hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Requires federal officers to safely store service weapons.
Rep. DeSaulnier introduced; affects federal law enforcement officers.
In committee, no House vote yet
This bill mandates that federal law enforcement agencies create and enforce rules for their officers to safely store service firearms when not in use. It also requires agencies to provide necessary equipment, report lost or stolen weapons, and train officers. Introduced by Representative Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA), the bill is currently being reviewed by committees in the House of Representatives before any potential vote.
Introduced Apr 30, 2026
This bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on April 30, 2026. It has been sent to the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Armed Services for review. For the bill to move forward, these committees would typically hold hearings, debate, and possibly amend the bill before voting on whether to send it to the full House for a vote.
If passed, federal law enforcement officers would be required to lock and safely store their service firearms when not actively using them, using agency-approved methods like smart locks or safes. Federal agencies would also need to report any lost or stolen service firearms to local, state, and federal authorities, which could help track missing weapons. Additionally, officers would receive training on safe storage practices and information about the risks of keeping firearms easily accessible at home.
Supporters Say
Supporters believe this bill will enhance public and officer safety by reducing accidental shootings and firearm thefts.
Critics Say
Critics might argue it creates an unnecessary burden on officers or agencies, or may be limited by funding availability.
Those in favor would likely highlight the potential for fewer firearm-related accidents and less diversion of stolen weapons into criminal hands, emphasizing the public safety benefits. Opponents could raise concerns about the practicalities of implementation for officers, especially the requirement to carry and use specific locking equipment, and question whether agencies will receive sufficient funding to provide the necessary equipment as stated in the bill (which is subject to appropriations).