used-turn-election-into-showdown.html?pagewanted=2|access-date=September 10, 2015|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|date=August 7, 2000 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> President Bush ordered an investigation by the U.S. Departments of Health, Education, and Justice in the wake of the [[Virginia Tech shooting]] in order to make recommendations on ways the federal government can prevent such tragedies. On January 8, 2008, he signed the [[NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007]] (NIAA) into law.<ref>{{cite web|title=The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007|url=http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=49|website=bjs.gov|publisher=Bureau of Justice|access-date=September 16, 2015}}</ref> Goals and objectives that the NIAA sought to address included: <blockquote>The gap in information available to NICS about such prohibiting mental health adjudications and commitments. Filling these information gaps will better enable the system to operate as intended, to keep guns out of the hands of persons prohibited by federal or state law from receiving or possessing firearms.<ref>{{cite web|title=Report to the President on issues raised by the Virginia Tech tragedy|url=https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2007/June/vt_report_061307.pdf|website=justice.gov|access-date=16 September 2015}}</ref></blockquote>

At the beginning of 2013, President [[Barack Obama]] outlined proposals regarding new gun control legislation asking Congress to close the gun show loophole by requiring background checks for all firearm sales.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Spetalnick|first1=Matt|last2=Mason|first2=Jeff|title=Obama's sweeping gun control agenda: Assault weapons ban, mandatory background checks|url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/2013/01/16/obamas-sweeping-gun-control-agenda-assault-weapons-ban-mandatory-background-checks/|access-date=September 14, 2015|newspaper=Chicago Tribune|date=January 16, 2013|archive-date=October 7, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151007042859/http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-16/news/chi-obama-gun-control-20130116_1_gun-show-sales-gun-control-assault-weapons-ban|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Now Is the Time: The President's Plan to Protect our Children and our Communities by Reducing Gun Violence|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/gun-proposals/GunViolenceExecutiveSummary.pdf|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=September 14, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Halloran|first1=Liz|title=Even Post-Sandy Hook, Politics Suggest Prospects Dim For Obama's Gun Plan|url=https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/01/16/169531180/even-post-sandy-hook-politics-suggest-prospects-dim-for-obamas-gun-plan|website=npr.org|date=January 16, 2013|publisher=National Public Radio|access-date=September 14, 2015}}</ref> Closing the gun show loophole became part of a larger push for universal background checks to close "federal loopholes on such checks at gun shows and other private sales".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Martinez |first1=Michael |date=January 28, 2013 |title='Universal background check:' What does it mean? |url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/14/us/universal-background-checks/ |website=[[CNN]] |access-date=July 7, 2014 |ref=universal background check}}</ref>

After the [[2019 Dayton shooting]] and [[2019 El Paso shooting]] President [[Donald Trump]] expressed an interest in tighter background checks for gun purchases.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Jill Colvin |first=Laurie Kellman |date=August 21, 2019 |title=Trump: Again open to strengthening gun background checks |work=[[Associated Press]] |url=https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-donald-trump-violence-gun-politics-politics-75db363bc4fb4779b92d4582f5d5bb70 |access-date=March 11, 2022}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Watson |first=Kathryn |date=August 21, 2019 |title=Trump says gun deaths are a public health emergency but his solutions are ambiguous |work=[[CBS News]] |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-says-he-thinks-gun-deaths-are-a-public-health-emergency-but-unclear-what-to-do-about-it/ |access-date=March 11, 2022}}</ref> After the shootings president Trump posted a response on social media: {{blockquote|"We cannot let those killed in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, die in vain. Likewise for those so seriously wounded. We can never forget them, and those many who came before them. Republicans and Democrats must come together and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying this legislation with desperately needed immigration reform. We must have something good, if not GREAT, come out of these two tragic events!"<ref>{{Cite news |last=Thomas |first=Elizabeth |date=August 5, 2019 |title=A timeline of Trump's record on gun control reform |work=[[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]] |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-trumps-record-gun-control-reform/story?id=64783662 |access-date=March 11, 2022}}</ref>}}
After the [[Midland–Odessa shootings]], in which the gunman had purchased a rifle through a private seller after a previous federal background check prevented him from purchasing a gun in 2014,<ref>{{Cite web |date=September 3, 2019 |title=Texas shooter got gun at private sale; denied in 2014 check |url=https://apnews.com/article/health-shootings-us-news-ap-top-news-mental-health-e7eb1dc5241c4daa9d93b58e826a93ec |access-date=December 17, 2023 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref> Trump was quoted saying: <blockquote>"For the most part, sadly, if you look at the last four or five (shootings) going back even five or six or seven years … as strong as you make your background checks, they would not have stopped any of it”.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Buncombe |first=Andrew |date=2019-09-01 |title=Texas shooting: Trump claims background checks would not have stopped any mass shootings in past seven years |url=https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/texas-mass-shooting-trump-background-check-gun-laws-ar-15-a9087856.html |work=The Independent}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Law |first=Tara |date=2019-09-04 |title=A Legal Loophole Let the Odessa Shooter Get a Weapon. Millions of Guns Change Hands That Way |url=https://time.com/5668471/gun-violence-background-checks-odess-mass-shooting/ |access-date=2024-10-18 |magazine=[[Time (magazine)|Time]] |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2019-09-03 |title=Texas shooter got gun at private sale; denied in 2014 check |url=https://apnews.com/article/health-shootings-us-news-ap-top-news-mental-health-e7eb1dc5241c4daa9d93b58e826a93ec |access-date=2023-12-17 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref></blockquote>

In the wake of the March [[2021 Boulder shooting]] President [[Joe Biden]] said at a press conference that the US Senate should pass legislation, namely H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446, to close loopholes in background checks required for purchasing firearms.<ref>{{Cite news |date=March 23, 2021 |title=President Biden Urges Senate To Pass Bills Closing Loopholes On Background Checks Following Grocery Store Shooting |work=[[CBS]] |url=https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/03/23/boulder-grocery-store-shooting-president-biden-urges-gun-reform/ |access-date=April 14, 2022}}</ref>

==Legislation==

Federal "gun show loophole" bills were introduced in seven consecutive Congresses: two in 2001,<ref>{{USBill|107|H.R.|2377}} Gun Show Loophole Closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001</ref><ref>{{USBill|107|S.|890}} Gun Show Loophole Closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001</ref> two in 2004,<ref>{{USBill|108|H.R.|3832}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2004</ref><ref>{{USBill|108|S.|1807}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2003</ref> one in 2005,<ref>{{USBill|109|H.R.|3540}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2005</ref> one in 2007,<ref>{{USBill|110|H.R.|96}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2007</ref> two in 2009,<ref>{{USBill|111|H.R.|2324}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2009</ref><ref>{{USBill|111|S.|843}} Gun Show Background Check Act of 2009</ref> two in 2011,<ref>{{USBill|112|H.R.|591}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2011</ref><ref>{{USBill|112|S.|35}} Gun Show Background Check Act of 2011</ref> and one in 2013.<ref>{{USBill|113|H.R.|141}} Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2013</ref> Specifically, seven gun show "loophole" bills were introduced in the U.S. House and four in the Senate between 2001 and 2013. None passed. In May 2015 [[United States Representative]] [[Carolyn Maloney]] introduced H.R.2380, also referred to as the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2015. It was referred to the [[United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance|Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations]].<ref name="thehill.com 242538-bill-would-require-background-checks-for-private-sales-at-gun-show">{{cite news|last1=Wheeler|first1=Lydia|title=Bill would require background checks for private sales at gun shows|url=https://thehill.com/regulation/242538-bill-would-require-background-checks-for-private-sales-at-gun-show/|access-date=September 8, 2015|newspaper=The Hill|date=May 19, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=H.R.2380 - Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2015|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2380|website=[[Congress.gov]]|date=June 26, 2015|publisher=Congressional Research Service|access-date=September 8, 2015}}</ref> In March 2017, Representative Maloney also introduced H.R.1612, referred to as the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2017. In January 2019 she sponsored H.R.820 – the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2019.<ref>{{cite web |title=H.R.820 |url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/820/text |website=Congress.gov |date=March 25, 2019 |access-date=August 12, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=H.R.1612|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1612|website=Congress.gov|date=March 31, 2017|access-date=April 19, 2017}}</ref> She again reintroduced it in 2021.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1006/text |title=H.R.1006 – Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2021 |website=[[Congress.gov]] |date=April 23, 2021 |access-date=November 16, 2024}}</ref> and [[Mark Takano|Rep. Mark Takano]] reintroduced it in 2023, after which it was referred to the [[House Committee on the Judiciary]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/3122/titles |title=H.R.3122 – Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2023 |website=[[Congress.gov]] |date=May 5, 2023 |access-date=November 16, 2024}}</ref>

In 2022, the [[Bipartisan Safer Communities Act]] (BSCA) was passed, which after interpretation by the [[United States Department of Justice]], partly closed the gun show loophole.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/11/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-action-to-implement-bipartisan-safer-communities-act-expanding-firearm-background-checks-to-fight-gun-crime/ | title=FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Action to Implement Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, Expanding Firearm Background Checks to Fight Gun Crime | date=April 11, 2024 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Cole |first=Devan |date=August 31, 2023 |title=Biden administration proposes rule aimed at curbing the 'gun show loophole' |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/31/politics/gun-show-loophole-rules-atf-biden-administration/index.html |access-date=December 15, 2023 |website=CNN |language=en}}</ref> In August 2023, the U.S. Justice Department and the ATF proposed new federal rules to clarify regulations for firearms sellers at gun shows, flea markets and for online firearms transactions. The new rules require sellers to obtain specific approvals and run background checks for firearm sales.

In late 2023, the ATF addressed the guidelines included in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, noting that "Federal law does not establish a 'bright-line' rule for when a federal firearms license is required. As a result, there is no specific threshold number or frequency of sales, quantity of firearms, or amount of profit or time invested that triggers the licensure requirement. Instead, determining whether you are "engaged in the business" of dealing in firearms requires looking at the specific facts and circumstances of your activities. Courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold, or when only a single transaction took place, when other factors were also present."<ref>{{cite web |title=Do I Need a License to Buy and Sell Firearms? Guide |url=https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download |website=[[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives]] (ATF) |access-date=November 10, 2023}}</ref>

The Department of Justice issued a final rule in April 2024 that established a clarified definition of when a person is "engaged in the business" of dealing in firearms, and is thus required to obtain a federal firearms license.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/fact-sheet-two-years-bipartisan-safer-communities-act |title=Fact Sheet: Two Years of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act |date=June 25, 2024 |website=U.S. Department of Justice |quote=In April 2024, the Department issued a Final Rule (EIB Rule) implementing the BSCA statutory definition clarifying when a person is 'engaged in the business' of dealing in firearms, and thus required to obtain a federal firearms license.}}</ref><ref name=WardPolitico>{{cite web |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/11/biden-gun-show-firearms-rule-00151655 |title=Biden to close 'gun-show loophole' and expand background checks for firearms |website=[[Politico]] |first=Myah |last=Ward |date=April 11, 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |first=Zachary |date=April 11, 2024 |last=Folk |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2024/04/11/biden-closes-gun-show-loophole-heres-what-to-know-and-when-rule-comes-into-effect/ |title=Biden Closes 'Gun Show Loophole'—Here's What To Know And When Rule Comes Into Effect |website=[[Forbes.com|Forbes]] |url-access=limited}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.atf.gov/firearms/final-rule-definition-engaged-business-dealer-firearms | title=Final Rule: Definition of 'Engaged in the Business' as a Dealer in Firearms |website=[[Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives]] (ATF) |date=June 13, 2024 }}</ref><ref name=FedregisterEngaged>{{cite journal |title=Department of Justice – Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives – 27 CFR Part 478 – [Docket No. ATF 2022R–17; AG Order No. 5920–2024] RIN 1140–AA58 Definition of 'Engaged in the Business' as a Dealer in Firearm |url=https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-19/pdf/2024-07838.pdf |journal=Federal Register – Rules and Regulations |volume=89 |number=77 |date=April 19, 2024 |pages=28968–29093 |publisher=[[U.S. Government Publishing Office]] |quote=Several commenters voiced support for closing what they referred to as the 'gun show loophole', by which commenters meant a situation in which many sellers dealing in firearms offer them for sale at gun shows without becoming licensed or subjecting purchasers to background checks. For example, one commenter simply requested that the government please stop criminals from easily buying guns at gun shows without a background check. Another commenter expressed that Americans cannot allow individuals with violent histories to purchase a gun at a gun show or online without their background being investigated. A mother and gun owner added that she is relieved to hear that ATF is moving forward on closing the gun show loopholes. ... Some commenters believed the rule presented a balanced approach. One commenter stated that closing the gun show loophole is a 'common-sense measure' and doesn't infringe on the rights of responsible gun owners; rather, it ensures that background checks are conducted for all firearm purchases, regardless of where they take place. Additionally, a commenter said that the 'proposal laid out does not appear overly cumbersome for currently licensed dealers or citizens looking to liquidate guns from their personal collection' and that '[c]losing the "gun show loophole" and requiring a record of firearms sold limits the possibility of nefarious characters obtaining weapons while increasing and promoting responsible gun ownership.' Another commenter agreed, describing the rule as a modest, common-sense measure to close some of the huge loopholes that buyers and sellers use to get around our necessary and otherwise effective system of background checks. ... The Department also notes that the term 'gun show loophole' is a misnomer in that there is no statutory exemption under the GCA for unlicensed persons to engage in the business of dealing in firearms at a gun show, or at any other venue. As this rule clarifies, all persons who engage in the business of dealing in firearms must be licensed (and, once licensed, conduct background checks), regardless of location.}}</ref> The modified rule, which went into effect in May 2024, affected how guns are sold and expanded background check requirements in the United States.<ref>{{Cite web |date=August 31, 2023 |title=Justice Department moves to close "gun show loophole" |work=[[CBS News]] |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gun-show-loophole-justice-department/ |access-date=December 15, 2023 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Stein |first=Perry |date=August 31, 2023 |title=ATF proposes rules that expand who must conduct gun background checks |language=en-US |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/31/atf-gun-show-rules-ffls/ |access-date=December 15, 2023 |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> It replaced the concept that a seller "engaged in the business" of dealing in firearms is someone who has a "principal objective of livelihood" as their goal with the concept that such a seller is anyone whose objective is "to predominantly earn a profit".<ref name="CohenCRS">{{Cite web |last1=Cohen |first1=Jordan B. |last2=Finklea |first2=Kristin |date=May 29, 2024 |title=The Biden Administration's New Restrictions on Firearms Sales |url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12679 |website=[[Congressional Research Service]]}}</ref> The Department of Justice estimated that the rule modification would reclassify about 23,000 current unlicensed gun sellers as being profit-oriented and thus required to apply for an FFL, and said that the rule change might reduce the number of people motivated to cross state lines to take advantage of differences in state laws regarding whether background checks are needed.<ref name=CohenCRS/>

==Other studies and opinions==

In 1996, the [[Violence Policy Center]] (VPC) released ''Gun Shows in America: Tupperware® Parties for Criminals'', a study that identified problems associated with gun shows.<ref>{{cite web|title=Gun Shows in America – Tupperware® Parties for Criminals|url=http://www.vpc.org/publications/gun-shows-in-america-tupperware-parties-for-criminals/|website=vpc.org|date=July 13, 2015 |access-date=September 30, 2015}}</ref> The VPC study documented the effect of the 1986 Firearms Owners' Protection Act in regard to proliferation of gun shows, which resulted in "a readily available source of weapons and ammunition for a wide variety of criminals, as well as [[Timothy McVeigh]] and [[David Koresh]]".<ref>{{cite web|title=Gun Shows in America Tupperware® Parties for Criminals|url=http://www.vpc.org/studies/tupintr.htm|website=VPC.org|publisher=VPC|access-date=August 8, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Gun Shows in America Tupperware® Parties for Criminals|url=http://www.vpc.org/studies/tupfive.htm|website=VPC.org|publisher=VPC|access-date=August 7, 2015|archive-date=September 14, 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070914045615/http://www.vpc.org/studies/tupfive.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> According to the VPC, the utility of gun shows to dangerous individuals stems primarily from the exemption enjoyed by private sellers from the sales criteria of the Brady law as well as the absence of a background check.<ref>{{cite web|title=Closing the Gun Show Loophole Principles for Effective Legislation|url=http://www.vpc.org/studies/gunloop.htm|website=VPC.org|publisher=VPC|access-date=August 7, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150202205840/http://www.vpc.org/studies/gunloop.htm |archive-date=February 2, 2015 |url-status=live}}</ref> The director of the program which is located at the [[University of California, Davis|UC Davis]], [[Garen J. Wintemute]], wrote, "There is no such loophole in federal law, in the limited sense that the law does not exempt private-party sales at gun shows from regulation that is required elsewhere."<ref name=RGVA2013>{{cite book |last=Wintemute |first=Garen J. |date=2013 |chapter=Comprehensive Background Checks for Firearm Sales: Evidence from Gun Shows |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sQxNVhV-W7oC&pg=PA95 |editor1-last=Webster |editor1-first=Daniel W. |editor2-last=Vernick |editor2-first=Jon S. |title=Reducing Gun Violence in America |publisher=[[Johns Hopkins University Press]] |isbn=978-1-4214-1110-1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sQxNVhV-W7oC |access-date=July 1, 2014}}</ref>{{rp|104}} In the context of avoiding pitfalls in legislation to end the gun show loophole, Wintemute's position states: <blockquote>The fundamental flaw in the gun show loophole proposal is its failure to address the great majority of private-party sales, which occur at other locations and increasingly over the Internet at sites where any non-prohibited person can list firearms for sale and buyers can search for private-party sellers.<ref name=RGVA2013/></blockquote>

On May 27, 1999, [[Wayne LaPierre]], executive vice president of the [[National Rifle Association of America]] (NRA), testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, saying: "We think it is reasonable to provide mandatory, instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone." LaPierre has since said that he is opposed to [[universal background checks]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Halloran |first1=Liz |title=LaPierre Fights To Stop The 'Nightmare' Of Background Checks |url=https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/01/30/170679024/lapierre-fights-to-stop-the-nightmare-of-background-checks |access-date=July 28, 2015 |date=January 30, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151002165832/https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/01/30/170679024/lapierre-fights-to-stop-the-nightmare-of-background-checks |archive-date=October 2, 2015 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=LaPierre990527>{{cite web |last=LaPierre |first=Wayne |date=May 27, 1999 |title=Statement of Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President, National Rifle Association |url=http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju63126.000/hju63126_0.htm |type=Testimony |publisher=Pending Firearms Legislation and the Administration's Enforcement of Current Gun Laws: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Crime of the Committee of the Judiciary of the House of Representatives One Hundred Sixth Congress First Session |location=Washington, D.C. |website=commdocs.house.gov |access-date=July 4, 2014 |archive-date=January 4, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150104103242/http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju63126.000/hju63126_0.htm |url-status=live }}</ref>{{rp|118}}

In 1999, [[Dave Kopel]], attorney and gun rights advocate for the NRA, said: "gun shows are no 'loophole' in the federal laws", and that singling out gun shows was "the first step toward abolishing all privacy regarding firearms and implementing universal gun registration".<ref name=GSUA1999>{{cite web |last=Kopel |first=Dave |date=July 16, 1999 |title=Gun Shows Under Attack |url=https://www.nraila.org/articles/19990716/gun-shows-under-attack-by-david-kopel |website=nraila.org |publisher=National Rifle Association of American Institute for Legislative Action |access-date=February 5, 2015}}</ref> In January 2000, Kopel said that no proposed federal law would have made any difference at Columbine since the adults who supplied the weapons were legal purchasers.<ref name=KopelCommentary>{{cite web |last1=Kopel |first1=David |author-link=David Kopel|title=The Facts About Gun Shows|url=http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows|website=[[Cato Institute]]|access-date=July 12, 2016}}<!-- This source may be OK for WP:ABOUTSELF descriptions of what this person said, but is an opinion piece by an activist, so it should not be cited for factual or objective summary of the topic. --></ref>

In 2009, Nicholas J. Johnson of the [[Fordham University School of Law]], wrote:
<blockquote>Criticisms of the "gun show loophole" imply that federal regulations allow otherwise prohibited retail purchases ("primary market sales") of firearms at gun shows. This implication is false. The real criticism is leveled at secondary market sales by private citizens.<ref name=Johnson2009>{{citation |last=Johnson |first=Nicholas J. |date=January 13, 2009 |title=Imagining Gun Control in America: Understanding the Remainder Problem |url=http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1438&context=faculty_scholarship|pages=837–891 |access-date=June 24, 2014 }}</ref>{{fv|date=October 2024}}</blockquote>

In a 2010 statement from the [[Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence]]: "Because of the gun show loophole, in most states prohibited buyers can walk into any gun show and buy weapons from unlicensed sellers with no background check. Many of these gun sellers operate week-to-week with no established place of business, traveling from gun show to gun show."<ref name=BCPGV2010>{{cite web |last1=Vice |first1=Daniel R. |last2=Long |first2=Robyn |last3=Eftekhari |first3=Elika |date=January 2010 |title=President Obama's First Year: Failed Leadership, Lost Lives |url=http://www.bradycampaign.org/sites/default/files/obama-1styear-report.pdf |website=Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence |access-date=February 10, 2015}}</ref>{{rp|5}}

In 2013, the NRA said that a universal background check system for gun buyers is both impracticable and unnecessary, but an effective instant check system that includes records of persons adjudicated mentally ill would prevent potentially dangerous people from getting their hands on firearms.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Sherfinski |first1=David |date=January 31, 2013 |title=NRA head wary on background checks, wants better instant check system |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/31/nra-head-argument-against-gun-show-loophole-overbl/ |newspaper=The Washington Times |access-date=July 7, 2014 |ref=universal background checks}}</ref> The group argues that only 10 percent of firearms are purchased via private sellers. They also dispute the idea that the current law amounts to a gun-show loophole, pointing out that many of the people selling at gun shows are federally licensed dealers.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Plumer|first1=Brad|title=Obama wants universal background checks for gun buyers. Is that feasible?|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/16/obama-wants-universal-background-checks-for-guns-would-it-work/|access-date=September 14, 2015|work=Washingtonpost.com|date=January 16, 2013}}</ref> The group has stated in the past that: gun control supporters' objectives are to reduce gun sales and register guns, and that there is no "loophole", but legal commerce under the [[status quo]] (like book fairs or car shows).<ref name="Cox100121"/><ref name=TAGS2009>{{cite web |last=Keefe |first=Mark A. |date=October 1, 2009 |title=The Truth About Gun Shows |url=https://www.nraila.org/articles/20091001/the-truth-about-gun-shows-1 |website=nraila.org |publisher=National Rifle Association of America Institute for Legislative Action |access-date=January 29, 2015}}</ref>

According to a 1994 survey called the National Survey on the Private Ownership of Firearms (NSPOF), it was estimated that 60% of firearms obtained by private parties were from retail dealers, with the remaining 40% being from other private parties.<ref name=CookTheTrace>{{cite web |first=Philip |last=Cook |author-link=Philip J. Cook | url=https://www.thetrace.org/2017/01/smaller-private-sale-loophole-gun-background-checks/ | title=A Smaller 'Private Sale' Loophole Suggests We're Closer to Universal Background Checks Than We Thought | date=January 12, 2017 }}</ref><!-- Apparently, The Trace is basically a gun control advocacy group, or at least not very objective on the subject. --> Based on 2015 data, [[Philip J. Cook]], who was the lead researcher for the prior NSPOF survey, produced an updated estimate of 22% for the percentage of gun transfers processed as private sales.<ref name=CookTheTrace/><!-- The last two paragraphs of that source are hard to interpret. If 64% were from retail dealers and 22% were private transactions, what happened to the other 14%? Is he saying the prior 40% number was a bad estimate so "we now know that it was never as large as some claimed", or that the percentage of private transactions substantially dropped during the two decades? --><!-- Apparently, The Trace is basically a gun control advocacy group, or at least not very objective on the subject. --><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Cook |first=Philip J. |date=2017-02-21 |title=At Last, a Good Estimate of the Magnitude of the Private-Sale Loophole for Firearms |url=http://annals.org/article.aspx?doi=10.7326/M16-2819 |journal=Annals of Internal Medicine |language=en |volume=166 |issue=4 |pages=301–302 |doi=10.7326/M16-2819 |pmid=28055051 |issn=0003-4819|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

In 2016, a study published in ''[[The Lancet]]'' reported that state laws only requiring background checks or permits for gun sales at gun shows were associated with higher rates of gun-related deaths. The same study also found that state laws that required background checks for all gun sales were strongly associated with lower rates of gun-related deaths.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kalesan |first1=Bindu |last2=Mobily |first2=Matthew E |last3=Keiser |first3=Olivia |last4=Fagan |first4=Jeffrey A |author-link4=Jeffrey Fagan |last5=Galea |first5=Sandro |author-link5=Sandro Galea |title=Firearm legislation and firearm mortality in the USA: a cross-sectional, state-level study |journal=[[The Lancet]] |date=April 2016 |volume=387 |issue=10030 |pages=1847–55 |pmid=26972843 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01026-0 |s2cid=21415884 |url=https://boris.unibe.ch/79968/14/Kalesan%20Lancet%202016_postprint.pdf }}</ref> Also that year [[Gabriel J. Chin]], professor at [[UC Davis School of Law]], stated that since there are no clear stipulations for the number of firearms sold before someone is required to be federally licensed and that since gun shows are usually held on weekends, "there is room for someone to claim 'this is a hobby or part of my collection' when it is also a substantial business."<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jan/07/politifact-sheet-3-things-know-about-gun-show-loop/| title = PolitiFact Sheet: 3 things to know about the 'gun show loophole'| last = Sherman| first = Amy| date = January 7, 2016| website = [[Politifact]]| access-date = February 23, 2018}}</ref>

Establishing universal background checks enjoys high levels of public support, with about 85% of the public or more in favor of the requirement (including about 77% of gun owners).<ref name=BuiNYT>{{cite news | url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/10/upshot/How-to-Prevent-Gun-Deaths-The-Views-of-Experts-and-the-Public.html?_r=4 | title=How to Prevent Gun Deaths? Where Experts and the Public Agree | work=The New York Times | date=January 10, 2017 | last1=Bui | first1=Quoctrung | last2=Sanger-Katz | first2=Margot |author2-link=Margot Sanger-Katz }}</ref><ref name=pew2017>{{cite news |agency=[[Pew Research Center]] |date=June 22, 2017 |title=America's Complex Relationship With Guns |first1=Kim |last1=Parker |first2=Juliana |last2=Menasce Horowitz |first3=Ruth |last3=Igielnik |first4=Baxter |last4=Oliphant |first5=Anna |last5=Brown |url=http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/americas-complex-relationship-with-guns/ |access-date=March 24, 2018 |archive-date=August 15, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170815023915/http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/americas-complex-relationship-with-guns/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=politico20180228>{{cite news |title=Gun control support surges in polls |first=Steven |last=Shepard |date=February 28, 2018 |publisher=[[Politico]] |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/28/gun-control-polling-parkland-430099 |access-date=March 19, 2018 |quote=Eighty-eight percent support requiring background checks on all gun sales.}}</ref><ref name=qu20180220>{{cite web |date=February 20, 2018 |title=U.S. Support For Gun Control Tops 2-1, Highest Ever, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds |url=https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2521 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180220194837/https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2521 |url-status=dead |archive-date=February 20, 2018 |website=[[Quinnipiac University Polling Institute]] |access-date=March 20, 2018 |quote=Support for universal background checks is itself almost universal, 97 – 2 percent...}}</ref> Universal background checks were also given the highest rating of effectiveness among 29 possible gun control measures for reducing firearm homicides in a survey of 32 academic experts on gun policy reported by ''[[The New York Times]]'' in January 2017.<ref name=BuiNYT/>

A position paper submitted to the [[Annals of Internal Medicine]] from the [[American College of Physicians]] in 2018 stated, "The Gun show loophole should be closed to ensure that prohibited purchasers, such as felons, persons who have been involuntarily committed for mental illness or are otherwise 'adjudicated mentally defective', and others who are prohibited from owning firearms, cannot make purchases."<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Butkus |first1=Renee |last2=Doherty |first2=Robert |last3=Bornstein |first3=Sue S. |date=October 30, 2018 |title=Reducing Firearm Injuries and Deaths in the United States: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians |url=https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M18-1530?_gl=1 |journal=Annals of Internal Medicine |volume=169 |issue=10 |pages=704–707 |doi=10.7326/M18-1530 |pmid=30383132 |via=acpjournals.org|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

State-level pro-gun lobbies oppose the framing of the issue since it "criminalizes the right to buy and sell lawful private property". In 2021, Wisconsin Gun Owners, Inc., a Second Amendment lobbying organization, opposed a ban on Wisconsin gun shows. The organization argued the ban was unjustified according to statistics and research that amounted to discrimination against gun owners.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Leager |first1=Thomas |title=Wisconsin Gun Shows |url=https://wisconsingunowners.org/wisconsin-gun-shows/ |website=wisconsingunowners.org |access-date=February 13, 2022}}</ref>

==Contributing events==
After the [[Columbine High School massacre]] on April 20, 1999, gun shows and background checks became a focus of national debate in the United States.<ref name=BMSG2000>{{cite web |date=January 1, 2000 |title=The debate on gun policies in U.S. and midwest newspapers |url=http://www.bmsg.org/resources/publications/issue-8-the-debate-on-gun-policies-in-US-and-midwest-newspapers |publisher=[[Berkeley Media Studies Group]] }}</ref><ref name=NCSL2000>{{cite web |author=National Conference of State Legislatures |date=June 1, 2000 |title=Colorado After Columbine The Gun Debate. |url=http://www.thefreelibrary.com/COLORADO+AFTER+COLUMBINE+THE+GUN+DEBATE.-a063840684 |website=The Free Library by Farlex |publisher=[[Gale (publisher)|Gale Group]] }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://content.thirdway.org/publications/7/AGS_Report_-_No_Questions_Asked_-_Background_Checks_Gun_Shows_and_Crime.pdf |title=No Questions Asked: Background Checks, Gun Shows, and Crime |publisher=[[Americans for Gun Safety Foundation]] |date=April 1, 2001 |access-date=January 26, 2015 |archive-date=March 4, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304103540/http://content.thirdway.org/publications/7/AGS_Report_-_No_Questions_Asked_-_Background_Checks_Gun_Shows_and_Crime.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> The Columbine shooters had obtained the guns via a straw purchase through private sellers at gun shows.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://extras.denverpost.com/news/col0624.htm |title=Duran gets 4 1/2-year term |last=Pankratz |first=Howard |date=June 24, 2000 |newspaper=[[The Denver Post]] |access-date=October 15, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150312123352/http://extras.denverpost.com/news/col0624.htm |archive-date=March 12, 2015 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="auto">{{cite book |last=Klebold |first=Sue |title=[[A Mother's Reckoning]]: Living in the Aftermath of the Columbine Tragedy |publisher=WH Allen |year=2016 |isbn=9780753556795 |page=84}}</ref> Weeks after the shooting, [[United States Senator]]s [[Frank Lautenberg]] and [[Jack Reed (Rhode Island politician)|Jack Reed]] introduced a bill to require background checks for sales at gun shows in federal law. It was passed in the [[United States Senate|Senate]], but did not pass in the [[United States House of Representatives|House]].<ref name="Los Angeles Times la-na-gunshow1feb01">{{cite news|last1=DuBose|first1=Ben|title=Senators aim to close gun-show loophole|url=https://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-gunshow1feb01-story.html|access-date=September 15, 2015|newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]]|date=February 1, 2008|archive-date=October 2, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151002170207/http://articles.latimes.com/2008/feb/01/nation/la-na-gunshow1feb01|url-status=live}}</ref>

The [[Virginia Tech shooting]] on April 16, 2007, again brought discussion of the gun show loophole to the forefront of U.S. politics, even though the shooter passed a background check and purchased his weapons legally at a Virginia gun shop via a Wisconsin-based Internet dealer.<ref name=AP081412>{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=April 12, 2008 |title=One year after tragedy, debate rages over solutions |url=http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-04-12-va-tech-gun-debate_N.htm |newspaper=USA Today |agency=Associated Press |access-date=January 27, 2015}}</ref><ref name=Alfano070419>{{cite news |last=Alfano |first=Sean |date=April 19, 2007 |title=Va. Tech Killer Bought 2nd Gun Online |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/va-tech-killer-bought-2nd-gun-online/ |publisher=CBS Interactive |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150205183656/http://www.cbsnews.com/news/va-tech-killer-bought-2nd-gun-online/ |archive-date=February 5, 2015 |url-status=live |access-date=February 5, 2015}}</ref> Previously, in December 2005, a Virginia judge had directed the Virginia Tech gunman to undergo outpatient treatment, but because he was treated as an outpatient, Virginia did not send his name to the [[National Instant Criminal Background Check System]] (NICS). On April 30, 2007, [[Tim Kaine]], the Governor of Virginia, issued an executive order intended to prohibit the sale of guns to anyone found to be dangerous and forced to undergo involuntary mental health treatment.<ref name=Urbina070501/> He called on lawmakers to close the gun show loophole.<ref name=Halliwell090409>{{cite news |last=Halliwell |first=Naria |date=April 9, 2009 |title=Easy Access: $5,000 and One Hour Buys 10 Guns |url=https://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=7297745 |work=ABC News |access-date=March 6, 2015}}</ref> A bill to close the gun show loophole in Virginia was submitted, but eventually failed.<ref name=Ripley080415>{{cite magazine |last=Ripley |first=Amanda |date=April 15, 2008 |title=Ignoring Virginia Tech |url=http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1731195,00.html |magazine=Time |access-date=March 6, 2015}}</ref> Since then, Virginia lawmakers' efforts to close the gun show loophole were continuously blocked by gun rights advocates.<ref name=Urbina070501>{{cite news |last=Urbina |first=Ian |date=May 1, 2007 |title=Virginia Ends a Loophole in Gun Laws |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/us/01guns.html?_r=1& |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=March 5, 2015 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> The governor wrote:

{{blockquote|I was disappointed to see the Virginia legislature balk, largely under pressure from the NRA, at efforts to close the gun-show loophole that allows anyone to buy weapons without any background check. That loophole still exists.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Kaine|first1=Tim|title=Tim Kaine: Are we ready to reduce gun violence?|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tim-kaine-are-we-ready-to-reduce-gun-violence/2013/01/14/a67e19ba-5e65-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html|website=washingtonpost.com|access-date=6 March 2015}}</ref>}}

After the July [[2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting]] in Colorado,<ref>{{cite news |last=Burns |first=Dan |date=January 14, 2013 |title=Aurora shooting victim's mother grieves with Newtown families |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-aurora-idUSBRE90D18T20130114 |work=Reuters |access-date=February 2, 2015}}</ref> the October 2012 [[Azana Spa shooting]] in Wisconsin,<ref>{{cite web |last1=Davis |first1=Stephen |last2=Polcyn |first2=Bryan |date=November 7, 2013 |title=Guns for sale: No background check required |url=http://fox6now.com/2013/11/07/guns-for-sale-no-background-check-required/ |website=fox6now.com |access-date=January 31, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Fuchs |first1=Erin |date=December 19, 2012 |title=There's A Gaping Loophole In US Gun Laws |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-background-check-loophole-2012-12 |website=businessinsider.com |access-date=January 31, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121230221942/http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-background-check-loophole-2012-12 |archive-date=December 30, 2012 |url-status=live}}</ref> and the December 2012 [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting]] involving weapons legally purchased and owned by the shooter's mother,<ref name=FinalReport>{{cite web |author=Office of the State's Attorney, Judicial District of Danbury |date=November 25, 2013 |title=Sandy Hook Final Report |url=http://www.ct.gov/csao/lib/csao/Sandy_Hook_Final_Report.pdf |access-date=February 6, 2015 |archive-date=November 25, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131125212413/http://www.ct.gov/csao/lib/csao/Sandy_Hook_Final_Report.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>{{rp|16}}<ref>{{cite news |last=Childress |first=Sarah |date=March 28, 2013 |title=What Police Found in Adam Lanza's Home |url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/what-police-found-in-adam-lanzas-home/ |publisher=PBS }}</ref> debates regarding the gun show loophole resumed.<ref name=Kesling121224>{{cite news |last=Kesling |first=Ben |date=December 24, 2012 |title=Fear of New Restrictions Drives Crowds to Gun Shows |url=https://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323291704578197802637164158 |others=Contributions to article by Jess Bravin. |newspaper=Wall Street Journal |publisher=Dow Jones & Company |access-date=January 19, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150203010752/https://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323291704578197802637164158 |archive-date=February 3, 2015 |url-status=live}}</ref> After the Aurora shooting, then-president of the NRA, [[David Keene]], said that such tragedies are often exploited by the media and politicians. He said, "Colorado has already closed the so-called 'loophole' and the killer didn't buy his guns at a gun show."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Keene |first1=David |date=October 1, 2012 |title=It's Impossible To Legislate Against Evil Or Madness |url=http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/14221/presidents-column-30/ |website=nrapublications.org |access-date=February 5, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512113402/http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/14221/presidents-column-30/ |archive-date=May 12, 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The handgun in the Azana Spa shooting was purchased legally in a private transaction, not at a gun show.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ramde |first1=Dinesh |last2=Bauer |first2=Scott |date=October 22, 2012 |title=Wis. shooting brings call for new law on guns |newspaper=Seattle Times |url=http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019492790_apuswisconsinmallshooting.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150205164014/http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019492790_apuswisconsinmallshooting.html |archive-date=February 5, 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

After the [[Charleston church shooting]] in 2015 raised the topic of background checks, former president Obama took executive actions in effort to close the gun show loophole.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Graham |first=David A. |date=July 10, 2015 |title=Why Didn't a Background Check Stop Dylann Roof? |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/dylann-roof-background-check/398267/ |access-date=October 16, 2024 |website=The Atlantic |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Wheaton |first1=Sarah |last2=Gass |first2=Nick |date=January 5, 2016 |title=Obama wipes away tears as he calls for new gun measures |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/obama-gun-restrictions-217354 |website=Politico}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Smith |first=Aaron |date=June 19, 2015 |title=This is how easy it is to buy guns in America |url=https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/19/news/guns-background-checks/index.html |access-date=October 16, 2024 |website=[[CNN]] |language=en}}</ref> In accordance with The Brady Act and certain state's laws, licensed gun dealers may complete firearm sales with an incomplete background check after three days. The result of the background check in this case is technically referred to as a default proceed, which does not involve a private sale. The perpetrator was prohibited from purchasing a firearm but was able to complete the purchase of a gun used in the attack through a licensed seller when his background check remained incomplete after the required three day waiting period. After the Charleston attack, the three day default proceed provision also came to be known as a Charleston loophole.<ref>{{Cite web |first1=Christi |last1=Parsons |first2=Michael A. |last2=Memoli |date=December 3, 2015 |title=Obama looks to use executive power to close gun loophole |url=https://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-obama-gun-order-20151203-story.html |access-date=October 16, 2024 |newspaper=[[Los Angeles Times]] |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Kates |first=Graham |date=February 4, 2021 |title="The Charleston loophole": Purchases by people barred from buying guns skyrocketed in 2020 - CBS News |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gun-purchases-charleston-loophole-2020/ |access-date=October 16, 2024 |website=www.cbsnews.com |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Rhodan |first=Maya |date=January 15, 2016 |title=How the GOP Gun Conversation Played Out In Charleston |url=https://time.com/4181993/republican-debate-gun-charleston/ |access-date=October 16, 2024 |magazine=TIME |language=en}}</ref> In a statement during the aftermath of the shooting, former FBI Director [[James Comey]] told reporters the shooter should have been denied, but the data was added incorrectly into the (NICS) database.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Nakashima |first=Ellen |date=April 10, 2023 |title=FBI: Breakdown in background check system allowed Dylann Roof to buy gun |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-accused-charleston-shooter-should-not-have-been-able-to-buy-gun/2015/07/10/0d09fda0-271f-11e5-b72c-2b7d516e1e0e_story.html |access-date=October 16, 2024 |newspaper=The Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Boyfriend loophole]], a lack of regulation of firearms purchases by stalkers and non-cohabitant, non-spouse romantic partners
* [[Homemade firearm]], also known as "ghost guns", firearms manufactured by unlicensed private parties
* [[Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2009]], a proposed law containing provisions specific to sales at gun shows

==Notes==
{{Reflist|group=n}}

== References ==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==Further reading==
* {{cite web |author=Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms<!-- The agency name used 1972–2002 --> |author-link=Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives |date=February 2000 |title=Commerce in Firearms in the United States |url=http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/storage/Research-Digital-Library/clinton-admin-history-project/81-90/Box-86/1756223-history-department-treasury-supplementary-documents-4.pdf |website=William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150208012904/http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/storage/Research-Digital-Library/clinton-admin-history-project/81-90/Box-86/1756223-history-department-treasury-supplementary-documents-4.pdf |archive-date=February 8, 2015 |url-status=dead }}
* {{cite web |author=City of New York |date=October 2009 |title=Gun Show Undercover: Report on Illegal Sales at Gun Shows |url=http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/pr442-09_report.pdf }}
* {{cite news |last1=Cooper |first1=Michael |last2=Schmidt |first2=Michael S. |last3=Luo |first3=Michael |date=April 10, 2013 |title=Loopholes in Gun Laws Allow Buyers to Skirt Checks |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/11/us/gun-law-loopholes-let-buyers-skirt-background-checks.html |newspaper=The New York Times |url-access=subscription}}
* {{cite news |last=Dinan |first=Stephen |date=December 17, 2012 |title=Gun bills face tough sailing on Capitol Hill |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/17/gun-limit-advocates-find-a-rare-juncture/?page=all |newspaper=The Washington Times }}
* {{cite news |last=Freedman |first=Dan |date=November 2, 2013 |title=How the NRA became ATF's biggest enemy |url=http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/How-the-NRA-became-ATF-s-biggest-enemy-4950703.php |website=sfgate.com }}
* {{cite news |last=Janofsky |first=Michael |date=November 15, 2000 |title=Both Sides See Momentum in Congress for Gun Control  |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/15/us/both-sides-see-momentum-in-congress-for-gun-control.html |newspaper=The New York Times |url-access=subscription}}
* {{cite news |last=Kessler |first=Glenn |date=January 21, 2013 |title=The stale claim that 40 percent of gun sales lack background checks |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-stale-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/01/20/e42ec050-629a-11e2-b05a-605528f6b712_blog.html |type=blog |newspaper=The Washington Post }}
* {{cite news |author=Los Angeles Times editorial board |date=April 23, 2007 |title=Close the gun control loophole |url=http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-guns23apr23-story.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times }}
* {{cite book |last=Patrick |first=Brian Anse |year=2010 |title=Rise of the Anti-media: Informing America's Concealed Weapon Carry Movement |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=93f4RzMSgXsC&pg=PA65 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |page=65 |isbn=978-0-7391-1886-3 }} – Patrick, a professor of [[Communication studies|communication]] at the [[University of Toledo]], thinks "gun show loophole" is a euphemistic label for legislative proposals as part of an "overall disarmament goal".

{{Gun control in the United States}}
{{Gun laws in the United States by state}}

[[Category:United States federal firearms legislation]]
[[Category:Sales]]