Relating to the prosecution of the criminal offense of the possession, manufacture, transport, repair, or sale of certain devices intended to modify handguns.
HB 2356 would expand Texas Penal Code Section 46.05, which already criminalizes the intentional or knowing possession, manufacture, transport, repair, or sale of certain prohibited weapons and devices. The bill adds a new prohibited item: any device designed and intended to make a handgun capable of firing more than one shot automatically, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. In practical terms, this targets handgun conversion devices, often referred to as “switches” or similar auto-sear-style modifications.
The bill also keeps the existing framework for other prohibited items, including explosive weapons, machine guns, short-barrel firearms, armor-piercing ammunition, chemical dispensing devices, zip guns, tire deflation devices, and improvised explosive devices. It applies only to offenses committed on or after September 1, 2025, leaving prior conduct subject to the law in effect when the offense occurred.
HB 2356 would broaden the scope of Texas’s weapons-offense statute by expressly covering handgun conversion devices that enable automatic fire. This would give prosecutors a clearer statutory basis to charge possession, manufacture, transport, repair, or sale of these devices under Penal Code Section 46.05, alongside other banned weapons and devices. The bill does not create a new chapter of law; it amends an existing criminal offense and would affect individuals involved in the possession or trafficking of firearm modification devices, as well as law enforcement and prosecutors enforcing weapons laws.
The available context shows the bill was referred to the House Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans’ Affairs Committee and there are no recorded votes or committee transcript excerpts provided. Based on the bill’s subject matter and structure, it appears to be a public-safety-oriented measure aimed at strengthening enforcement against handgun conversion devices. With no recorded debate in the supplied materials, there is no documented opposition or support to characterize beyond the bill’s apparent intent to tighten weapons restrictions.
The main point of potential contention is the bill’s expansion of criminal liability to a specific class of handgun modification devices, which could raise concerns among gun-rights advocates about the breadth of weapons regulation and the criminalization of possession or repair-related conduct. Supporters would likely emphasize the public-safety rationale and the need to address devices that convert handguns to automatic fire. Because no committee discussion or votes are included, the record provided does not identify any named opponents, amendments, or disputed provisions beyond the new device prohibition itself.