Potential Senate Agreement on New Gun Law

[Libertarian01]

This does not look good.

Senate negotiators announce a deal on guns, breaking logjam

Senate bargainers have announced the framework of a bipartisan response to last month’s mass shootings.

apnews.com

Whatever is in this bill the Conference Committee will be able to add things and twist it. This is not good.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Cameramonkey]

The only good thing I have seen in these blurbs is the juvenile records availability. That should have already been available.

 

[bwframe]

APnews.com

 

[KellyinAvon]

Fox broke it 20 minutes ago, more to follow...

Senate announces bipartisan framework for gun control package

A bipartisan group of senators announced an agreement for gun control following the devastating Uvalde shooting in Texas. The senators include John Cornyn and Kyrsten Sinema.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Lmo1131]

From another source... https://thehill.com/news/senate/3520461-senators-announce-bipartisan-agreement-on-gun-proposals/

A bipartisan group of 20 senators announced a framework deal on Sunday to address gun violence following a string of high-profile mass shootings that have reignited a debate over gun control.

The framework includes funding for school safety measures and mental health, a requirement to review juvenile records for firearm buyers under 21 years old and incentives for states to implement “red flag” laws.

The bipartisan group includes Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) , Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) , Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.) , Bill Cassidy (R-La.) , Susan Collins (R-Maine) , Chris Coons (D-Del.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) , Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) , Mitt Romney (R-Utah) , Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) .

 

[rosejm]

They key point to watch here: the actual text of the bill does not yet exist.

This "story" is simply clickbait showing a group of RINOs and Ds have "agreed" they should propose legislation that does something...

 

[qwerty]

Will have to check again, but looks like all of the R's are either retiring or not up for re-election this year.

 

[KittySlayer]

…get something done that will help restore their sense of safety…

So instead of finding real solutions we want people to feel safe rather than have the tools to protect themselves with.

 

[bwframe]

The only good thing I have seen in these blurbs is the juvenile records availability. That should have already been available.

I don't disagree with juvenile records being a part of any individual's criminal record. That's been a long term debacle.

Let's do that on it's own, not cloak it as a reactionary victory for the gun grabbers.

Don't **** around and give them a nose under the tent here...


.

 

[KellyinAvon]

My comments in blue.

Bottom line (of the story) up front:

(Translation: vague platitudes in lieu of actual legislation.)
"This an agreement on principles, not legislative text. The details will be critical for Republicans, particularly the firearms-related provisions. One or more of these principles could be dropped if text is not agreed to," a GOP aide involved with the negotiations told Fox News.

(A combination of RINOs, never-Trumpers, gun-banners, and low-IQ types.)
A bipartisan group of senators announced an agreement on a gun package Sunday.

The senators include: Chris Murphy, John Cornyn, Thom Tillis , Kyrsten Sinema, Richard Blumenthal, Roy Blunt, Cory Booker, Richard Burr, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Chris Coons, Lindsey Graham, Martin Heinrich, Mark Kelly, Angus King, Joe Manchin, Rob Portman, Mitt Romney, Debbie Stabenow, and Pat Toomey

(According to Merriam-Webster there is no commonsense here, that is a talking-point used by the antis. As far as for the rest of this paragraph, "That's nice, how are you going to do that?")
"Today, we are announcing a commonsense, bipartisan proposal to protect America’s children, keep our schools safe, and reduce the threat of violence across our country. Families are scared, and it is our duty to come together and get something done that will help restore their sense of safety and security in their communities," the group of senators said in a press release on the announcement.

(Mental health in this country is a problem? In the words of Bob Seger "****, I've known that for 10 years!")
"Our plan increases needed mental health resources, improves school safety and support for students,

(Uuuuhhhhhhhhmmm, aren't those already prohibited possessors of firearms unto 18 USC Section 922 and thus can't legally purchase firearms?)
and helps ensure dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as mentally ill can’t purchase weapons.

(How?)
Most importantly, our plan saves lives while also protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans.

(Talk is cheap, lets see something other than a Sunday press release.)
We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense proposal into law," the senators continued in their group statement.

Senate announces bipartisan framework for gun control package

A bipartisan group of senators announced an agreement for gun control following the devastating Uvalde shooting in Texas. The senators include John Cornyn and Kyrsten Sinema.

www.foxnews.com

 

[KLB]

At least neither of our Senators is on the list of 10

 

[BigRed]

The senate will save us....read it here on INGO

 

[BigRed]

To Hell with these ********.

 

[Magyars]

 

[Libertarian01]

The problem isn't what they put in the bill(s), it's how the conference committee remakes it.

Here is a very simple way of how it works. Say INGO is going to have a meetup from northern and southern Indiana. A group of ten (10) members in southern Indiana get together to discuss where to go for lunch in Indianapolis. We'll call them the House of Representatives. They decide to be fancy and in their bill they agree to go somewhere to get seafood and sushi, somewhere in Indianapolis that will serve lobster and/or crab legs.

The group of ten (10) in the north we'll call the Senate. They also vote to meetup in Indianapolis but just want a simple steak and potatoes place. Nothing fancy.

So each group sends three (3) members to the the middle to hash it all out. This is the Conference Committee. During their discussion they decide to meetup at a Mexican restaurant instead. This way those who want steak can have beef on a taco and those who want seafood can have fish on a taco. Heaven forbid they choose a surf-and-turf restaurant, this idea eludes them. Also, they decide because the roads are harder to get around in the south they'll move the meeting from Indianapolis to Bloomington. Oh, and they're also going to charge everyone $10 to cover the tip.

Now the exact same worded bill gets sent back to the groups in the north and south. It cannot be changed again. This is what they VOTE on!

In politics it will probably pass. With INGO it's easy. Everyone who doesn't want to meet in Bloomington or eat Mexican will just tell the rest to go pound sand. But in politics they have told their constituents they have a great bill agreed upon. This is before the conference committee even meets. So now they think they'll look stupid not voting for it since they themselves hyped it up so much.

Now I've simplified it an awful lot. The conference committee does have to think what they unify will actually pass when finally voted on in the House and Senate when they send it back, but DAMN do they have a lot of power to add things in and take things out. This is why one time Sen McCain didn't want to vote for a bill with his own name on it because it was changed so much.

This is what concerns me. They can all agree to limited "reform" but the final bill could be very different.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Cameramonkey]

And why only check juvenile records up to 21? Why not permanently? Do we think a gang banger is going to turn 21 and magically be reformed? Yes, I can see them getting their act together and should probably be able to get it expunged after a while. Because face it, we all do stupid stuff as minors.


I see both sides and am not sure what I think about it. But I DO know that felonious acts should be exposed to NICS as a high level thought.

 

[BJHay]

It seems like a missed opportunity by not negotiating a 'comprehensive' firearms act.
At least these republicans could have negated for something... My suggestion would be national reciprocity for concealed carry and removal of suppressors from the NFA. Both seem like common sense solutions.

 

[Cameramonkey]

It seems like a missed opportunity by not negotiating a 'comprehensive' firearms act.
At least these republicans could have negated for something... My suggestion would be national reciprocity for concealed carry and removal of suppressors from the NFA. Both seem like common sense solutions.

The former is overreach and violates states' rights.
The latter is a most excellent idea. Which means they'd never do it.

 

[Creedmoor]

It seems like a missed opportunity by not negotiating a 'comprehensive' firearms act.
At least these republicans could have negated for something... My suggestion would be national reciprocity for concealed carry and removal of suppressors from the NFA. Both seem like common sense solutions.

Why just concealed and just supressors?
Why not carry and eliminate the nfa?

 

[BJHay]

Why just concealed and just suppressors?
Why not carry and eliminate the nfa?

Personally I'm good with eliminating the NFA but that seems a bridge too far for the moment. I would take whatever could be obtained.
The suppressors are an easy argument to win. Not having a suppressor is a hearing risk.