Recent Changes in U.S. State Gun Laws

The firearms industry operates at the intersection of constitutionally protected rights, public safety, and a complex regulatory environment. While the fundamental right to bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment, state-level regulations surrounding gun sales and ownership are constantly evolving. For businesses operating in this space—whether as firearms dealers, manufacturers, or service providers—it is critical to understand and adapt to these changes. This responsibility extends not only to federal firearms licensees (FFLs) but also to the financial institutions that support these businesses, such as credit card processors and banks. Unfortunately, the firearms industry has been mischaracterized as inherently "high risk" by many financial institutions. This misconception often leads to overly complicated policies, heightened scrutiny, and operational barriers for businesses that are fully compliant with the law. At its core, firearms transactions are not high-risk endeavors when conducted under the oversight of an active FFL, which is bound by strict legal requirements for background checks, reporting, and compliance with state and federal regulations. This white paper seeks to provide a comprehensive review of state-level gun law changes across the United States and their implications for businesses in the firearms industry. By examining recent legislative trends and their impact, we aim to emphasize the importance of staying informed and compliant. Failing to adhere to evolving state laws not only risks reputational and financial harm but could inadvertently facilitate illegal gun sales—an outcome that undermines both the industry and public safety. In addition to legal compliance, this paper will address the role of financial institutions in supporting the firearms industry responsibly and fairly. By understanding the true dynamics of firearms transactions, banks and credit card processors can move beyond reputational concerns and contribute to a robust, law-abiding industry. This introduction sets the stage for a deeper exploration of how businesses can navigate the regulatory landscape, safeguard their operations, and ensure their continued growth while maintaining ethical and legal integrity.

California

Before: California already enforced strict gun control measures, including universal background checks, assault weapon bans, and magazine capacity limits.

Recent Changes: Effective January 2025:

• Stricter regulations on the sale and transfer of parts used to assemble unregistered firearms.
• Increased penalties for unsafe firearm storage in homes with minors or prohibited individuals.

Implications: These measures aim to reduce unauthorized access to firearms and close loopholes in firearm assembly laws.

Colorado

Before: Open carry was allowed in most public spaces, including polling locations, with compliance to local ordinances.

Recent Changes: The Vote Without Fear Act prohibits open carry within polling locations and vote-counting centers.

Implications: This law seeks to prevent voter intimidation and ensure public safety during elections.

Delaware

Before: Delaware permitted the sale and possession of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines with limited regulation.

Recent Changes: The Lethal Firearms Safety Act:

• Bans the manufacture, sale, and possession of assault weapons.
• Imposes a 15-round limit on magazine capacity.
• Strengthens background checks by closing private sale loopholes.

Implications: These measures aim to reduce gun violence and restrict access to weapons commonly used in mass shootings.

Illinois

Before: The sale and possession of ghost guns (untraceable firearms) were largely unregulated.

Recent Changes:

• Banned the sale, possession, and manufacture of ghost guns.
• Launched public campaigns to promote safe firearm storage.

Implications: These changes address the proliferation of untraceable firearms and promote responsible gun ownership.

Maryland

Before: Ghost guns and unfinished receivers were not classified as firearms, leaving them unregulated.

Recent Changes:

• Expanded the definition of "firearm" to include unfinished frames or receivers.
• Banned the sale, transfer, and possession of ghost guns.

Implications: This law closes a significant loophole and limits access to untraceable firearms.

Michigan

Before: Firearms collected through community buybacks were not required to be destroyed, raising concerns about potential resale.

Recent Changes:

• Mandates the destruction of all firearms collected during buyback programs or other initiatives.

Implications: This ensures that guns removed from circulation cannot re-enter the market, reducing overall firearm availability.

New Jersey

Before: Ammunition sales were loosely regulated, and firearm training was not mandatory for obtaining a gun purchaser identification card.

Recent Changes:

• Requires electronic reporting of handgun ammunition sales.
• Mandates firearm training courses before issuing gun purchaser identification cards.

Implications: These measures enhance safety by ensuring firearm owners are trained and improve oversight of ammunition sales.

New York

Before: The minimum age to purchase semi-automatic rifles was 18, and microstamping technology was not required for firearms.

Recent Changes:

• Raised the minimum age for purchasing semi-automatic rifles to 21.
• Mandated microstamping technology on handguns to aid in tracing firearms used in crimes.
• Enhanced inter-agency data sharing for firearm-related crimes.

Implications: These laws aim to prevent younger individuals from accessing powerful firearms and improve crime-solving capabilities.

Washington

Before: Assault rifles were not explicitly banned, though restrictions existed on certain firearms.

Recent Changes:

• Banned the manufacture, sale, and transfer of assault rifles.
• Extended waiting periods for firearm purchases.
• Enhanced background check requirements.

Implications: The assault rifle ban reduces access to firearms commonly associated with mass shootings, while stricter waiting periods discourage impulsive purchases.

Financial institutions, such as banks and credit card processors, play a vital role in supporting the firearms industry responsibly and fairly by balancing economic, social, and ethical considerations. They must ensure fair access to financial services for lawful businesses while managing risks, such as reputational concerns and regulatory compliance. Institutions can promote responsible practices by partnering with firearms businesses that prioritize safety measures, such as background checks and secure storage, and by requiring adherence to ethical standards. Enhancing transparency through data reporting and monitoring suspicious transactions helps ensure accountability and prevent illegal activities. Financial institutions can also collaborate with stakeholders to promote public safety initiatives and incentivize the adoption of advanced safety technologies. However, they must avoid politicizing their policies and ensure a balanced approach that considers societal expectations, regulatory compliance, and the rights of lawful businesses. By fostering transparency, ethical practices, and stakeholder engagement, financial institutions can contribute to public safety while supporting the firearms industry in a responsible and fair manner.