PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 1998
21st Century Firearm Technology and Safety Act of 1998 - Directs the Director of the National Institute of Justice to make grants to reduce firearms violence through improvements in firearms safety technology, weapons detection technology, and other technology. Authorizes appropriations for FY 1998 through 2002. Establishes in the Department of Justice the Independent Panel on Firearms Safety to: (1) research how technology can be used in the area of weapons safety improvements to reduce violence; and (2) direct, oversee, and review the work of the Technical Study Group on Firearms Safety. Requires the Panel to: (1) report to the Congress on the findings of the Technical Study Group on Firearms Safety (established in the Department under this Act); and (2) if the report contains a recommendation for standards governing the design of firearm safety locks, forward the recommendation to the National Institute of Justice. Requires the Panel to submit to the Congress annual reports detailing its findings and recommendations on such firearms safety improvements as the Panel considers appropriate. Terminates the Panel five years after the date it is organized. Requires the Group to undertake such studies and activities as it considers necessary to determine the technical and commercial feasibility, economic impact, and other consequences of developing improvements in firearms safety technology. States that: (1) a main focus of the Group shall be to reduce deaths and injuries resulting from the unintended or inappropriate discharge of firearms; and (2) the Group's initial research should be a study of the reliability of firearm safety locks and a determination as to whether the locks prevent the unintended discharge of firearms. Requires the Group to: (1) report to the Panel on its findings; and (2) include in the report a recommendation for standards governing the design of firearm safety locks if the Group determines that firearm safety locks can prevent the unintended discharge of firearms.
People & committees
Rep. Kennelly, Barbara B. [D-CT-1] · D–CT
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.3895 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.3895 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.3895 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.3895 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.