HB2799, titled the “Closing the Bump Stock Loophole Act of 2025,” would amend federal firearms law to prohibit the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, receipt, or possession of certain devices and modifications that increase the rate of fire of semiautomatic firearms. The bill defines semiautomatic firearms for purposes of the amendment and targets manual, power-driven, or electronic devices designed to make a firearm fire faster or approximate the action or rate of fire of a machinegun, as well as parts or combinations of parts that eliminate the need for a separate trigger movement for each function.
The bill also covers semiautomatic firearms that have been modified in a way that materially increases their rate of fire or makes them function like a machinegun. It creates a 120-day compliance window after enactment and requires lawful owners of preexisting modified semiautomatic firearms to register them under the National Firearms Act. The bill exempts federal, state, tribal, and local government possession and transfers, and it amends the Internal Revenue Code to treat certain modified semiautomatic firearms as firearms subject to National Firearms Act registration requirements.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would expand federal criminal prohibitions in title 18 and add a new category of regulated firearms under the National Firearms Act framework. It would expose violators to criminal penalties under existing federal firearms enforcement provisions and require registration of certain previously modified semiautomatic firearms, affecting owners, manufacturers, sellers, importers, and transferors of bump stocks and similar rate-of-fire devices or modifications.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill’s subject matter and its title, the measure appears to be framed as a gun-safety and loophole-closing proposal, but the provided materials do not show any recorded sentiment beyond its introduction and referral.
Contention
The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s broad definitions of prohibited devices and modifications, especially the phrases “materially increases the rate of fire” and “approximates the action or rate of fire of a machinegun,” which could raise concerns about scope and enforcement. Another likely issue is the registration requirement for previously modified firearms, which may be viewed by opponents as burdensome or as a de facto ban, while supporters would likely argue it is necessary to prevent rapid-fire conversions and close loopholes in existing law.