Bill Overview
Title: AIM Act
Description: This bill removes limitations on the authority of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to conduct activities related to the administration of federal firearms laws. Specifically, the bill removes provisions that limit the use of firearms tracing data; prohibit consolidating or centralizing records maintained by federal firearm licensees, or FFLs (e.g., gun dealers); prohibit imposing a requirement that gun dealers conduct a physical inventory; require national instant criminal background check records to be destroyed within 24 hours; limit the disclosure of data under the Freedom of Information Act; prohibit the ATF from altering the definition of a curio or relic firearm; prohibit the denial of a federal firearms license due to lack of business activity; prohibit transferring the ATF's functions, missions, or activities to other agencies or departments; prohibit the electronic retrieval of information gathered from firearm transaction records of FFLs that go out of business; and prohibit the ATF from denying an application to import certain shotguns. Additionally, the bill raises the liability standard for denying or revoking a federal firearms license from a willful violation to a knowing violation of federal firearms laws or regulations, and removes the de novo standard of judicial review for appealing the denial or revocation of a federal firearms license.
Sponsors: Rep. Beyer, Donald S., Jr. [D-VA-8]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in the United States affected by firearms legislation
Estimated Size: 66000000
- The AIM Act affects the role and function of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), primarily focusing on the regulatory framework surrounding firearms in the U.S.
- Individuals directly impacted will include those involved in the manufacturing, distribution, and sale of firearms, such as gun dealers and manufacturers, due to changes in regulations and record-keeping requirements.
- Gun owners and prospective gun owners in the U.S. might be indirectly impacted due to changes in how firearms laws are administered.
- Victims or potential victims of gun violence may be impacted positively or negatively, depending on changes in enforcement as a result of this legislation.
- Law enforcement and legal entities involved in the firearms regulation and judicial review processes are stakeholders who will experience a shift in how they handle cases related to firearms licenses and regulations.
- Given the U.S.-centric nature of this legislation, the impact outside the U.S. is indirect; other countries or international markets may not see a direct effect.
Reasoning
- The AIM Act's budgetary constraints mean it must prioritize impactful yet feasible changes, potentially emphasizing regulations that are simpler to implement and have clear execution paths.
- Firearms dealers and manufacturers are often found in rural areas; hence, the perceived impact may vary significantly depending on regional focus and local laws.
- For policymakers and the ATF, budget allocation will necessitate hiring or training additional personnel, restructuring certain processes, and perhaps developing new technologies for record management.
- Wellbeing impacts will depend on how the policy changes perception and reality of firearm safety and business operations.
Simulated Interviews
Gun shop owner (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy makes paperwork tougher but could reduce illegal transfers, boosting legitimacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Legal advisor (California)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy changes increase workload, but provide clearer grounds for license revocation, which may improve overall compliance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Community college professor (Illinois)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could potentially reduce gun misuse, but successful implementation is complex.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Law enforcement officer (Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhanced ATF powers may lead to better control over illegal firearms, supporting public safety efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Gun rights activist (New York)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a slippery slope to infringing on gun owners' rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Small arms manufacturer (Colorado)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The implementation costs and increased scrutiny could pressure small operations like ours.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Retired military (Ohio)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These changes may disrupt curio and relic markets, affecting cultural preservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Data analyst (Washington)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Removing data limitations is a step forward for research, but must ensure privacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College student (Georgia)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about how reforming ATF rules might affect lawful gun sports.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Federal lawmaker (Arizona)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More streamlined processes can lead to better enforcement, but careful balancing is essential.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 2: $165000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $200000000)
Year 3: $180000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $220000000)
Year 5: $200000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $240000000)
Year 10: $230000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $280000000)
Year 100: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Key Considerations
- The ATF's ability to implement such changes effectively with the appropriated budget is crucial.
- Legal challenges and compliance issues may arise, impacting anticipated cost and savings.
- Public and political reactions to increased centralization of records could affect policy implementation.