The Destroy Zombie Guns Act amends title 18 to require complete destruction of firearms by entities in the business of destruction when the firearm has moved in interstate or foreign commerce. It also expands who is considered “engaged in the business” of destroying firearms to include those who regularly devote time and labor to destruction for profit.
The bill then imposes penalties for violations and empowers the Attorney General to suspend or revoke licenses of offending licensees after notice and a hearing.
At a Glance
What It Does
It adds a new prohibition under 18 U.S.C. §922(aa) requiring destruction of every component when destroying firearms shipped in interstate or foreign commerce. It also expands the definition of who qualifies as a destroyer of firearms.
Who It Affects
Directly affects firearm destruction businesses and their employees, plus any licensees under the relevant statutes who operate destruction services that involve interstate shipments.
Why It Matters
It closes potential gaps where firearms were partially destroyed or components left intact, and it creates a clearer regulatory path with meaningful penalties to deter non-compliance.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a hard rule for anyone who destroys firearms as a business: when a firearm has moved across state lines or internationally, every component must be destroyed. This sets a uniform standard and eliminates partial destruction as a permissible practice.
To make sense of who must follow this rule, the bill also broadens the definition of “destroyer of firearms” to include individuals who devote significant time and labor to destroying firearms or firearm components as a regular commercial activity with the aim of making a profit. The consequence for not meeting these destruction duties is added teeth in the criminal penalties: violations of the new destruction rule could lead to fines and up to two years in prison.
In addition, licensees face extra oversight — the Attorney General may suspend a license after a first violation or revoke it after any subsequent violation after due process. Together, these changes push for complete, verifiable destruction of firearms across the destruction industry and give enforcement agencies a clearer mechanism to police compliance.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds a prohibition requiring complete destruction of all firearm components during destruction when interstate or foreign shipments are involved.
It defines a destroyer of firearms as someone who regularly engages in destruction as a trade to earn a profit.
Violations carry penalties under 18 U.S.C. §924(a), including fines and up to two years in prison.
The Attorney General can suspend a license after the first violation and revoke after subsequent violations, following due process.
The act is titled the Destroy Zombie Guns Act.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Safe firearm destruction
This section adds a prohibition to ensure that, whenever a firearm being destroyed has moved across state lines or international borders, every component of the firearm is destroyed. The practical effect is to close gaps where partial destruction could be attempted or claimed. For compliance, destroyers must maintain procedures that verify total component destruction for interjurisdictional shipments.
Expanded definition of 'engaged in the business' for destroyers
The bill amends the existing catch-all for “engaged in the business” to include a destroyer who devotes time, attention, and labor to firearm destruction as a regular trade or business with the aim of earning profit. This helps categorize more operators as regulated destroyers, bringing their practices under the new destruction standard and enforcement tools.
Penalties and license enforcement
This section adds a new penalty structure for violations of the destruction rule. A violator faces fines and up to two years’ imprisonment. In addition, the Attorney General may suspend a license for the first violation and revoke it for any subsequent violation after notice and a hearing, creating a structured enforcement pathway for licensees.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Criminal Justice across all five countries.
Explore Criminal Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Licensed firearm destruction facilities gain a clear, enforceable standard for complete destruction and predictable regulatory oversight.
- Employees of destruction facilities benefit from standardized procedures and clearer expectations, reducing ambiguity in job duties and compliance.
- Public safety agencies and local communities benefit from stronger assurance that destroyed firearms are fully rendered inoperable, reducing the risk of improper disposal.
- Gun owners and communities relying on licensed destruction services gain confidence that unwanted firearms are handled under a uniform standard.
Who Bears the Cost
- Small or independent destruction operators may need to upgrade equipment or processes to demonstrate complete destruction, raising compliance costs.
- Licensees face potential licensure disruption (suspension or revocation) and related administrative costs, especially during any required hearings.
- Enforcement agencies may incur additional administrative costs to process notices, hearings, and license actions and to monitor compliance across facilities.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing a universal destruction standard against the cost and feasibility for destruction operators; resolving ambiguities around what constitutes ‘complete destruction’ and which operators fall under the defined regime.
The core policy tension is between a robust, verifiable destruction standard and the practical burden of implementing and auditing that standard across a diverse set of destruction providers. Definitional scope — what counts as a “component” and what constitutes destruction — could invite disputes in enforcement.
Cross-border destruction adds complexity for record-keeping, verification, and potential interstate coordination. The bill presumes the existence of effective compliance infrastructure within destruction facilities, but smaller operators may struggle to meet heightened expectations without support or phased implementation.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.