PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 29, 2014
Domestic Violence Gun Homicide Prevention Act of 2014 - Authorizes the Director of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make grants to assist eligible states in carrying out policies, procedures, protocols, laws, or regulations relating to the possession or transfer of firearms or ammunition that:
impose restrictions and penalties substantially similar to or more comprehensive than those applicable to possession by or transfer to persons subject to a court order for stalking-related offenses against an intimate partner or child or persons convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence;
require the seizure or surrender of all firearms and ammunition from an individual convicted of any crime for which any such restrictions or penalties apply or against whom a court has issued a protection order;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
require state and local courts to consider, at the initial appearance before a magistrate of any individual arrested for any crime for which such restrictions or penalties apply, if the individual possesses a firearm or ammunition that has been or is likely to be used to threaten, harass, or harm the victim or the victim's child or otherwise pose a danger to them and to issue a protection order prohibitting the possession of any firearm or ammunition and require the surrender or seizure of any firearm or ammunition possessed;
give state and local law enforcement the authority to seize a firearm or ammunition when responding to specified domestic violence situations, if there is probable cause to believe such firearm or ammunition is contraband or illegally in the possession of the suspected offender and is likely to be used to threaten, harass, menace, or harm, or to otherwise pose a danger to, the victim or the victim's child; and
provide for the safe return of any seized or surrendered firearm or ammunition when such restrictions and penalties no longer apply.
People & committees
Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
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 10, 2026. 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 S.2676 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 S.2676 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 S.2676 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 S.2676 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.