Georgia CommonsHouse · Introduced · 2025-2026 Regular Session
HB 1454: Crimes and offenses; firearms and carrying and possession of firearms and other weapons; revise various laws
Last action March 3, 2026 · House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute
A House committee substitute to HB 1454 would let Georgians sue if their names end up in a gun registry, let counties and cities allow gun discharge on large rural properties, and force local governments to sell off unclaimed firearms on a regular schedule.
The summaries below were written by an AI model (claude-sonnet-5) from the text of the bill and are not part of it. Quote the text, not the summary. The stored text is the Comm Sub version, the latest the General Assembly's website lists.
In plain language
Georgia law already bans government agencies from keeping lists or shared databases of gun owners or weapons carry license holders, but currently offers no way to enforce that ban. This bill adds a legal remedy: anyone who proves they were wrongly listed in such a database or registry could sue and collect at least $100 (or actual damages) plus attorney's fees. The bill also changes local gun discharge rules. Cities, counties, and consolidated governments could still limit firing guns within their borders, but they could no longer ban discharge on privately owned parcels of five acres or more if the landowner consents, though zoning limits on commercial shooting ranges would still apply. Finally, it tightens rules for police departments and other agencies disposing of unclaimed firearms. Municipalities and other government bodies must auction or sell unclaimed guns to licensed dealers at least once every 12 months once they have five or more firearms in inventory, and buyers unable to get a firearm because an agency failed to follow this schedule could sue for damages of at least $100 plus legal costs.
What the bill does
- Creates a lawsuit remedy for people wrongly placed in a multijurisdictional gun database or a firearms registry, allowing at least $100 in damages plus attorney's fees (O.C.G.A. § 16-11-129).
- Allows cities, counties, and consolidated governments to keep regulating gun discharge generally, but bars them from prohibiting discharge on private parcels of five acres or more with landowner consent (O.C.G.A. § 16-11-173).
- Preserves local zoning power over commercial shooting ranges even on those larger rural parcels.
- Requires municipalities and other government bodies to auction or sell unclaimed firearms to licensed dealers at least once every 12 months once they hold five or more guns (O.C.G.A. § 17-5-54).
- Creates a new lawsuit for people unable to buy a firearm because a government agency failed to hold required disposal auctions, entitling them to at least $100 in damages plus attorney's fees and costs.
- Lets winning bidders at firearm auctions direct the actual transfer to another licensed dealer, collector, importer, or manufacturer rather than only to themselves.
Who it affects
Weapons carry license holders and firearm owners concerned about being tracked in government databases, rural landowners who want to allow shooting on their property, city and county governments that regulate gun discharge or store unclaimed firearms, and licensed firearms dealers who buy guns at government auctions.
Why it matters
People wrongly listed in a gun database could now collect money damages instead of having no recourse. Rural landowners would gain a clearer right to allow shooting on large tracts despite local ordinances. Local agencies would face a firm deadline and lawsuit risk for clearing out unclaimed firearms, changing how police departments manage seized gun inventories.
Key provisions
- Section 1 rewrites the database prohibition in O.C.G.A. § 16-11-129(k), letting anyone proven to be in a banned gun database or registry sue for at least $100 or actual damages, plus litigation costs and attorney's fees.
- Section 2 amends O.C.G.A. § 16-11-173(e) so local governments cannot ban firearm discharge on parcels of five acres or more with owner consent, while keeping their power to limit discharge elsewhere and to zone commercial shooting ranges.
- Section 3 revises O.C.G.A. § 17-5-54(g), requiring municipalities and other government bodies to dispose of unclaimed firearms with an inventory of five or more at least once every 12 months through sale or auction to licensed dealers.
- Section 3 also creates a mandamus and damages remedy ($100 or actual damages, plus costs and attorney's fees) for people unable to acquire a firearm because a government agency missed its disposal deadline.
- Section 3 allows winning bidders at firearm auctions to direct that guns be transferred to another licensed collector, dealer, importer, or manufacturer rather than only to the bidder personally.
- Section 4 repeals any conflicting laws.
From the bill
“Any person aggrieved by a violation of this subsection may bring an action for relief.”
“No municipality, county, or consolidated government shall prohibit the discharge of firearms on a parcel of land that is five acres or more in size, provided that the owner or lawful occupants of such land consent to such discharging of firearms.”
“The municipal corporation shall dispose of all such firearms at least once every 12 months during any time in which the municipal corporation has an inventory of five or more firearms.”
Discussed in meetings (4)
The House and Senate meetings that took this bill up, from their machine transcripts. Each account was written by Georgia Commons with AI and is not part of the record; the video is what was said.
House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee, March 2, 2026
From 0:14:08 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 1454 would strengthen restrictions on sharing weapons-license databases, prevent municipalities from banning firearm discharge on parcels of at least 10 acres, and require annual auctions of unclaimed firearms. The sponsor said individuals could bid but would receive firearms through licensed dealers with background checks. The sponsor cited shooting restrictions affecting a youth shotgun team and existing ranges. Members questioned private lawsuits and attorney-fee provisions, whether the bill addressed wrongly withheld firearms, and risks from high-powered rifles. Legislative counsel said existing law requires retaining evidence until criminal proceedings end and clarified that this bill concerns unclaimed firearms. Georgia Second Amendment and Gun Owners of America supported enforcement measures and a lower acreage threshold. Georgia Majority for Gun Safety opposed limiting local safety decisions and warned of taxpayer-funded litigation, saying lawsuits could begin over five firearms. Several members raised safety concerns about smaller parcels. A proposal using five acres, more or less, was withdrawn after objections that it lacked a clear limit. A separate amendment reducing the threshold to five acres passed 8-6. The committee then approved the amended bill, with eight affirmative votes counted and no opposing count stated.
House Rules Committee, March 4, 2026
From 0:50:41 · Watch on the General Assembly's Vimeo channel
Summary by Georgia Commons: The sponsor said HB 1454 would strengthen penalties for sharing concealed-carry permit information, prevent local restrictions on shooting on properties of at least five acres, and enforce requirements to sell unclaimed firearms within 12 months. The sponsor said individuals could buy those firearms through licensed dealers. Members questioned shooting near schools, playgrounds and property lines. The sponsor confirmed the provision covered any legal firearm anywhere on qualifying property, while saying shooters would remain responsible for harm. Members disputed the sponsor's view that existing local restrictions and noise rules would remain effective; the sponsor agreed to check. Another member objected that allowing private lawsuits over delayed firearm sales could burden courts without showing harm to buyers. The sponsor said some departments were stockpiling firearms and failing to follow existing law. A second member described the lawsuits as a way to compel compliance and recover reasonable attorney fees, which the sponsor confirmed. Members also asked about selling unsafe firearms. The sponsor compared such sales to government auctions and said buyers might repair or collect them. The chair encouraged further discussion outside the meeting. No decision was recorded.
Status timeline
- House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute (House)
- House Second Readers (House)
- House First Readers (House)
- House Hopper (House)
Sponsors
- Jason Ridley (R, HD-6)
- John Corbett (R, HD-174)
- Noel Williams, Jr. (R, HD-148)
- Trey Rhodes (R, HD-124)
- Chas Cannon (R, HD-172)
- Lauren McDonald III (R, HD-26)
Topics
- gun rights
- firearms databases
- local gun ordinances
- unclaimed property
- gun sales