On June 5–6, 2025, the Firearms Research Center (FRC) at the University of Wyoming College of Law hosted the Seventh Annual Firearms Law Works-in-Progress (WIP) Conference. The conference, held on a home-and-away basis with our colleagues at the Duke Center for Firearms Law, brought together leading scholars, practitioners, and researchers to present developing scholarship that’s at the intersection of firearms law, policy, history, and public health. This special edition highlights the papers presented at the conference that are discussed by their authors in our Forum. As always, the FRC provides a platform for academic exchange but does not endorse the views expressed in these papers.
Our Second First Amendment By Leo Bernabei
Leo Bernabei explores the parallels between First and Second Amendment jurisprudence, suggesting that courts could adopt established First Amendment principles to better guide Second Amendment cases post-Bruen. He argues that doctrines such as content-based restrictions and time, place, and manner regulations provide workable analogues for firearm regulation. Bernabei contends that this approach is both faithful to history and judicial precedent, while offering courts clearer frameworks to navigate modern Second Amendment challenges.
Federalism and Firearms: How Brazil and the United States Define the Limits of State and Local Authority By Antônio Pedro Machado
Antônio Pedro Machado compares the United States and Brazil in terms of how federalism shapes firearms regulation. He notes that the U.S. constitutional structure enforces individual rights through the Second Amendment, restricting state and local regulation, while Brazil centralizes firearms authority at the federal level. His paper illustrates the distinct constitutional traditions of both countries and how each system enforces limits on state and local governments.
A Contrarian View of the Bill of Rights with Emphasis on the Second Amendment By Charles K. Eldred
Charles K. Eldred presents a provocative argument that the Founders viewed rights as subject to state regulation rather than absolute guarantees enforced by courts. He asserted that the Second Amendment’s militia clause grants Congress authority to regulate arms as part of militia powers. Eldred further argues that incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states is inconsistent with its original meaning and that federal firearms laws exceed Congress’s enumerated powers. His paper critiques modern jurisprudence, including Bruen and Rahimi, as wrongly decided.
The F.F.L. “System”: An Economic Institution By Martin Edwards
Martin Edwards analyzes the federal firearms licensee (FFL) system as an economic institution beyond its role in crime prevention. He argues that mandatory licensing incentivizes firearms-specific investments by dealers, which enhance distribution, innovation, and compliance. By comparing the FFL system to economic institutions in other industries, Edwards highlighted how legal regulation has inadvertently created a framework that strengthens both the firearms market and regulatory enforcement.
The Firearm That Isn’t: Silencers and the “Loud Bang Theory” By Thomas L. Chittum, III
Thomas L. Chittum examines why silencers, despite offering safety benefits such as hearing protection, have been legally defined and regulated as firearms. He contrasted the restrictive treatment of silencers with the permissive approach to rifle scopes, both of which enhance firearm use but with different legal outcomes. Chittum proposes that the persistent regulation of silencers reflects an implicit legal and cultural view that the loud sound of gunfire is an essential and constitutionally unalterable characteristic of firearms.
Rethinking the Official Use Exemption: Firearms, Protective Orders, and the Police By Natalie Nanasi
Natalie Nanasi addresses the issue of domestic violence within law enforcement and the risks posed by the official use exemption that allows officers under protective orders to retain firearms. She argues that police officers who commit intimate partner violence pose heightened dangers given their training, access to weapons, and systemic protections. Nanasi urges eliminating the exemption, asserting that disarming officers under protective orders is consistent with both public safety and constitutional principles.
A Positive Law Framework for Firearm Bans By Andrew Nell
Andrew Nell critiques the ‘common use’ test in Second Amendment jurisprudence as indeterminate and prone to ideological bias. He proposes instead that courts adopt a positive law approach, examining whether a stable national consensus exists in state and federal laws permitting or prohibiting particular firearms. This framework, he argues, will provide more objective, administrable standards for determining the constitutionality of firearm bans and limit outcome-driven judicial reasoning.
Beyond “Just-So” Stories: Do Firearms Laws Really Affect Gun Theft? By K. Alexander Adams
Alexander Adams examines whether various gun control laws actually influence rates of firearm theft, a claim often supported by speculative “just-so” explanations. Using FBI data on the value of stolen firearms, he finds that most laws—including permitless carry, child access prevention, and universal background checks—show no significant effect on theft. The notable exception is mandatory reporting of lost or stolen firearms (MRLF) laws, which correlate with nearly a 30% reduction in theft rates, though Adams cautions that more research is needed to confirm causality and avoid overstating the policy’s impact.
The Firearms Research Center extends its sincere thanks to all of the participants who contributed to the success of the 2025 Works-in-Progress Conference. Your thoughtful research, insightful dialogue, and collaborative spirit make this gathering a cornerstone of firearms scholarship. We look forward to continuing these vital conversations and to next year’s conference, where new voices and perspectives will further enrich the field.