Making America Safe and Secure Act of 2025; MASS Act
Summary
The Making America Safe and Secure Act of 2025, or MASS Act, aims to reduce gun violence by providing grants to states that implement and maintain firearms licensing requirements. These requirements include thorough background checks, safety training for first-time applicants, and processes for revoking licenses from individuals deemed a risk. The act also addresses the transfer, storage, and reporting of firearms and ammunition sales.
Expected Effects
If enacted, the MASS Act would likely lead to more stringent firearms licensing procedures across participating states. This could potentially reduce gun violence and improve public safety. However, it may also increase the burden on law-abiding citizens seeking to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
Potential Benefits
- May reduce gun violence by preventing prohibited individuals from acquiring firearms.
- Enhances public safety through mandatory safety training for first-time firearms license applicants.
- Provides resources to states for improving and maintaining firearms licensing systems.
- Establishes clear standards for categorizing individuals prohibited from owning firearms.
- Offers judicial review processes for those denied a firearms license.
Potential Disadvantages
- May infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.
- Could create additional bureaucratic hurdles for legal gun owners.
- Potential for increased costs associated with licensing and background checks.
- Risk of inconsistent application of licensing standards across different states.
- May not effectively deter criminals who obtain firearms illegally.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The MASS Act's constitutionality is debatable, particularly concerning the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms. While the act aims to regulate firearms to promote public safety, some provisions, such as strict licensing requirements, could be viewed as infringing upon this right. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment, as articulated in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, recognizes an individual's right to possess firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, but also acknowledges the government's power to regulate firearms to some extent. The extent of permissible regulation remains a subject of ongoing legal and political debate.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).