Bill Overview
Title: Keep Americans Safe Act
Description: This bill establishes a new criminal offense for the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device (LCAFD). The bill does not prohibit certain conduct with respect to an LCAFD, including the following: importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession related to certain law enforcement efforts, or authorized tests or experiments; importation, sale, transfer, or possession related to securing nuclear materials; and possession by a retired law enforcement officer. The bill permits continued possession of, but prohibits sale or transfer of, a grandfathered LCAFD. Newly manufactured LCAFDs must display serial number identification and the date of manufacture. Additionally, the bill allows a state or local government to use Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program funds to compensate individuals who surrender an LCAFD under a buy-back program.
Sponsors: Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1]
Target Audience
Population: People currently owning or potentially owning large capacity ammunition feeding devices
Estimated Size: 27000000
- The bill affects individuals who currently possess large capacity ammunition feeding devices (LCAFDs), as they will be prohibited from importing, selling, manufacturing, or transferring these devices.
- Gun owners, particularly those who own firearms that use LCAFDs, will be directly impacted since their ability to acquire new LCAFDs will be restricted.
- Manufacturers and sellers of LCAFDs will have their operations restricted by the new legislation, affecting possibly their revenue and business model.
- Law enforcement and military personnel are exempt from this ban, meaning their professional use and acquisition of LCAFDs will remain unchanged.
- The bill targets the entire United States market but primarily affects jurisdictions with high gun ownership and usage of LCAFDs.
Reasoning
- The policy targets individuals possessing or interested in possessing LCAFDs, hence affecting gun owners and related industries directly.
- About 27 million Americans are estimated to be directly impacted, suggesting we prioritize interviews with gun owners and those in the firearms industry.
- A significant portion of affected individuals likely reside in regions with high gun ownership rates, such as the South and Midwest.
- The budget and program size constraints indicate that while the policy is broad, the immediate financial impact per person may not be substantial in the first year.
Simulated Interviews
Firearm Retailer (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would directly impact my business by limiting the sale of popular high-capacity magazines.
- It might reduce my customer base if people perceive this as an infringement on their rights.
- I might need to shift focus to other firearm accessories to stay profitable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Police Officer (Florida)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a law enforcement officer, my daily work routines remain largely unaffected.
- This bill might improve public safety, which aligns with my professional and personal values.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Gun Rights Advocate (Illinois)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this bill as a limitation on my ability to enjoy shooting sports and maintain my collection.
- The buy-back program offers some relief, but it isn't a substitute for ownership rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Retired Law Enforcement (California)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Since I'm exempt, this policy doesn't change much for me personally.
- I support any measure that potentially increases public safety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Veteran (Alabama)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for some control, but this feels excessive.
- May have to adapt my hunting practices without LCAFDs if my gear can't be grandfathered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Urban Designer (New York)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't impact me personally, but I support anything that might reduce gun violence.
- Regulatory changes in other states don't usually affect my day-to-day.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Firearm Manufacturer Worker (Tennessee)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My job might be at risk with these new restrictions on manufacturing.
- I worry about the long-term sustainability of my industry if demand drops.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Environmental Scientist (Colorado)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't affect me directly as I don't use LCAFDs.
- I do hope it results in less gun violence in outdoor spaces where I often work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
History Teacher (Virginia)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as a necessary step for public safety.
- I'm interested in the historical context of such regulations more than the specifics affecting me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Public Health Advocate (Montana)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this step can start curbing gun violence.
- Regulatory changes like this could have long-term positive health outcomes for communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $75000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $95000000)
Year 3: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $80000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)
Key Considerations
- Compliance and enforcement will require collaboration between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, which may complicate consistent policy application.
- The legislation might face legal challenges on grounds related to Second Amendment rights, affecting its implementation timeline and costs.
- State-based buy-back programs will vary significantly in terms of participation rates and costs, influenced by local gun culture and prior buy-back experiences.
- Inflationary effects due to the policy are expected to be minimal as it impacts a specific segment of commodified products with varied demand elasticity.