PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 7, 1995
Citizens' Protection From Violent Crime Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal criminal code to set mandatory prison terms for possessing, brandishing, or discharging a firearm or destructive device during a Federal or State crime that is a serious violent felony or serious drug offense, with exceptions involving defense of person or property during the course of a crime committed by another person. Sets forth penalties for second or subsequent convictions. Bars the court from imposing probation or a concurrent term of imprisonment for offenses under this Act. Prohibits releasing any such individual for any reason during a term of imprisonment imposed under this Act. Requires the court to sentence a person convicted of transporting, receiving, or possessing a firearm or ammunition in interstate commerce to not less than five years in prison if the person has a prior conviction for a serious violent felony and not less than ten years in prison if the person has two such prior convictions. Makes certain serious juvenile drug offenses predicate offenses under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Includes within the definition of "crime of violence" specified offenses relating to the possession of explosives and firearms by convicted felons. Directs the Attorney General to establish an armed violent criminal apprehension program. Declares that a person not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm shall have the right to use firearms within a home in defense of self or other persons against a reasonably perceived threat of imminent and unlawful infliction of serious bodily injury. Authorizes a person whose right is violated to bring an action in U.S. district court against a person or government. Sets forth provisions regarding attorney's fees and the statute of limitations. Repeals the ban on semiautomatic firearms and on large capacity ammunition feeding devices under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
People & committees
Rep. Barr, Bob [R-GA-7] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1488 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1488 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1488 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1488 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.