Committee advances bill to bar firearm purchases for qualifying out‑of‑state domestic violence orders

Representative Griffith introduced House Bill 3 42 to clarify that out‑of‑state protection orders that explicitly prohibit firearms or that were issued after a court hearing and contain specified findings should be treated the same as in‑state PFAs for firearm purchase and possession prohibitions.

Griffith said the bill responds to a gap identified by the Delaware State Police after an attempted purchase by an individual with an out‑of‑state PFA. Supporters argued the change would close a dangerous loophole that allows people subject to qualifying out‑of‑state orders to cross state lines and legally obtain firearms in Delaware.

Anne McWalter of Moms Demand Action told the committee HB3 42 "closes a dangerous gap in current law" and described how protective orders are a critical safety tool for survivors. Tracy Murphy of the Coalition for Safer Delaware and Sergeant Mike Ripple of the Delaware State Police also testified in support; Ripple said his firearms transaction unit discovered the loophole during an investigation.

Ramya Swamy, policy counsel for Brady, cited national data on domestic‑violence risk and urged support for the bill. After public testimony and brief questions from committee members about definitions and exceptions, the committee voted and released HB3 42 for floor consideration.

The bill’s expansion would apply only where the out‑of‑state order meets the bill’s qualifying criteria; the text as presented preserves conditions such as a hearing or explicit firearm prohibition as prerequisites for recognition.