Firearm ownership in the United States is based upon a patchwork of federal and state regulations, which prove to vary extremely about licensing and permitting necessities. Federal law does not necessitate a license or permit to sell, own, possess, or purchase a firearm; however, some states have enforced their very own strict requirements. Such state-level requirements include requiring permits to purchase firearms, licenses to own firearms, or mandating the registration of firearms. Essentially, such laws would require that a person purchasing a firearm has undergone a background check and is legally qualified to obtain one.
State licensing or permitting requirements occur most frequently in permit-to-purchase laws. These laws function much like universal background check laws in requiring that any person getting a firearm through a private transfer meets the same standard as when someone buys from a federally licensed dealer. States with permit/license renewal requirements create a process through which law enforcement can regularly verify that an individual is still eligible to own or buy a firearm. For instance, in Alabama, background checks for gun sales significantly decreased when permit-to-purchase laws were in effect, as described by Smucker et al. (2022).
Mandatory permits to purchase ammunition introduce a new layer of challenge for prohibited possessors who attempt to utilize illicit firearms. “In Los Angeles, prohibited possessors purchased at least 10,500 rounds of ammunition over two months, accounting for about 2.6 percent of all such sales. This number suggests that the policies must be far better at keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals if their effects on violent crime and suicide are to be noticed.”.
Licensing and permitting requirements can limit access to firearms among people presumed to be at an increased risk of misusing them, which can help reduce gun violence. Although compliance with these laws is less than complete, they may still deter prohibited possessors who are not currently owners from attempting to acquire guns. Thus, the actual effect of these laws depends on the degree of enforcement, the extent to which firearms or ammunition are available to potential offenders through unregulated markets, or the degree to which persons seeking firearms who are disqualified from purchasing them will find alternative means.
In addition to background checks, licensing and permitting regulations frequently impose other requirements on firearm purchasers or owners. For example, some state laws require licensees or permittees to complete a safety course or pass an exam. However, training’s ability to make a difference in improving firearm storage practices is debatable. In this respect, a 2019 survey showed that among gun owners who completed formal firearm training, 32 percent stored one or more firearms loaded and unlocked, compared with 26 percent of untrained individuals. A 1995 survey also reported that gun owners who had taken a course were much more likely to keep their guns loaded and unlocked (Hemenway, Solnick, and Azrael, 1995).
Some licensing/permitting laws in jurisdictions require applications to be submitted in person at a law enforcement agency and mandate fingerprinting. These requirements for extra steps may more effectively deter fraud or identify mis-identification. In-person application processes, by way of direct contact with law enforcement, may further discourage persons who want to acquire firearms for criminal purposes. Available evidence reveals that permit-to-purchase laws reduce the diversion of guns for criminal use when added to background check laws.
Within the licensing process lies an opportunity for time to elapse between the purchase decision and the actual acquisition of the firearm. Such delays, varying in degree by state and type of transaction, may interject time between a purchase decision, with intent to use a firearm for self-harm or interpersonal violence, and the actual perpetration of violence.
Licensing systems that require extensive coordination among local, state, and federal databases and institutions are promising but might, in turn, be complex both technically and regulatorily hence decreasing the laws’ effectiveness. Moreover, most firearm buyers already own a firearm. Azrael et al. found that, on average, gun owners had almost five guns and a vast majority purchased their most recent weapon from a licensed gun dealer. For people who already have guns in their possession, licensing, and permitting requirements may not have, or have very little, effect on crime or suicide risk.
Both types of licensing laws could also have some impact on defensive or recreational gun use by raising the costs of obtaining or continuing to possess a firearm. On one hand, the monetary licensing cost varies from $10 to $100 for getting a license or permit. On the other hand, total time and energy costs, together with privacy concerns, may deter some legal purchasers of firearms. Results from surveys suggest that handgun purchaser licensing laws receive more support from non-gun owners than from gun owners, at 61 percent and 81 percent, respectively, according to Crifasi et al. in their 2020 analysis.
To assess the influence of licensing or permit requirements on violent crime or suicides, analyses should estimate outcomes for populations that would be prevented under the licensing law from legally acquiring or possessing a firearm. Research may be strengthened by tracing the crime gun data and changes in homicide rates. However, since 2003, provisions attached to the appropriations for ATF have denied the detailed trace data of firearms to most researchers. Thus, very limited information was made available for use in research. Existing empirical evidence, however, does suggest that permit-to-purchase laws help in preventing the diversion of guns from licensed in-state retailers to criminal markets. Collins et al., 2018; Crifasi et al., 2017; Kahane, 2020; Li et al., 2023.