The Truth About Guns
New Senate Bill Would Boost Penalty For Stealing Guns From FFL Licensees
By Mark Chesnut
Federally licensed firearms dealers have been getting hit hard by smash-and-grab thefts for years, with criminals targeting gun shops because the merchandise inside is worth significantly more on the black market than what most retail establishments stock. A Senate bill introduced this week aims to make that calculation considerably less attractive.
On June 3, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) introduced the Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) Protection Act of 2026, legislation designed to substantially enhance criminal penalties for stealing firearms from licensed dealers. The bill has 18 cosponsors and the backing of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry’s primary trade association.
The scale of the problem
The numbers behind the legislation are substantial. According to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives data cited in Graham’s announcement, FFL theft incidents from 2021 to 2025 totaled 4,046, resulting in 23,319 firearms stolen from licensed dealers over that five-year period.
That works out to roughly 4,664 firearms stolen from licensed dealers annually, moving from legal commerce directly into the black market via criminal break-ins. South Carolina alone, Graham’s home state, accounted for 618 stolen firearms from FFL thefts during the 2021-2025 window.
These aren’t firearms that found their way into criminal hands through straw purchases, theft from individual owners, or any of the other diversion mechanisms gun-control advocates typically cite. They’re firearms taken at gunpoint or by smash-and-grab burglary from the same licensed dealers Brady and Everytown spend their time attacking as “the largest sellers of crime guns.” The actual sources of firearms entering criminal commerce are the criminals breaking into gun shops — not the dealers operating those shops legally.
What the bill does
The FFL Protection Act includes several substantive enhancements to federal criminal penalties for FFL theft:
- Increases the statutory maximum penalty for knowingly stealing any firearm from an FFL’s business inventory from 10 to 20 years
- Imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of three years for burglary from an FFL
- Imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for robbery from an FFL
- Criminalizes attempted theft of a firearm from a licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector
The mandatory minimum sentences are the most significant operational change. Federal prosecution of FFL theft cases has historically resulted in widely varying outcomes depending on jurisdiction, prosecutor discretion, and case-specific factors. Establishing mandatory floor sentences ensures that criminals who specifically target firearms dealers face serious consequences regardless of where they’re prosecuted.
Graham characterized the legislation as a basic exercise in matching penalties to the actual harm caused.
“I am proud to reintroduce this important legislation to make ‘smash-and-grabs’ more costly for criminals,” Graham said in his announcement. “Americans have a right to lawfully buy, own, and sell firearms; criminals who steal them must pay the price.”
NSSF backing
NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Larry Keane framed the legislation as exactly the kind of focused criminal-penalty approach gun-rights advocates have been arguing should be the focus of federal firearms policy:
“This legislation is what true gun safety looks like,” Keane said in an NSSF news release endorsing the bill. “Congress is sending a clear message that the safety of our communities is nonnegotiable and targeting firearm retailers to steal guns in order to commit further crimes is intolerable.”
Keane added a framing point that should resonate with TTAG readers familiar with the broader gun-control debate:
“This legislation assigns the responsibility for crime where it belongs — with the criminal. These are real solutions that make our communities safer.”
That’s the framing the gun-rights side has been pushing for decades against the gun-control framing that focuses on the firearms themselves rather than the people misusing them. The FFL Protection Act is exactly the kind of legislation that lands in the gun-rights framing — targeted criminal penalties for actual criminal conduct, with no impact on lawful gun owners or dealers operating legally.
The cosponsor list
The legislation has 18 cosponsors, all Republicans:
Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.).
The all-Republican list of cosponsors reflects a recurring frustration with Senate dynamics on gun-related legislation. The FFL Protection Act is the kind of bill that should attract bipartisan support — it targets criminals specifically, enhances penalties for documented crimes affecting both businesses and public safety, and doesn’t impose any new restrictions on lawful gun owners. The absence of Democratic cosponsors signals that gun-related legislation is now so politically polarized that even narrow criminal-penalty enhancements struggle to attract bipartisan support.
The broader policy
The FFL Protection Act fits into a broader policy framework that gun-rights advocates have been building out across multiple fronts. While Brady is suing the ATF to obtain records for public attacks on lawful firearms dealers, and Everytown is melting down over the ATF’s regulatory reform package targeting administrative overreach against the firearms industry, Graham’s legislation focuses where federal firearms policy attention should actually focus: on the criminals committing actual crimes.
The contrast couldn’t be sharper. Gun-control organizations spend their resources attacking licensed dealers, demanding records to fuel public pressure campaigns, and supporting state-level legislation that imposes civil liability on lawful firearms commerce. Gun-rights advocates and the firearms industry support legislation that enhances criminal penalties for actual criminals committing actual crimes against firearms dealers.
The FFL Protection Act also builds on existing industry-driven safety efforts. NSSF has partnered with the ATF on Operation Secure Store, one of several industry safety programs aimed at reducing FFL theft through improved security practices, intelligence sharing, and law enforcement coordination. The legislation provides the criminal penalty teeth that complement those voluntary industry efforts.
The realistic prospects
Standalone Second Amendment-adjacent legislation has historically struggled to pass even in Republican-controlled Congresses. The 2025 NFA tax eliminations passed only because they were packaged into the One Big Beautiful Bill rather than advanced as standalone legislation. Whether the FFL Protection Act follows that pattern — getting attached to a broader public safety or criminal justice package — or attempts a standalone path will largely determine its trajectory.
The legislation’s tight focus on criminal penalty enhancements rather than substantive changes to firearms law gives it a somewhat better political profile than broader gun-rights legislation. It’s harder to credibly oppose enhanced penalties for armed criminals who break into gun stores. Whether that political profile translates into actual passage remains to be seen.
What this means for FFLs
For federally licensed firearms dealers, the legislation represents Congress finally addressing a problem the industry has been documenting for years. FFL theft affects dealer livelihoods, employee safety, business insurance costs, and the broader firearms market, all while moving firearms directly into criminal commerce. Enhanced federal penalties give prosecutors better tools to deter these crimes and ensure that criminals targeting gun shops face serious consequences regardless of state-level prosecutorial decisions.
For gun owners, the legislation is the kind of focused criminal-penalty approach that should be the actual centerpiece of federal firearms policy. Going after armed criminals who steal firearms is exactly where federal enforcement attention belongs. Going after lawful dealers, lawful owners, and lawful firearms commerce is where federal enforcement attention has too often been misdirected for the past several years.
The FFL Protection Act is what good gun policy looks like. The question is whether enough senators are willing to vote for it.