Poli-Tricks & Guns
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
WHY:
Canada Races on Gun Policy When America Crawls
As the U.S. Congress once more struggles through acrimonious and so far fruitless negotiations over gun reforms in the wake of a mass shooting, Americans may find themselves looking north in befuddlement.
Canada’s government has begun moving to ban handgun sales and buy back military-style rifles — dramatic changes in a country with one of the world’s highest gun ownership rates outside of the United States, expected to pass easily and with little fuss.
Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times
Ask Americans why Canada’s government seems to cut through issues that mire their own in bitterness and frustration, and you might hear them cite cultural differences, gentler politics, even easygoing Canadian temperaments.
But ask a political scientist why and you will get a more straightforward answer.
Differences in national culture and issues, while meaningful, do not on their own explain things. After all, Canada also has two parties that mostly dominate national politics, an urban-rural divide, deepening culture wars and a rising far-right. And guns have been a contentious issue there for decades, one long contested by activist groups.
Rather, much of the gap in how these two countries handle contentious policy questions comes down to something that can feel invisible amid day-to-day politicking but may be just as important as the issues themselves: the structures of their political systems.
Canada’s is a parliamentary system. Its head of government, Justin Trudeau, is elevated to that job by the legislature, of which he is also a member, and which his party, in collaboration with another, controls.
If Trudeau wants to pass a new law, he must merely ask his subordinates in his party and their allies to do it. There is no such thing as divided government and less cross-party horse-trading and legislative gridlock.
Canada is similar to what the United States would be if it had only a House of Representatives, whose speaker also oversaw federal agencies and foreign policy.
But ask a political scientist, and you will get a more straightforward answer.
Differences in national culture and issues, while meaningful, do not on their own explain things. After all, Canada also has two parties that mostly dominate national politics, an urban-rural divide, deepening culture wars and a rising far-right. And guns have been a contentious issue there for decades, one long contested by activist groups.
Rather, much of the gap in how these two countries handle contentious policy questions comes down to something that can feel invisible amid day-to-day politicking but may be just as important as the issues themselves: the structures of their political systems.
Canada’s is a parliamentary system. Its head of government, Justin Trudeau, is elevated to that job by the legislature, of which he is also a member, and which his party, in collaboration with another, controls.
If Trudeau wants to pass a new law, he must merely ask his subordinates in his party and their allies to do it. There is no such thing as divided government and less cross-party horse-trading and legislative gridlock.
Canada is similar to what the United States would be if it had only a House of Representatives, whose speaker also oversaw federal agencies and foreign policy.
What the U.S. has instead is a system whose structure
simultaneously requires cooperation across competing
parties - BUT - discourages them from working
together.
The result is a U.S. system that not only moves slower and passes fewer laws than those of parliamentary models like Canada’s, research has found, but also stalls for years even on measures that enjoy widespread support among voters in both parties, such as universal background checks for gun purchases.
Many political scientists argue that the United States’ long-worsening gridlock runs much deeper than any one issue or the interest groups engaged with it, to the basic setup of its political system.
The Perils of Presidents:
Scholar Juan Linz warned in a much-discussed 1990 essay, as much of the developing and formerly Soviet worlds moved to democracy, that those countries not follow what he called one of the foundational flaws of the United States: its presidency.
“The vast majority of the stable democracies in the world today are parliamentary regimes,” Linz wrote.
Presidential systems, on the other hand, tended to collapse in coups or other violence, with only the United States having persisted since its origin.
It’s telling that when American diplomats and technocrats help to set up new democracies abroad, -- they almost always model them on European-style parliaments.
Subsequent research has found that parliamentary systems also perform better at managing the economy and advancing rule of law than presidencies, if only for the comparative ease with which they can implement policy — witnessed in Canada’s rapid response to gun violence or other crises.
America’s legislative hurdles, requiring cooperation across the president, Senate and House to pass laws, are raised further by the fact that all three are elected under different rules.
None represents a straight national majority. Presidential elections favor some states over others. The Senate tilts especially toward rural voters. All three are elected on different schedules. As a result, single-party control is rare. Because competing parties typically control at least one of those three veto points on legislation, legislation is frequently vetoed.
Americans have come to accept, even embrace, divided government. But it is exceedingly uncommon. While Americans may see Canada’s legislative efficiency as unusual, to the rest of the world it is American-style gridlock that looks odd.
Still, America’s presidential system does not, on its own, explain what makes it function so differently from a country like Canada.
“As long as things are moderate, a presidential system is not so bad,” said Lee Drutman, a political scientist who studies political reform.
Rather, he cited that the U.S. is nearly alone in combining a presidency with winner-take-all elections.
Zero-Sum Contests
Proportional votes, common in most of the world, award seats to each party based on its share of the vote.
Under American-style elections, the party that wins 51% of a race controls 100% of the office it elects, while the party with 49% ends up with nothing.
This all but ensured that politics would coalesce between two parties because third-ranked parties rarely win office. And as those two parties came to represent geographically distinct electorates struggling for national control, their contests took on, for voters, a sensation of us-versus-them.
Canada, too, has winner-take-all elections, a practice inherited from Britain. Still, neither of those countries hold presidential contests, which pit one half of the nation against the other.
And in neither country do the executive and legislative branches share power, which, in times of divided government, extends the zero-sum nature of U.S. elections into lawmaking, too. And not only on issues on which the parties’ supporters disagree.
In 2013, shortly after a gunman killed 20 first graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, polls found that 81% of Republicans supported background checks for gun purchases. But when asked whether the Senate should pass such a bill — which would have required Republicans to side with the then-Democratic majority — support dropped to 57%. The measure never passed.
The episode was one of many suggesting that Americans often privilege partisan victory, or at least denying victory to the other side, over their own policy preferences, scholar Lilliana Mason wrote in a book on partisanship.
“Even when policy debates crack open and an opportunity for compromise appears,” Mason wrote, “partisans are psychologically motivated to look away.”
Unstable Majorities
Still, there is something unusual to Canada’s model, too.
Most parliamentary systems, as in Europe, elect lawmakers proportionally. Voters select a party, which takes seats in the legislature proportional to its overall vote share. As a result, many different parties end up in office and must join in a coalition to secure a governing majority. Lawmaking is less prone to gridlock than in the U.S., but it’s not seamless, either: The prime minister must negotiate among the parties of their coalition.
Canada, like Britain, combines American-style elections, which produce what is not quite a two-party system in those countries but is close, with European-style parliaments.
As a result, Canada’s prime minister usually oversees a legislative majority, allowing him or her to breeze through legislation even more easily than in European-style parliaments.
This moment is an exception: Trudeau’s Liberal Party controls slightly less than half of the House of Commons. Still, his party dominates a legislative alliance in which he has only one partner. Canada also includes a Senate, though its members are appointed and rarely rock the boat.
But the Canadian system produces what Drutman called “unstable majorities,” prone to whiplashing on policy.
“If you have a 52% margin for one party, and then you throw the bums out because 4% of the vote went the other way, now you’ve moved completely in the other direction,” he said.
Gun laws are a case in point. After a 1989 mass shooting, Canadian lawmakers passed registration rules but phased them in over several years because they were unpopular among rural communities.
Those rules were later abolished under a Conservative government. Though Trudeau has not reimposed the registry, he has tightened gun laws in other ways.
In a European-style system, by contrast, a 4-point shift to the right or left might change only one party in the country’s governing coalition, prompting a slighter policy change more proportional to the electorate’s mood.
American liberals may thrill at the seeming ease with which Canada’s often-left-leaning government can implement policy, much as conservatives may envy Britain’s more right-wing, but similarly rapid, lawmaking under a similar system.
But it is the slow-and-steady European model, with its frustratingly incremental advances, that, over the long run, research finds, tend to prove the most stable and effective.
© 2022 The New York Times Company
Why Canada Races on Gun Policy When America Crawls (yahoo.com)
.
Is the NRA Funded by Russia?
What We Know
and
What We Don't
NEWSWEEK
BY EWAN PALMER
6/2/22
The power of the National Rifle Association (NRA) has once again come under scrutiny in the wake of the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas that left 19 children and two adults dead.
The pro-gun lobbyist group has been widely condemned following the massacre at Robb Elementary School for holding a conference in Houston just days after the tragedy, as well as for how the group's influence on the Republican Party has held back any attempt at major gun reform in the U.S. for years.
In the days since the May 24 shooting in Uvalde, others have also noted how the NRA has received money and other donations from Russian nationals over the years.
"NRA. Who took donations from our enemy, Russia. Russia funded the NRA. Russia helps enable the slaughter of American kids. And they do it on purpose. They are the enemy. Never forget that," tweeted Louise Mensch, a former British politician and author, also sharing a mock-up advertising board form the NRA with the words "f**k you kids" and a fired bullet.
Above, Black Rain Ordnance sporting rifles are displayed during the NRA Annual Meeting at the
George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, Texas on May 28, 2022. PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP/
GETTY IMAGES
Political commentator Lindy Li wrote on Twitter: "With Tulsa, we are now up to TWENTY MASS SHOOTINGS since Uvalde," in reference to Wednesday shooting at a hospital which left four people dead. "Why the F is the Russian-funded NRA considered by the IRS to be a tax-exempt social welfare org? How the F is an unapologetic, murder-promoting domestic terrorist org contributing to our social welfare?!"
Actor Brain Guest tweeted: "Republicans won't abandon the NRA because it's their shell company that funnels in funding from Russia."
The claims that NRA is funded by Russia appear to be based on two separate findings related to Russian nationals and their ties to the NRA around the time of the 2016 presidential election.
What We Know
and
What We Don't
NEWSWEEK
BY EWAN PALMER
6/2/22
The power of the National Rifle Association (NRA) has once again come under scrutiny in the wake of the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas that left 19 children and two adults dead.
The pro-gun lobbyist group has been widely condemned following the massacre at Robb Elementary School for holding a conference in Houston just days after the tragedy, as well as for how the group's influence on the Republican Party has held back any attempt at major gun reform in the U.S. for years.
In the days since the May 24 shooting in Uvalde, others have also noted how the NRA has received money and other donations from Russian nationals over the years.
"NRA. Who took donations from our enemy, Russia. Russia funded the NRA. Russia helps enable the slaughter of American kids. And they do it on purpose. They are the enemy. Never forget that," tweeted Louise Mensch, a former British politician and author, also sharing a mock-up advertising board form the NRA with the words "f**k you kids" and a fired bullet.
Above, Black Rain Ordnance sporting rifles are displayed during the NRA Annual Meeting at the
George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, Texas on May 28, 2022. PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP/
GETTY IMAGES
Political commentator Lindy Li wrote on Twitter: "With Tulsa, we are now up to TWENTY MASS SHOOTINGS since Uvalde," in reference to Wednesday shooting at a hospital which left four people dead. "Why the F is the Russian-funded NRA considered by the IRS to be a tax-exempt social welfare org? How the F is an unapologetic, murder-promoting domestic terrorist org contributing to our social welfare?!"
Actor Brain Guest tweeted: "Republicans won't abandon the NRA because it's their shell company that funnels in funding from Russia."
The claims that NRA is funded by Russia appear to be based on two separate findings related to Russian nationals and their ties to the NRA around the time of the 2016 presidential election.
ELECTIONS
www.politico.com
The gun debate roadblock you might not expect: Swing states
In some top Senate battlegrounds, gun-drenched GOP primaries and high firearm ownership rates thwart any chance of serious reform.
Pennsylvania Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mehmet Oz was forced to distance himself from past comments made in favor of gun regulations. | Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
POLITICO
By NATALIE ALLISON
05/27/2022 04:30 AM EDT
They’ve fired rifles. They’ve loaded shotguns. They’ve staked claims to be the most “pro-gun” candidate running.
Throughout the primary election season, voters in the top Senate battleground states have been witness to a parade of Republican candidates trying to display their proficiency with guns and expressing their full-throated commitment to the Second Amendment.
It’s a backdrop that helps explain how even a tragedy as horrific as the mass shooting of children in a Uvalde, Texas, school seems unable to produce a consensus on how to respond to gun violence.
There’s little incentive for Republicans to change course now, national strategists say, particularly in swing states where gun ownership remains high and the GOP is riding a wave of momentum. Even Democrats in the most competitive Senate races this cycle — incumbents in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and New Hampshire — have shied away from articulating specific policy demands, instead offering vague suggestions that somethingshould be done to protect children.
“I think it’s going to be a very rare purple-to-red state where one of your top paid communication messages with independents is guns, under any circumstance,” said John Rowley, a Democratic strategist with experience working on races in rural America. “It’s probably not going to be a lynchpin, decisive issue. That’s probably going to be something else.”
While Herschel Walker easily won the Republican nomination in Georgia on Tuesday, GOP candidates in Arizona, Nevada and New Hampshire are still battling through contested primaries. As condolences poured in Tuesday and Wednesday about the school shooting that left at least 21 dead, the two Republicans in the Nevada Republican Senate primary continued pumping out campaign tweets, but avoided mentioning the fatal shooting.
In statements provided to POLITICO, they stuck to similar messaging as other Republicans around the country who have been asked to address the issue: improve school safety measures and mental health services, but don’t touch guns. Adam Laxalt called for tapping billions of dollars in remaining federal coronavirus relief funds to harden security at schools, while Sam Brown said he wouldn’t support laws that would “adjudicate persons without due process,” but suggested increasing mental health services.
On Thursday, Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, who will face a competitive fight this fall in Wisconsin, dodged a question about whether he would support stiffer background checks.
“No matter what you do, people fall through the cracks … these are difficult issues,” Johnson said in a Fox Business interview. He said “the solution lies” in stronger families, faith and supportive communities, before pivoting to condemn the teaching of critical race theory in schools.
TEXAS SCHOOL SHOOTING
The 10 GOP senators to watch in the wake of the Texas school shooting
BY JORDAIN CARNEY AND MARIANNE LEVINE
In Arizona, top Republicans vying for the Senate nomination told POLITICO they weren’t interested in talking about gun restrictions — an issue that is personal for Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, whose wife, Gabrielle Giffords, sustained serious injuries when, as a congresswoman, she was shot in 2011.
The state was rated the most gun-friendly statein the nation last year by Guns and Ammo magazine.
“Democrats have it exactly backwards — they want to outlaw our guns, as they free violent criminals and defund the police,” GOP Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters said in a statement. “We’re not going to ban guns — period.”
He continued by suggesting schools have armed and trained security guards and that society “actually fix the culture” so “fewer kids grow up in isolated, broken homes.”
Mark Brnovich, the Republican state attorney general running for Senate, said he hopes the country “will reflect on our humanity instead of racing to politicize such a heartbreaking tragedy.” A spokesperson for Jim Lamon, another top contender, did not respond to a request for comment, and Lamon has not addressed the shooting on social media.
The Arizona GOP field’s reluctance to talk about bipartisan gun reform efforts or other new restrictions comes as firearms have featured prominently in their campaigns. Lamon drew national attention in February after running a Super Bowl ad of him firing shots at stand-ins for Kelly, President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Masters, meanwhile, posted a campaign video last fall of him holding a short-barreled rifle.
“It wasn’t designed for hunting. This is designed to kill people,” Masters said in the video. “But if you’re not a bad guy, I support your right to own one.”
“I don’t think we’re going to see Republican primary candidates talk about trying to fix it,” said Chuck Coughlin, an Arizona-based GOP strategist, referring to gun laws. “I just don’t think it’s going to happen. Unless they’re acting completely out of conscience, I couldn’t see it being played to a political advantage.”
Within days of each other, Pennsylvania Republican Senate candidates Dave McCormick and Mehmet Oz released ads last month showing themselves firing guns — in both cases, shooting rounds using three different types of firearms.
The ads came as both candidates, political outsiders who moved back to Pennsylvania to run for the Senate seat, sought to prove their conservative bona fides to Republican voters in the face of intense attacks about their backgrounds.
Oz, in particular, was forced to distance himself from past comments made in favor of gun regulations, including banning semi-automatic weapons and implementing universal background checks and waiting periods.
The two candidates — who are engaged in an official recount after Oz took a narrow lead in last week’s primary election — each posted on social media that they were mourning those killed in the shooting, but stopped short of proposing any change in gun laws.
Though the state’s Democratic Senate nominee, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, went so far as to outline specific gun policy goals in a statement this week — calling for “universal background checks for all gun sales and a ban on military-grade assault weapons and high capacity magazines” — even Democrats acknowledge Pennsylvania has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the country.
When he was first running for Congress in 2018, Rep. Conor Lamb — whom Fetterman defeated in the state’s May 17 Democratic primary — included in his opening television ad a photo of himself shooting a rifle at a firing range.
“Still loves to shoot,” the narrator said of Lamb, after noting he had spent four years in the Marines.
The Senate’s most vulnerable Democratic incumbents this fall are refraining from specific calls to round up assault weapons or implement sweeping changes to federal firearm laws. Instead, they’re using measured language like “common sense” gun reform and “we must act” when speaking about the need to prevent future gun violence. While Kelly has previously expressed support for universal background checks, red flag laws and closing loopholes that allow domestic abusers to buy guns, the senator has so far held off from calling for specific policy proposals this week.
Justin Barasky, a strategist who most recently served as a senior adviser for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said GOP candidates’ reluctance to discuss additional gun restrictions likely won’t single-handedly motivate undecided voters. But it “contributes to the growing problems Republicans have” with those voters, which also includes the party’s support for rolling back abortion rights.
“These types of things that Republicans are so widely out of step on, hurt them, I think, in swing areas — and it has in the past,” Barasky said. “It’s one of the reasons Republicans lost in 2020.”
Several national strategists contacted for this story — on both sides of the aisle — said it’s likely only a matter of time until the gun violence conversation blows over again. In their cynical view, swing-state Republicans are unlikely to face repercussions for keeping a low profile on the issue because inflation and economic concerns, meanwhile, remain a top priority for voters.
“One week it’s abortion, one week it’s guns. One week it’s something else,” said a Republican involved in Senate races. “At the end of the day, there are a lot of other issues that are going to be front and center.”
In recent years, however, support for some gun restrictions has appeared to work in some swing-state Republicans’ favor. In a tight reelection campaign in 2016, when polls showed Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) trailing his Democratic opponent at times, the Republican earned an endorsement from Kelly and Giffords’ anti-gun violence PAC. Their support came after he spearheaded a bipartisan gun reform bill that ultimately failed in the Senate.
Two years later, in the aftermath of a deadly school shooting in Parkland, Fla., then-Florida Gov. Rick Scott signed into law a series of gun control measures. A month later, Scott officially announced his challenge to Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, a race he later won by one-tenth of a percentage point.
Though Scott initially drew heat from some Republicans — and from the National Rifle Association — for supporting the Parkland bill, he worked that year to repair his reputation on the right as a Second Amendment champion. By Election Day, he had also largely inoculated himself from criticism that he failed to act on gun violence.
In the current political environment, some strategists see limited gun reform measures like red flag laws — which give law enforcement the ability to seek a judge’s approval to seize firearms from someone in mental distress or who has threatened to harm others — as more attainable than most other prospective restrictions.
A vulnerable Democrat in a state like Arizona should seize on the issue relentlessly, Coughlin suggested, given the favorable polling surrounding a limited-scope policy to take guns from someone who has declared their intent to shoot others.
“Kelly could do it very effectively, because it’s going to be very popular with unaffiliated voters,”
Coughlin said. “And probably popular with nearly a majority of the Republican electorate, except primary voters — depending on what you say.”
The gun debate roadblock you might not expect: Swing states
In some top Senate battlegrounds, gun-drenched GOP primaries and high firearm ownership rates thwart any chance of serious reform.
www.politico.com
The gun debate roadblock you might not expect: Swing states
In some top Senate battlegrounds, gun-drenched GOP primaries and high firearm ownership rates thwart any chance of serious reform.
Pennsylvania Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mehmet Oz was forced to distance himself from past comments made in favor of gun regulations. | Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
POLITICO
By NATALIE ALLISON
05/27/2022 04:30 AM EDT
They’ve fired rifles. They’ve loaded shotguns. They’ve staked claims to be the most “pro-gun” candidate running.
Throughout the primary election season, voters in the top Senate battleground states have been witness to a parade of Republican candidates trying to display their proficiency with guns and expressing their full-throated commitment to the Second Amendment.
It’s a backdrop that helps explain how even a tragedy as horrific as the mass shooting of children in a Uvalde, Texas, school seems unable to produce a consensus on how to respond to gun violence.
There’s little incentive for Republicans to change course now, national strategists say, particularly in swing states where gun ownership remains high and the GOP is riding a wave of momentum. Even Democrats in the most competitive Senate races this cycle — incumbents in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and New Hampshire — have shied away from articulating specific policy demands, instead offering vague suggestions that somethingshould be done to protect children.
“I think it’s going to be a very rare purple-to-red state where one of your top paid communication messages with independents is guns, under any circumstance,” said John Rowley, a Democratic strategist with experience working on races in rural America. “It’s probably not going to be a lynchpin, decisive issue. That’s probably going to be something else.”
While Herschel Walker easily won the Republican nomination in Georgia on Tuesday, GOP candidates in Arizona, Nevada and New Hampshire are still battling through contested primaries. As condolences poured in Tuesday and Wednesday about the school shooting that left at least 21 dead, the two Republicans in the Nevada Republican Senate primary continued pumping out campaign tweets, but avoided mentioning the fatal shooting.
In statements provided to POLITICO, they stuck to similar messaging as other Republicans around the country who have been asked to address the issue: improve school safety measures and mental health services, but don’t touch guns. Adam Laxalt called for tapping billions of dollars in remaining federal coronavirus relief funds to harden security at schools, while Sam Brown said he wouldn’t support laws that would “adjudicate persons without due process,” but suggested increasing mental health services.
On Thursday, Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, who will face a competitive fight this fall in Wisconsin, dodged a question about whether he would support stiffer background checks.
“No matter what you do, people fall through the cracks … these are difficult issues,” Johnson said in a Fox Business interview. He said “the solution lies” in stronger families, faith and supportive communities, before pivoting to condemn the teaching of critical race theory in schools.
TEXAS SCHOOL SHOOTING
The 10 GOP senators to watch in the wake of the Texas school shooting
BY JORDAIN CARNEY AND MARIANNE LEVINE
In Arizona, top Republicans vying for the Senate nomination told POLITICO they weren’t interested in talking about gun restrictions — an issue that is personal for Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, whose wife, Gabrielle Giffords, sustained serious injuries when, as a congresswoman, she was shot in 2011.
The state was rated the most gun-friendly statein the nation last year by Guns and Ammo magazine.
“Democrats have it exactly backwards — they want to outlaw our guns, as they free violent criminals and defund the police,” GOP Arizona Senate candidate Blake Masters said in a statement. “We’re not going to ban guns — period.”
He continued by suggesting schools have armed and trained security guards and that society “actually fix the culture” so “fewer kids grow up in isolated, broken homes.”
Mark Brnovich, the Republican state attorney general running for Senate, said he hopes the country “will reflect on our humanity instead of racing to politicize such a heartbreaking tragedy.” A spokesperson for Jim Lamon, another top contender, did not respond to a request for comment, and Lamon has not addressed the shooting on social media.
The Arizona GOP field’s reluctance to talk about bipartisan gun reform efforts or other new restrictions comes as firearms have featured prominently in their campaigns. Lamon drew national attention in February after running a Super Bowl ad of him firing shots at stand-ins for Kelly, President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Masters, meanwhile, posted a campaign video last fall of him holding a short-barreled rifle.
“It wasn’t designed for hunting. This is designed to kill people,” Masters said in the video. “But if you’re not a bad guy, I support your right to own one.”
“I don’t think we’re going to see Republican primary candidates talk about trying to fix it,” said Chuck Coughlin, an Arizona-based GOP strategist, referring to gun laws. “I just don’t think it’s going to happen. Unless they’re acting completely out of conscience, I couldn’t see it being played to a political advantage.”
Within days of each other, Pennsylvania Republican Senate candidates Dave McCormick and Mehmet Oz released ads last month showing themselves firing guns — in both cases, shooting rounds using three different types of firearms.
The ads came as both candidates, political outsiders who moved back to Pennsylvania to run for the Senate seat, sought to prove their conservative bona fides to Republican voters in the face of intense attacks about their backgrounds.
Oz, in particular, was forced to distance himself from past comments made in favor of gun regulations, including banning semi-automatic weapons and implementing universal background checks and waiting periods.
The two candidates — who are engaged in an official recount after Oz took a narrow lead in last week’s primary election — each posted on social media that they were mourning those killed in the shooting, but stopped short of proposing any change in gun laws.
Though the state’s Democratic Senate nominee, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, went so far as to outline specific gun policy goals in a statement this week — calling for “universal background checks for all gun sales and a ban on military-grade assault weapons and high capacity magazines” — even Democrats acknowledge Pennsylvania has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the country.
When he was first running for Congress in 2018, Rep. Conor Lamb — whom Fetterman defeated in the state’s May 17 Democratic primary — included in his opening television ad a photo of himself shooting a rifle at a firing range.
“Still loves to shoot,” the narrator said of Lamb, after noting he had spent four years in the Marines.
The Senate’s most vulnerable Democratic incumbents this fall are refraining from specific calls to round up assault weapons or implement sweeping changes to federal firearm laws. Instead, they’re using measured language like “common sense” gun reform and “we must act” when speaking about the need to prevent future gun violence. While Kelly has previously expressed support for universal background checks, red flag laws and closing loopholes that allow domestic abusers to buy guns, the senator has so far held off from calling for specific policy proposals this week.
Justin Barasky, a strategist who most recently served as a senior adviser for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said GOP candidates’ reluctance to discuss additional gun restrictions likely won’t single-handedly motivate undecided voters. But it “contributes to the growing problems Republicans have” with those voters, which also includes the party’s support for rolling back abortion rights.
“These types of things that Republicans are so widely out of step on, hurt them, I think, in swing areas — and it has in the past,” Barasky said. “It’s one of the reasons Republicans lost in 2020.”
Several national strategists contacted for this story — on both sides of the aisle — said it’s likely only a matter of time until the gun violence conversation blows over again. In their cynical view, swing-state Republicans are unlikely to face repercussions for keeping a low profile on the issue because inflation and economic concerns, meanwhile, remain a top priority for voters.
“One week it’s abortion, one week it’s guns. One week it’s something else,” said a Republican involved in Senate races. “At the end of the day, there are a lot of other issues that are going to be front and center.”
In recent years, however, support for some gun restrictions has appeared to work in some swing-state Republicans’ favor. In a tight reelection campaign in 2016, when polls showed Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) trailing his Democratic opponent at times, the Republican earned an endorsement from Kelly and Giffords’ anti-gun violence PAC. Their support came after he spearheaded a bipartisan gun reform bill that ultimately failed in the Senate.
Two years later, in the aftermath of a deadly school shooting in Parkland, Fla., then-Florida Gov. Rick Scott signed into law a series of gun control measures. A month later, Scott officially announced his challenge to Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, a race he later won by one-tenth of a percentage point.
Though Scott initially drew heat from some Republicans — and from the National Rifle Association — for supporting the Parkland bill, he worked that year to repair his reputation on the right as a Second Amendment champion. By Election Day, he had also largely inoculated himself from criticism that he failed to act on gun violence.
In the current political environment, some strategists see limited gun reform measures like red flag laws — which give law enforcement the ability to seek a judge’s approval to seize firearms from someone in mental distress or who has threatened to harm others — as more attainable than most other prospective restrictions.
A vulnerable Democrat in a state like Arizona should seize on the issue relentlessly, Coughlin suggested, given the favorable polling surrounding a limited-scope policy to take guns from someone who has declared their intent to shoot others.
“Kelly could do it very effectively, because it’s going to be very popular with unaffiliated voters,”
Coughlin said. “And probably popular with nearly a majority of the Republican electorate, except primary voters — depending on what you say.”
- FILED UNDER:
- REPUBLICANS,
- ARIZONA,
- PENNSYLVANIA,
- SWING STATES,
- GUN RIGHTS,
- 2022 ELECTIONS
The Texas conservative turned Biden-approved ‘rational Republican’ on guns
If the Senate can’t agree on a legislative response after the killings in Uvalde, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said, “it will be embarrassing.”
The Texas conservative turned Biden-approved ‘rational Republican’ on guns - POLITICO
Any gun safety deal Congress can pass after the shooting of 19 children and two teachers in Texas will need the support of its Second Amendment-touting senior senator.
“It would feed the narrative that we can’t get things done in the public interest,” the 70-year-old former state attorney general told POLITICO in an interview. “I don’t believe that narrative, I believe we can get a bipartisan deal done in the public interest.”
Cornyn’s in a unique position to get the votes on guns, not just because of the latest tragedy that struck his home state. He’s previously teamed up with Democrats on narrow background checks legislation — the most substantive gun bill to clear Congress in the last decade. Not to mention that the former whip wields major influence in a GOP conference where he’s widely viewed as a potential successor to McConnell.
A successful gun vote could boost Cornyn in any future race for Senate GOP leader. Yet the risks of failure are even clearer — whatever bipartisan agreement that won’t go too far for Cornyn - - may not be enough for Democratic negotiators. Cornyn, who assured one home-state radio host this week that Second Amendment restrictions are “not gonna happen,” voted against expanding background checks in 2013.
Even if Democrats and Cornyn can meet in the middle on trying to stop the American scourge of mass shootings, Cornyn will then have to sell the plan to a GOP conference - - historically disinterested in gun policy reforms. Despite that skepticism, especially given the closeness of the midterm elections, senators on both sides of the aisle see Cornyn as a gun-talks linchpin.
“He’s critical,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a frequent negotiating partner of Cornyn’s. “His credibility as a conservative, as a Republican caucus leader, as a law enforcement leader from Texas … gives him the credibility to negotiate a balance between robust investment in mental health and some progress around gun safety.”
Cornyn and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), another leading participant in the current talks, tried to reach a deal last year to expand the definition of a commercial gun dealer to no avail. The Texan suggested this moment could be different, given “the urgency of these repeated incidents” and concerns from law enforcement about copycat shootings.
But as “somewhat optimistic” as he is, Cornyn is aware of the long odds and not sounding like a centrist.
“When Sen. McConnell asked me to be sort of the point person on this, I thought to myself ‘well, this is like Joe Biden appointing Kamala Harris border czar,’ I accepted the responsibility with a little trepidation,” he recalled.
Alongside Cornyn and Murphy in one set of talks are Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). Those are happening in tandem with bipartisan discussions on a gun package that include Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.) Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Murphy and Sinema.
Negotiators are aiming to craft proposals soon and senators involved in the talks suggested their ideas could eventually merge. On both fronts, though, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has given deal-makers a relatively short deadline to reach an agreement.
The Texas conservative turned Biden-approved ‘rational Republican’ on guns - POLITICO
If the Senate can’t agree on a legislative response after the killings in Uvalde, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said, “it will be embarrassing.”
The Texas conservative turned Biden-approved ‘rational Republican’ on guns - POLITICO
Any gun safety deal Congress can pass after the shooting of 19 children and two teachers in Texas will need the support of its Second Amendment-touting senior senator.
And John Cornyn, tapped as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s
emissary to bipartisan negotiations on gun legislation, is feeling the
pressure after years of congressional failure to get a bill done. If the
Senate can’t agree on a legislative response after the killings in Uvalde,
Texas, Cornyn said, “it will be embarrassing.”
“It would feed the narrative that we can’t get things done in the public interest,” the 70-year-old former state attorney general told POLITICO in an interview. “I don’t believe that narrative, I believe we can get a bipartisan deal done in the public interest.”
Cornyn’s in a unique position to get the votes on guns, not just because of the latest tragedy that struck his home state. He’s previously teamed up with Democrats on narrow background checks legislation — the most substantive gun bill to clear Congress in the last decade. Not to mention that the former whip wields major influence in a GOP conference where he’s widely viewed as a potential successor to McConnell.
A successful gun vote could boost Cornyn in any future race for Senate GOP leader. Yet the risks of failure are even clearer — whatever bipartisan agreement that won’t go too far for Cornyn - - may not be enough for Democratic negotiators. Cornyn, who assured one home-state radio host this week that Second Amendment restrictions are “not gonna happen,” voted against expanding background checks in 2013.
Even if Democrats and Cornyn can meet in the middle on trying to stop the American scourge of mass shootings, Cornyn will then have to sell the plan to a GOP conference - - historically disinterested in gun policy reforms. Despite that skepticism, especially given the closeness of the midterm elections, senators on both sides of the aisle see Cornyn as a gun-talks linchpin.
“He’s critical,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a frequent negotiating partner of Cornyn’s. “His credibility as a conservative, as a Republican caucus leader, as a law enforcement leader from Texas … gives him the credibility to negotiate a balance between robust investment in mental health and some progress around gun safety.”
Cornyn and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), another leading participant in the current talks, tried to reach a deal last year to expand the definition of a commercial gun dealer to no avail. The Texan suggested this moment could be different, given “the urgency of these repeated incidents” and concerns from law enforcement about copycat shootings.
But as “somewhat optimistic” as he is, Cornyn is aware of the long odds and not sounding like a centrist.
“When Sen. McConnell asked me to be sort of the point person on this, I thought to myself ‘well, this is like Joe Biden appointing Kamala Harris border czar,’ I accepted the responsibility with a little trepidation,” he recalled.
Alongside Cornyn and Murphy in one set of talks are Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). Those are happening in tandem with bipartisan discussions on a gun package that include Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.) Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Murphy and Sinema.
Negotiators are aiming to craft proposals soon and senators involved in the talks suggested their ideas could eventually merge. On both fronts, though, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has given deal-makers a relatively short deadline to reach an agreement.
The Texas conservative turned Biden-approved ‘rational Republican’ on guns - POLITICO
NY Governor Hochul Signs Landmark Legislative Package to Strengthen Gun Laws and Protect New Yorkers
Governor Kathy Hochul today signed a landmark legislative package to immediately strengthen the state's gun laws, close critical loopholes exposed by shooters in Buffalo and Uvalde and protect New Yorkers from the scourge of gun violence that continues to infect our nation and endanger our communities.
Governor Hochul signed the bills at the Northeast Bronx YMCA flanked by Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Speaker Carl Heastie, partners in the legislature, Attorney General Letitia James and victims and survivors of gun violence.
"Gun violence is an epidemic that is tearing our country apart. Thoughts and prayers won't fix this, but taking strong action will," Governor Hochul said.
"In New York, we're taking bold steps to protect the people of our state. I am proud to sign a comprehensive bill package that prohibits the sale of semiautomatic weapons to people under 21, bans body armor sales outside of people in select professions, closes critical gun law loopholes and strengthens our Red Flag Law to keep guns away from dangerous people—new measures that I believe will save lives. I am thankful to Majority Leader Stewart-Cousins, Speaker Heastie, and all our legislative partners for acting with the urgency and thoughtfulness that this issue demands. While we are taking expedient action to enhance New York State's nation-leading gun laws, we recognize that gun violence is a nationwide problem. I once again urge Congress to follow our lead and take immediate action to pass meaningful gun violence prevention measures. Lives depend on it."
"There is a scourge of gun violence in our country due to the pervasiveness of illegal firearms. Year after year, our neighborhoods are flooded with illegal guns and ghost guns, tormenting families and law-abiding citizens every day, but yet the national response does not change," Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado said. "In New York, we just passed common-sense gun safety legislation and more kids will live to see their high school graduation because of it. In the fight to save lives, New York is leading the way."
more: Governor Hochul Signs Landmark Legislative Package to Strengthen Gun Laws and Protect New Yorkers | Governor Kathy Hochul (ny.gov)
Comprehensive Ten-Bill Package Closes Critical Gun Law Loopholes Exposed in Tragic Shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde:
Legislation S.9458/A.10503 Bars Purchase of Semiautomatic Rifles by Anyone Under Age 21 by Requiring a License
Legislation S.9407-B/A.10497 Prohibits Purchase of Body Armor with Exception of Those in Specified Professions
Legislation S.9113-A./A.10502 Expands List of People Who Can File Extreme Risk Protection Orders and Requires Law Enforcement to File ERPOs Under Specified Set of Circumstances
Package Also Strengthens Crime Reporting;
Requires Microstamping of New Semiautomatic Pistols;
Eliminates Grandfathering of High-Capacity Feeding Devices; AND
Requires Social Media Companies to Improve Response to and Reporting of Hateful Content
Governor Kathy Hochul today signed a landmark legislative package to immediately strengthen the state's gun laws, close critical loopholes exposed by shooters in Buffalo and Uvalde and protect New Yorkers from the scourge of gun violence that continues to infect our nation and endanger our communities.
Governor Hochul signed the bills at the Northeast Bronx YMCA flanked by Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Speaker Carl Heastie, partners in the legislature, Attorney General Letitia James and victims and survivors of gun violence.
"Gun violence is an epidemic that is tearing our country apart. Thoughts and prayers won't fix this, but taking strong action will," Governor Hochul said.
"In New York, we're taking bold steps to protect the people of our state. I am proud to sign a comprehensive bill package that prohibits the sale of semiautomatic weapons to people under 21, bans body armor sales outside of people in select professions, closes critical gun law loopholes and strengthens our Red Flag Law to keep guns away from dangerous people—new measures that I believe will save lives. I am thankful to Majority Leader Stewart-Cousins, Speaker Heastie, and all our legislative partners for acting with the urgency and thoughtfulness that this issue demands. While we are taking expedient action to enhance New York State's nation-leading gun laws, we recognize that gun violence is a nationwide problem. I once again urge Congress to follow our lead and take immediate action to pass meaningful gun violence prevention measures. Lives depend on it."
"There is a scourge of gun violence in our country due to the pervasiveness of illegal firearms. Year after year, our neighborhoods are flooded with illegal guns and ghost guns, tormenting families and law-abiding citizens every day, but yet the national response does not change," Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado said. "In New York, we just passed common-sense gun safety legislation and more kids will live to see their high school graduation because of it. In the fight to save lives, New York is leading the way."
more: Governor Hochul Signs Landmark Legislative Package to Strengthen Gun Laws and Protect New Yorkers | Governor Kathy Hochul (ny.gov)
House passes tough new gun measures hours after wrenching testimony
Washington Post
June 8, 2022
The House on Wednesday endorsed some of the most aggressive gun-control measures taken up on Capitol Hill in years — including raising the minimum age for the purchase of most semiautomatic rifles to 21 and banning high-capacity ammunition magazines — as Washington seeks to mount a tough response to recent high-profile mass shootings.
The 223-to-204 vote took place just hours after a House committee heard searing testimony from a young survivor of the May 24 shooting in Uvalde, Tex., as well as the parents of a victim and a pediatrician who responded to the tragedy that left 19 elementary-schoolers and two teachers dead.
Five Republicans joined most Democrats in backing the legislation. Two Democrats voted no.
“Somewhere out there, there is a mom listening to our testimony, thinking, ‘I can’t even imagine their pain,’ not knowing that our reality will one day be hers, unless we act now,” said Kimberly Rubio, the mother of 10-year-old Lexi Rubio, who was killed in the attack.
The House vote, however, will amount to little more than a political messaging exercise because of firm Republican opposition to substantial new gun restrictions. That has left hopes for a bipartisan deal that could be signed into law in the hands of a small group of senators who are exploring much more modest changes to federal gun laws. Those talks continued Wednesday in hopes of sealing a deal in the coming days.
Still, Democrats said this week’s House votes were necessary to show Americans that more can be done to prevent not only mass-casualty incidents such as the killings last month in Buffalo and Uvalde, but the hundreds of less deadly mass shootings and everyday incidents of gun violence that have long scourged America.
“Even if our Senate colleagues do not take up these exact bills, I will tell you what this process we are going through will absolutely do and why our efforts here are worthwhile: This process will unequivocally show where each and every one of us stand in the wake of this unspeakable tragedy,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), adding that the votes would send a clear message to the Senate negotiators.
Republicans attacked the bills as an unserious, partisan effort that would infringe on Americans’ constitutional rights. At a news conference Wednesday, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) called them an effort “to destroy the Second Amendment.”
The bill under consideration Wednesday, Jordan said, “in short, tells Americans, law-abiding American citizens, when they can buy a firearm, what kind of firearm they can get, and where and how they have to store it in their own darn home — a direct attack on Second Amendment rights.”
Besides the minimum-age measure and the ban on high-capacity magazines, the House legislation passed Wednesday includes proposals that would crack down on gun trafficking, create new safe-storage requirements for gun owners, and codify executive orders that ban untraceable “ghost guns” as well as “bump stock” devices that allow a semiautomatic rifle to mimic machine-gun fire.
Of the five House Republicans voting for the bill — Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Anthony Gonzalez (Ohio), Chris Jacobs (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Fred Upton (Mich.) — only Fitzpatrick is seeking reelection. Among Democrats, Reps. Jared Golden (Maine) and Kurt Schrader (Ore.) voted no; Schrader lost his campaign for renomination last month.
House lawmakers will vote Thursday on a separate bill dealing with red-flag laws that could allow authorities to keep guns out of the hands of people judged to represent a threat to themselves or their communities. The bill combines legislation from Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.) that would create a federal grant program to encourage states to adopt their own red-flag laws with a measure from Rep. Lucy McBath (D-Ga.) that would allow federal courts to issue red-flag orders, which are formally known as “extreme risk protection orders.”
The House last year passed two bills dealing with federal background checks — one that would expand their applicability to all commercial sales, including gun shows and internet transactions, and another that would extend the time frame for completing a check. Neither has come to a vote in the Senate because of GOP opposition.
The Senate is exploring a narrower package that could include legislation encouraging states to create red-flag systems, a modest expansion of background checks to incorporate juvenile records, as well as funding for mental health programs and school security improvements.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the lead GOP negotiator, cited “steady progress” Wednesday, but he declined to say when a deal might be reached and counseled against “artificial deadlines.” Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has signaled a desire to accelerate the talks, lest the recent shootings fade from public attention.
“But I sense a feeling of urgency and a desire actually to get things done,” Cornyn said. “Around here, if you know people have the will, there is a way, and I believe there is a collective bipartisan will.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday she was “prayerful” about the Senate talks and suggested that her chamber stood ready to pass whatever package the negotiators could agree upon.
“Hopefully, we can make some advancement, because for all of us who have met again and again and again with the survivors of gun violence — some coming time and again to check up on what’s happening, others new to that horrible club that none of us wants to be a member of — they just want something to happen,” she said.
Washington Post
June 8, 2022
The House on Wednesday endorsed some of the most aggressive gun-control measures taken up on Capitol Hill in years — including raising the minimum age for the purchase of most semiautomatic rifles to 21 and banning high-capacity ammunition magazines — as Washington seeks to mount a tough response to recent high-profile mass shootings.
The 223-to-204 vote took place just hours after a House committee heard searing testimony from a young survivor of the May 24 shooting in Uvalde, Tex., as well as the parents of a victim and a pediatrician who responded to the tragedy that left 19 elementary-schoolers and two teachers dead.
Five Republicans joined most Democrats in backing the legislation. Two Democrats voted no.
“Somewhere out there, there is a mom listening to our testimony, thinking, ‘I can’t even imagine their pain,’ not knowing that our reality will one day be hers, unless we act now,” said Kimberly Rubio, the mother of 10-year-old Lexi Rubio, who was killed in the attack.
The House vote, however, will amount to little more than a political messaging exercise because of firm Republican opposition to substantial new gun restrictions. That has left hopes for a bipartisan deal that could be signed into law in the hands of a small group of senators who are exploring much more modest changes to federal gun laws. Those talks continued Wednesday in hopes of sealing a deal in the coming days.
Still, Democrats said this week’s House votes were necessary to show Americans that more can be done to prevent not only mass-casualty incidents such as the killings last month in Buffalo and Uvalde, but the hundreds of less deadly mass shootings and everyday incidents of gun violence that have long scourged America.
“Even if our Senate colleagues do not take up these exact bills, I will tell you what this process we are going through will absolutely do and why our efforts here are worthwhile: This process will unequivocally show where each and every one of us stand in the wake of this unspeakable tragedy,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), adding that the votes would send a clear message to the Senate negotiators.
Republicans attacked the bills as an unserious, partisan effort that would infringe on Americans’ constitutional rights. At a news conference Wednesday, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) called them an effort “to destroy the Second Amendment.”
The bill under consideration Wednesday, Jordan said, “in short, tells Americans, law-abiding American citizens, when they can buy a firearm, what kind of firearm they can get, and where and how they have to store it in their own darn home — a direct attack on Second Amendment rights.”
Besides the minimum-age measure and the ban on high-capacity magazines, the House legislation passed Wednesday includes proposals that would crack down on gun trafficking, create new safe-storage requirements for gun owners, and codify executive orders that ban untraceable “ghost guns” as well as “bump stock” devices that allow a semiautomatic rifle to mimic machine-gun fire.
Of the five House Republicans voting for the bill — Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Anthony Gonzalez (Ohio), Chris Jacobs (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Fred Upton (Mich.) — only Fitzpatrick is seeking reelection. Among Democrats, Reps. Jared Golden (Maine) and Kurt Schrader (Ore.) voted no; Schrader lost his campaign for renomination last month.
House lawmakers will vote Thursday on a separate bill dealing with red-flag laws that could allow authorities to keep guns out of the hands of people judged to represent a threat to themselves or their communities. The bill combines legislation from Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.) that would create a federal grant program to encourage states to adopt their own red-flag laws with a measure from Rep. Lucy McBath (D-Ga.) that would allow federal courts to issue red-flag orders, which are formally known as “extreme risk protection orders.”
The House last year passed two bills dealing with federal background checks — one that would expand their applicability to all commercial sales, including gun shows and internet transactions, and another that would extend the time frame for completing a check. Neither has come to a vote in the Senate because of GOP opposition.
The Senate is exploring a narrower package that could include legislation encouraging states to create red-flag systems, a modest expansion of background checks to incorporate juvenile records, as well as funding for mental health programs and school security improvements.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the lead GOP negotiator, cited “steady progress” Wednesday, but he declined to say when a deal might be reached and counseled against “artificial deadlines.” Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has signaled a desire to accelerate the talks, lest the recent shootings fade from public attention.
“But I sense a feeling of urgency and a desire actually to get things done,” Cornyn said. “Around here, if you know people have the will, there is a way, and I believe there is a collective bipartisan will.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday she was “prayerful” about the Senate talks and suggested that her chamber stood ready to pass whatever package the negotiators could agree upon.
“Hopefully, we can make some advancement, because for all of us who have met again and again and again with the survivors of gun violence — some coming time and again to check up on what’s happening, others new to that horrible club that none of us wants to be a member of — they just want something to happen,” she said.
Congressional Hearing
Gun violence
Uvalde, Texas
Victims of the Uvalde elementary school massacre and other recent mass shootings gave first-hand descriptions of the horrors of gun violence at a House committee meeting on Wednesday.
In a pre-recorded video, 11-year-old Miah Cerrillo, a fourth-grade student at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, described trying to hide behind her teacher's desk and covering herself in blood in an attempt to survive. It marked a rare moment for Congress to hear testimony from someone as young as Cerrillo on a subject as sensitive and disturbing as gun violence. Family members of shooting victims also made passionate pleas for gun legislation.
The hearing, however, clearly displayed the partisan divide in the debate on guns as Democrats urged stronger gun control, while Republicans pushed back on restrictions.
Gun violence
Uvalde, Texas
Victims of the Uvalde elementary school massacre and other recent mass shootings gave first-hand descriptions of the horrors of gun violence at a House committee meeting on Wednesday.
In a pre-recorded video, 11-year-old Miah Cerrillo, a fourth-grade student at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, described trying to hide behind her teacher's desk and covering herself in blood in an attempt to survive. It marked a rare moment for Congress to hear testimony from someone as young as Cerrillo on a subject as sensitive and disturbing as gun violence. Family members of shooting victims also made passionate pleas for gun legislation.
The hearing, however, clearly displayed the partisan divide in the debate on guns as Democrats urged stronger gun control, while Republicans pushed back on restrictions.
Senators strike bipartisan gun deal, heralding potential breakthrough
Washington Post
June 2022
A bipartisan group of Senate negotiators is set to announce Sunday that it reached a tentative agreement on legislation that would pair modest new gun restrictions with significant new mental health and school security investments — a deal that could put Congress on a path to enacting the most significant national response in decades to acts of mass gun violence.
The framework deal was confirmed Sunday by three people involved in the negotiations who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss their status ahead of a formal announcement, which is expected midday Sunday.
While substantially weaker than the assault weapons ban, high-capacity ammunition magazine restrictions and broad background check expansions that most Democrats support, the gun provisions set out in the framework could, if enacted, represent the most significant new federal firearms restrictions enacted since the mid-1990s.
Under the tentative deal, a federal grant program would encourage states to establish “red flag” laws that allow authorities to keep guns away from people found by a judge to represent a potential threat to themselves or others, while federal criminal background checks for gun buyers under 21 would include a mandatory search of juvenile justice records for the first time.
It does not include a provision supported by President Biden, congressional Democrats and a handful of Republicans that would raise the minimum age for the purchase of at least some rifles from 18 to 21. Handguns are already subject to a federal 21-and-over age limit.
Other provisions could
- funnel billions of new federal dollars into mental health care and into school security programs,
- funding new campus infrastructure and armed officers. Several senators last week said they expected one cornerstone of the deal would be legislation sponsored by Sens. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) to establish a nationwide network of “community behavioral health clinics.”
The announcement Sunday represents the fruit of a crash bipartisan effort launched in the days after the May 24 killing of 19 children and two teachers inside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, which itself came 10 days after another shocking mass shooting inside a Buffalo supermarket.
It also comes one day after thousands attended pro-gun-control rallies across the country organized by the student-led March for Our Lives group, including a Washington event on the National Mall.
On Sunday, each senator publicly sketched out a negotiating position in general terms.
Murphy, who has led Democrats’ efforts on gun legislation since the 2012 school shooting in Newtown, Conn., said during an anti-gun-violence rally Friday that he was determined to break congressional stasis on gun legislation, but not at any cost: “I’m not interested in doing something unless that’s something is going to save lives, unless that something’s going to be impactful and meaningful.”
Meanwhile, Cornyn, who has an A-plus rating from the National Rifle Association, said last week that he is interested in forging a compromise, but only if it preserves gun owners’ rights under the Second Amendment.
“This is not about creating new restrictions on law-abiding citizens,” he said. "It’s about ensuring that the system we already have in place works as intended.”
Key pitfalls remain:
- Only a handful of the 50 Republican senators were involved in the negotiating group, and under the Senate’s filibuster rule, at least 10 would have to join with the 50 members of the Democratic caucus to advance any legislation.
- Red-flag laws, in particular, have raised many conservative Republicans’ hackles, though negotiators said last week they believed there would be sufficient GOP support to pass any deal.
The people involved in the talks said it remained unclear how many senators would ultimately sign the statement Sunday morning. One said there were still hopes of having at least 10 Republicans on board, signaling a clear path to passage.
Furthermore, the framework set to be announced Sunday amounts to a statement of principles, not a fully written bill. While people involved in the process said last week that significant chunks of the legislation have already been written, new points of friction frequently arise in Congress as the drafting process is finalized.
Biden, who gave a White House address earlier this month calling for tough new firearms restrictions, voiced support for the rallies and for “commonsense gun safety legislation” Saturday in a Twitter post: “I join them by repeating my call to Congress: do something.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) signaled Friday that the Democratic-controlled House would move to enact whatever bill the Senate managed to pass. “If it’s life-saving and can make a difference, and they have bipartisan support for it, then we would welcome it, even though it won’t be everything that we want,” she said at a news conference.
The House has already passed four gun-related bills that go considerably further than the tentative Senate deal. Last year, lawmakers passed a bill expanding federal background checks to all commercial transactions, including those conducted at gun shows and over the internet, as well as a measure extending the period the FBI has to complete background checks for gun buyers.
Also last week, in response to the recent shootings, the House passed bills that based sales of many semiautomatic rifles to those under 21, banned high-capacity magazines and promoted red-flag laws in both state and federal courts.
None of those bills has the requisite Republican support to pass the Senate.
The last substantial new federal gun control laws were passed in the mid-1990s — the “Brady bill” of 1993, which created the national instant background check system, and the assault weapons ban of 1994, which outlawed some military-style semiautomatic rifles and handguns. The latter bill expired 10 years later and has not been renewed.
In recent decades, Washington has acted mainly to expand gun rights. In 2005, for instance, Congress immunized the firearms industry against product liability lawsuits, and in 2008, the Supreme Court enshrined an individual’s right to possess guns in the landmark case D.C. v. Heller . A 2013 push in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting to expand background checks to cover more gun transactions, including gun-show and internet sales, fell six votes short in the Senate.
In recent decades, Washington has acted mainly to expand gun rights. In 2005, for instance, Congress immunized the firearms industry against product liability lawsuits, and in 2008, the Supreme Court enshrined an individual’s right to possess guns in the landmark case D.C. v. Heller . A 2013 push in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting to expand background checks to cover more gun transactions, including gun-show and internet sales, fell six votes short in the Senate.
The Senate returns to session Monday, and while Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) did not lay out any ultimatums last week on timing, he urged the negotiators to act quickly.
in an interview Thursday, Murphy said he believed that the chamber had two weeks left to act — before lawmakers leave Washington for a two-week Independence Day recess.
But meeting even that timeline would require a framework for a deal to be put in place quickly, Murphy said, citing the likelihood that gun-rights supporters in the Senate would seek to erect procedural hurdles to any potential legislation.
“We can’t come to agreement the last week we’re here,” he said. “There are people in the Senate that are no doubt going to use every rule available to them to hold this up and slow it down.”
Mike DeBonis covers Congress, with a focus on the House, for The Washington Post. He previously covered D.C. politics and government from 2007 to 2015.
Leigh Ann Caldwell is co-author of The Washington Post’s Early 202 and focuses on Congress and politics. She is also an anchor for Washington Post Live, conducting high-impact newsmaking interviews. Before joining The Post in 2022, Caldwell was a correspondent at NBC News, most recently as a member of its congressional unit.
Washington Post
June 2022
A bipartisan group of Senate negotiators is set to announce Sunday that it reached a tentative agreement on legislation that would pair modest new gun restrictions with significant new mental health and school security investments — a deal that could put Congress on a path to enacting the most significant national response in decades to acts of mass gun violence.
The framework deal was confirmed Sunday by three people involved in the negotiations who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss their status ahead of a formal announcement, which is expected midday Sunday.
While substantially weaker than the assault weapons ban, high-capacity ammunition magazine restrictions and broad background check expansions that most Democrats support, the gun provisions set out in the framework could, if enacted, represent the most significant new federal firearms restrictions enacted since the mid-1990s.
Under the tentative deal, a federal grant program would encourage states to establish “red flag” laws that allow authorities to keep guns away from people found by a judge to represent a potential threat to themselves or others, while federal criminal background checks for gun buyers under 21 would include a mandatory search of juvenile justice records for the first time.
It does not include a provision supported by President Biden, congressional Democrats and a handful of Republicans that would raise the minimum age for the purchase of at least some rifles from 18 to 21. Handguns are already subject to a federal 21-and-over age limit.
Other provisions could
- funnel billions of new federal dollars into mental health care and into school security programs,
- funding new campus infrastructure and armed officers. Several senators last week said they expected one cornerstone of the deal would be legislation sponsored by Sens. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) to establish a nationwide network of “community behavioral health clinics.”
The announcement Sunday represents the fruit of a crash bipartisan effort launched in the days after the May 24 killing of 19 children and two teachers inside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, which itself came 10 days after another shocking mass shooting inside a Buffalo supermarket.
It also comes one day after thousands attended pro-gun-control rallies across the country organized by the student-led March for Our Lives group, including a Washington event on the National Mall.
On Sunday, each senator publicly sketched out a negotiating position in general terms.
Murphy, who has led Democrats’ efforts on gun legislation since the 2012 school shooting in Newtown, Conn., said during an anti-gun-violence rally Friday that he was determined to break congressional stasis on gun legislation, but not at any cost: “I’m not interested in doing something unless that’s something is going to save lives, unless that something’s going to be impactful and meaningful.”
Meanwhile, Cornyn, who has an A-plus rating from the National Rifle Association, said last week that he is interested in forging a compromise, but only if it preserves gun owners’ rights under the Second Amendment.
“This is not about creating new restrictions on law-abiding citizens,” he said. "It’s about ensuring that the system we already have in place works as intended.”
Key pitfalls remain:
- Only a handful of the 50 Republican senators were involved in the negotiating group, and under the Senate’s filibuster rule, at least 10 would have to join with the 50 members of the Democratic caucus to advance any legislation.
- Red-flag laws, in particular, have raised many conservative Republicans’ hackles, though negotiators said last week they believed there would be sufficient GOP support to pass any deal.
The people involved in the talks said it remained unclear how many senators would ultimately sign the statement Sunday morning. One said there were still hopes of having at least 10 Republicans on board, signaling a clear path to passage.
Furthermore, the framework set to be announced Sunday amounts to a statement of principles, not a fully written bill. While people involved in the process said last week that significant chunks of the legislation have already been written, new points of friction frequently arise in Congress as the drafting process is finalized.
Biden, who gave a White House address earlier this month calling for tough new firearms restrictions, voiced support for the rallies and for “commonsense gun safety legislation” Saturday in a Twitter post: “I join them by repeating my call to Congress: do something.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) signaled Friday that the Democratic-controlled House would move to enact whatever bill the Senate managed to pass. “If it’s life-saving and can make a difference, and they have bipartisan support for it, then we would welcome it, even though it won’t be everything that we want,” she said at a news conference.
The House has already passed four gun-related bills that go considerably further than the tentative Senate deal. Last year, lawmakers passed a bill expanding federal background checks to all commercial transactions, including those conducted at gun shows and over the internet, as well as a measure extending the period the FBI has to complete background checks for gun buyers.
Also last week, in response to the recent shootings, the House passed bills that based sales of many semiautomatic rifles to those under 21, banned high-capacity magazines and promoted red-flag laws in both state and federal courts.
None of those bills has the requisite Republican support to pass the Senate.
The last substantial new federal gun control laws were passed in the mid-1990s — the “Brady bill” of 1993, which created the national instant background check system, and the assault weapons ban of 1994, which outlawed some military-style semiautomatic rifles and handguns. The latter bill expired 10 years later and has not been renewed.
In recent decades, Washington has acted mainly to expand gun rights. In 2005, for instance, Congress immunized the firearms industry against product liability lawsuits, and in 2008, the Supreme Court enshrined an individual’s right to possess guns in the landmark case D.C. v. Heller . A 2013 push in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting to expand background checks to cover more gun transactions, including gun-show and internet sales, fell six votes short in the Senate.
In recent decades, Washington has acted mainly to expand gun rights. In 2005, for instance, Congress immunized the firearms industry against product liability lawsuits, and in 2008, the Supreme Court enshrined an individual’s right to possess guns in the landmark case D.C. v. Heller . A 2013 push in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting to expand background checks to cover more gun transactions, including gun-show and internet sales, fell six votes short in the Senate.
The Senate returns to session Monday, and while Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) did not lay out any ultimatums last week on timing, he urged the negotiators to act quickly.
in an interview Thursday, Murphy said he believed that the chamber had two weeks left to act — before lawmakers leave Washington for a two-week Independence Day recess.
But meeting even that timeline would require a framework for a deal to be put in place quickly, Murphy said, citing the likelihood that gun-rights supporters in the Senate would seek to erect procedural hurdles to any potential legislation.
“We can’t come to agreement the last week we’re here,” he said. “There are people in the Senate that are no doubt going to use every rule available to them to hold this up and slow it down.”
Mike DeBonis covers Congress, with a focus on the House, for The Washington Post. He previously covered D.C. politics and government from 2007 to 2015.
Leigh Ann Caldwell is co-author of The Washington Post’s Early 202 and focuses on Congress and politics. She is also an anchor for Washington Post Live, conducting high-impact newsmaking interviews. Before joining The Post in 2022, Caldwell was a correspondent at NBC News, most recently as a member of its congressional unit.
The good news about gun control isn’t the bipartisan deal
By Perry Bacon Jr.
Columnist|Follow
June 14, 2022 at 4:20 p.m. EDT
There is good news about gun policy in America. But it’s not the bipartisan agreement that emerged on Capitol Hill this week.
The deal between 10 Republican and 10 Democratic senators is better than nothing. (Frown) But it amounts to small-bore measures that don’t really address the central problem — the broad availability and circulation of guns in the United States, including weapons such as the AR-15 that are often used in mass shootings. The danger is that passing this legislation will take the heat off lawmakers, particularly Republicans, to adopt truly meaningful solutions.
But ultimately, I don’t think passage of the Senate bill will weaken the push for more far-reaching gun policies. The recent mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Tex., have cemented two big, important shifts on gun policy that were already happening and won’t be slowed by the passage of a minor congressional bill.
First, those involved in public policy who are not accountable to hardcore Republican voters have come to agree that guns are the problem. As a result, many in the media, top Democratic Party officials, think tanks and advocacy groups that don’t usually focus on guns are all pushing for policies such as banning the sale and ownership of military-style weapons and high-capacity magazines. Just as significantly, the reality-based policy community now agrees that while addressing, say, mental health, gangs and school security might help, what makes gun violence so prevalent in America is the unusually high number of guns in circulation.
Centering guns as the problem unifies issues that are often discussed separately: mass shootings at schools and in other public spaces; shootings that happen among acquaintances or rival gangs; instances where people shoot spouses or partners; and suicides. It also brings together the groups and experts that work on those disparate problems to push for one solution — fewer guns.
The second big shift is that the national Democratic Party is no longer afraid of gun control. A mythology developed in the early 2000s that supporting gun control was a key driver of the Democrats’ decline in the South. In particular, some strategists argued that Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee, and therefore the 2000 presidential election, over his support for gun control. Now, it’s fairly clear that the Democrats’ struggles in the South were part of a broader political realignment, with the most important explanation likely being Southerners breaking with the party as it became more tied to Black people and causes.
Also, electoral politics aside, the sheer number of catastrophic mass shootings over the past decade has basically forced Democrats to take on this issue.
These shifts aren’t reflected much in national policy, because the Democrats don’t have the Senate votes to push through a serious gun-control bill. But having a general agreement about the problem still matters. Why?
First, clearly identifying guns as the problem is a big step toward finding actual solutions. Now, wealthy individuals, organizations and the Democratic Party know they must develop a comprehensive agenda aimed at reducing the number of guns in the United States and only backing candidates who believe in that goal. The Biden administration, too, will have to keep pressing this issue, even when there are no clear political benefits. Whenever the Democrats next have control of the House, Senate and presidency, gun control must be at the top of the agenda, in a way that it wasn’t in 2009 or 2021.
Story continues below advertisement
Second, blue cities and states where Republicans aren’t a roadblock should pass strong gun regulations, daring lower-level GOP judicial appointees who are often hostileto local gun regulations to strike them down and thereby put gun rights ahead of public safety. Cities and states as well as philanthropic organizations should also seek innovative ways to encourage people to voluntarily either get rid of guns or not buy them in the first place. For example, I’m hoping we see public service announcements urging people against gun ownership, perhaps modeled on successful anti-smoking campaigns.
Second, blue cities and states where Republicans aren’t a roadblock should pass strong gun regulations, daring lower-level GOP judicial appointees who are often hostileto local gun regulations to strike them down and thereby put gun rights ahead of public safety. Cities and states as well as philanthropic organizations should also seek innovative ways to encourage people to voluntarily either get rid of guns or not buy them in the first place. For example, I’m hoping we see public service announcements urging people against gun ownership, perhaps modeled on successful anti-smoking campaigns.
Third, understanding guns are the problem makes one solution imperative: demanding that GOP-appointed judges, including those on the Supreme Court, accept that some expansive gun-control measures are simply necessary for public safety.
Conservatives on the court have essentially created a right for all Americans to own a handgun with few restrictions, a view some scholars say is not grounded in the original intent of the Second Amendment. The court’s conservatives are expected to further expand gun rights in a ruling still to come this term. America will continue to have constant shootings as long as we have such sweeping gun rights. If conservative justices don’t change course, the only answer will be judicial reforms such as adding justices to shift the balance of the court toward common-sense gun policy.
So, no, I’m not celebrating this bipartisan guns deal too much. But I am excited to see lots of powerful Americans, including top Democrats, get more serious about reducing the number of guns in the United States. That’s the only real solution — and it’s good that so many people are finally acknowledging that.
By Perry Bacon Jr.
Columnist|Follow
June 14, 2022 at 4:20 p.m. EDT
There is good news about gun policy in America. But it’s not the bipartisan agreement that emerged on Capitol Hill this week.
The deal between 10 Republican and 10 Democratic senators is better than nothing. (Frown) But it amounts to small-bore measures that don’t really address the central problem — the broad availability and circulation of guns in the United States, including weapons such as the AR-15 that are often used in mass shootings. The danger is that passing this legislation will take the heat off lawmakers, particularly Republicans, to adopt truly meaningful solutions.
But ultimately, I don’t think passage of the Senate bill will weaken the push for more far-reaching gun policies. The recent mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Tex., have cemented two big, important shifts on gun policy that were already happening and won’t be slowed by the passage of a minor congressional bill.
First, those involved in public policy who are not accountable to hardcore Republican voters have come to agree that guns are the problem. As a result, many in the media, top Democratic Party officials, think tanks and advocacy groups that don’t usually focus on guns are all pushing for policies such as banning the sale and ownership of military-style weapons and high-capacity magazines. Just as significantly, the reality-based policy community now agrees that while addressing, say, mental health, gangs and school security might help, what makes gun violence so prevalent in America is the unusually high number of guns in circulation.
Centering guns as the problem unifies issues that are often discussed separately: mass shootings at schools and in other public spaces; shootings that happen among acquaintances or rival gangs; instances where people shoot spouses or partners; and suicides. It also brings together the groups and experts that work on those disparate problems to push for one solution — fewer guns.
The second big shift is that the national Democratic Party is no longer afraid of gun control. A mythology developed in the early 2000s that supporting gun control was a key driver of the Democrats’ decline in the South. In particular, some strategists argued that Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee, and therefore the 2000 presidential election, over his support for gun control. Now, it’s fairly clear that the Democrats’ struggles in the South were part of a broader political realignment, with the most important explanation likely being Southerners breaking with the party as it became more tied to Black people and causes.
Also, electoral politics aside, the sheer number of catastrophic mass shootings over the past decade has basically forced Democrats to take on this issue.
These shifts aren’t reflected much in national policy, because the Democrats don’t have the Senate votes to push through a serious gun-control bill. But having a general agreement about the problem still matters. Why?
First, clearly identifying guns as the problem is a big step toward finding actual solutions. Now, wealthy individuals, organizations and the Democratic Party know they must develop a comprehensive agenda aimed at reducing the number of guns in the United States and only backing candidates who believe in that goal. The Biden administration, too, will have to keep pressing this issue, even when there are no clear political benefits. Whenever the Democrats next have control of the House, Senate and presidency, gun control must be at the top of the agenda, in a way that it wasn’t in 2009 or 2021.
Story continues below advertisement
Second, blue cities and states where Republicans aren’t a roadblock should pass strong gun regulations, daring lower-level GOP judicial appointees who are often hostileto local gun regulations to strike them down and thereby put gun rights ahead of public safety. Cities and states as well as philanthropic organizations should also seek innovative ways to encourage people to voluntarily either get rid of guns or not buy them in the first place. For example, I’m hoping we see public service announcements urging people against gun ownership, perhaps modeled on successful anti-smoking campaigns.
Second, blue cities and states where Republicans aren’t a roadblock should pass strong gun regulations, daring lower-level GOP judicial appointees who are often hostileto local gun regulations to strike them down and thereby put gun rights ahead of public safety. Cities and states as well as philanthropic organizations should also seek innovative ways to encourage people to voluntarily either get rid of guns or not buy them in the first place. For example, I’m hoping we see public service announcements urging people against gun ownership, perhaps modeled on successful anti-smoking campaigns.
Third, understanding guns are the problem makes one solution imperative: demanding that GOP-appointed judges, including those on the Supreme Court, accept that some expansive gun-control measures are simply necessary for public safety.
Conservatives on the court have essentially created a right for all Americans to own a handgun with few restrictions, a view some scholars say is not grounded in the original intent of the Second Amendment. The court’s conservatives are expected to further expand gun rights in a ruling still to come this term. America will continue to have constant shootings as long as we have such sweeping gun rights. If conservative justices don’t change course, the only answer will be judicial reforms such as adding justices to shift the balance of the court toward common-sense gun policy.
So, no, I’m not celebrating this bipartisan guns deal too much. But I am excited to see lots of powerful Americans, including top Democrats, get more serious about reducing the number of guns in the United States. That’s the only real solution — and it’s good that so many people are finally acknowledging that.
The enate on Thursday passed a bipartisan bill to address gun violence that amounts to the first major federal gun safety legislation in decades.
The vote was 65 to 33 with 15 Republicans joining Democrats in support of the measure. The bill now goes to the House for a vote before it can be sent to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. The measure includes millions of dollars for mental health, school safety, crisis intervention programs and incentives for states to bolster juvenile records systems. It also makes significant changes to the process for people ages 18 to 21 to buy a firearm and closes the so-called boyfriend loophole. The package, however, does not include an assault weapons ban that Democrats were seeking. Separately, hours before the Senate vote, the Supreme Court struck down a New York gun law that places restrictions on carrying a concealed handgun outside the home -- an opinion marking the widest expansion of gun rights in a decade.
The vote was 65 to 33 with 15 Republicans joining Democrats in support of the measure. The bill now goes to the House for a vote before it can be sent to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. The measure includes millions of dollars for mental health, school safety, crisis intervention programs and incentives for states to bolster juvenile records systems. It also makes significant changes to the process for people ages 18 to 21 to buy a firearm and closes the so-called boyfriend loophole. The package, however, does not include an assault weapons ban that Democrats were seeking. Separately, hours before the Senate vote, the Supreme Court struck down a New York gun law that places restrictions on carrying a concealed handgun outside the home -- an opinion marking the widest expansion of gun rights in a decade.
POLITICS
Biden signs bipartisan gun safety bill into law: 'God willing, it's going to save a lot of lives'
By Donald Judd, 8 hrs ago
CNN
Follow
President Joe Biden on Saturday signed into law the first major federal gun safety legislation passed in decades, marking a significant bipartisan breakthrough on one of the most contentious policy issues in Washington.
“God willing, it’s going to save a lot of lives,” Biden said at the White House as he finished signing the bill.
The legislation came together in the aftermath of recent mass shootings at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school and a Buffalo, New York, supermarket that was in a predominantly Black neighborhood. A bipartisan group of negotiators set to work in the Senate and unveiled legislative text on Tuesday. The bill – titled the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act – was released by Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
The House on Friday passed the bill by 234-193, including 14 Republicans voting with Democrats. The Senate passed the bill in a late-night vote Thursday.
In his remarks Saturday, the President announced he’d host members of Congress who supported the landmark gun safety legislation at a White House event on July 11, following his return from Europe, to celebrate the new law with the families of gun violence victims.
The package represents the most significant new federal legislation to address gun violence since the expired 10-year assault weapons ban of 1994 – though it fails to ban any weapons and falls far short of what Biden and his party had advocated for, and polls show most Americans want to see.
“While this bill doesn’t do everything I want, it does include actions I’ve long called for that are going to save lives,” Biden said. “Today, we say more than ‘enough.’ We say more than enough. This time, when it seems impossible to get anything done in Washington, we are doing something consequential.”
Biden added, “If we can reach compromise on guns, we ought to be able to reach a compromise on other critical issues, from veterans’ health care to cutting edge American innovation and so much more. I know there’s much more work to do, and I’m never going to give up, but this is a monumental day.”
It includes $750 million to help states implement and run crisis intervention programs. The money can be used to implement and manage red flag programs – which through court orders can temporarily prevent individuals in crisis from accessing firearms – and for other crisis intervention programs like mental health courts, drug courts and veterans courts.
This bill closes a years-old loophole in domestic violence law – the “boyfriend loophole” – which barred individuals who have been convicted of domestic violence crimes against spouses, partners with whom they shared children or partners with whom they cohabitated from having guns. Old statutes didn’t include intimate partners who may not live together, be married or share children.
Now the law will bar from having a gun anyone who is convicted of a domestic violence crime against someone they have a “continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature.” The law isn’t retroactive. It will, however, allow those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes to restore their gun rights after five years if they haven’t committed other crimes.
The bill encourages states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System with grants as well as implements a new protocol for checking those records.
The bill goes after individuals who sell guns as primary sources of income but have previously evaded registering as federally licensed firearms dealers. It also increases funding for mental health programs and school security.
Just before signing the bill, Biden praised the families of gun violence victims with whom he had met. He said their activism in the face of loss was a difference-maker.
“I especially want to thank the families that Jill and I have (met), many of whom we sat with for hours on end, across the country. There’s so many we’ve gotten to know who’ve lost their soul to an epidemic of gun violence. They’ve lost their child, their husband, their wife,” Biden said.
“Nothing is going to fill that void in their hearts. But they led the way so other families will not have the experience and the pain and trauma they’ve had to live through.”
This story has been updated with additional developments on Saturday.
CNN’s Clare Foran, Kristin Wilson, Annie Grayer, Ariane de Vogue, Lauren Fox, Ali Zaslav, Melanie Zanona and Jeremy Herb contributed to this report.
For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com
1125.9k Followers
CNN
It’s our job to #Go
Biden signs bipartisan gun safety bill into law: 'God willing, it's going to save a lot of lives'
By Donald Judd, 8 hrs ago
CNN
Follow
President Joe Biden on Saturday signed into law the first major federal gun safety legislation passed in decades, marking a significant bipartisan breakthrough on one of the most contentious policy issues in Washington.
“God willing, it’s going to save a lot of lives,” Biden said at the White House as he finished signing the bill.
The legislation came together in the aftermath of recent mass shootings at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school and a Buffalo, New York, supermarket that was in a predominantly Black neighborhood. A bipartisan group of negotiators set to work in the Senate and unveiled legislative text on Tuesday. The bill – titled the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act – was released by Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
The House on Friday passed the bill by 234-193, including 14 Republicans voting with Democrats. The Senate passed the bill in a late-night vote Thursday.
In his remarks Saturday, the President announced he’d host members of Congress who supported the landmark gun safety legislation at a White House event on July 11, following his return from Europe, to celebrate the new law with the families of gun violence victims.
The package represents the most significant new federal legislation to address gun violence since the expired 10-year assault weapons ban of 1994 – though it fails to ban any weapons and falls far short of what Biden and his party had advocated for, and polls show most Americans want to see.
“While this bill doesn’t do everything I want, it does include actions I’ve long called for that are going to save lives,” Biden said. “Today, we say more than ‘enough.’ We say more than enough. This time, when it seems impossible to get anything done in Washington, we are doing something consequential.”
Biden added, “If we can reach compromise on guns, we ought to be able to reach a compromise on other critical issues, from veterans’ health care to cutting edge American innovation and so much more. I know there’s much more work to do, and I’m never going to give up, but this is a monumental day.”
It includes $750 million to help states implement and run crisis intervention programs. The money can be used to implement and manage red flag programs – which through court orders can temporarily prevent individuals in crisis from accessing firearms – and for other crisis intervention programs like mental health courts, drug courts and veterans courts.
This bill closes a years-old loophole in domestic violence law – the “boyfriend loophole” – which barred individuals who have been convicted of domestic violence crimes against spouses, partners with whom they shared children or partners with whom they cohabitated from having guns. Old statutes didn’t include intimate partners who may not live together, be married or share children.
Now the law will bar from having a gun anyone who is convicted of a domestic violence crime against someone they have a “continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature.” The law isn’t retroactive. It will, however, allow those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes to restore their gun rights after five years if they haven’t committed other crimes.
The bill encourages states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System with grants as well as implements a new protocol for checking those records.
The bill goes after individuals who sell guns as primary sources of income but have previously evaded registering as federally licensed firearms dealers. It also increases funding for mental health programs and school security.
Just before signing the bill, Biden praised the families of gun violence victims with whom he had met. He said their activism in the face of loss was a difference-maker.
“I especially want to thank the families that Jill and I have (met), many of whom we sat with for hours on end, across the country. There’s so many we’ve gotten to know who’ve lost their soul to an epidemic of gun violence. They’ve lost their child, their husband, their wife,” Biden said.
“Nothing is going to fill that void in their hearts. But they led the way so other families will not have the experience and the pain and trauma they’ve had to live through.”
This story has been updated with additional developments on Saturday.
CNN’s Clare Foran, Kristin Wilson, Annie Grayer, Ariane de Vogue, Lauren Fox, Ali Zaslav, Melanie Zanona and Jeremy Herb contributed to this report.
For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com
1125.9k Followers
CNN
It’s our job to #Go
Texas shooting: Uvalde report finds 'systemic failures' by authorities
Officers showed a lack of leadership and urgency in their response to the shooting, a report finds.
www.bbc.co.uk
Texas shooting: Uvalde report finds 'systemic failures' by authorities
A report into the Uvalde school shooting in Texas that killed 21 people has found "systemic failures and egregiously poor decision-making" by those involved in the response.
<iframe width="400" height="500" frameborder="0" src=""></iframe>
The committee of state legislators highlighted a lack of leadership and urgency, describing a "lackadaisical approach" by authorities at the scene.
Nearly 400 officers rushed to the site, but police waited over an hour to confront the attacker.
The report was published on Sunday.
It was hand-delivered to victims' families before being made public.
On Monday, Texas state police announced an internal review into the 73 minutes of inaction by dozens of troopers who were at Robb Elementary School as an 18-year-old gunman slaughtered 19 children and two teachers on 24 May.
- The teachers who died trying to save their pupils
- The 'sweet and lovable' children who died in Uvalde
It found no single "villain", other than the attacker, in the course of its investigation.
Instead, it concluded that there were multiple failures of responsibility from a number of authorities, including numerous law enforcement agencies and the school itself.
'Void of leadership'
The report heavily criticised the actions of the various agencies on the scene, accusing them of failing to prioritise "saving the lives of innocent victims over their own safety".
Despite nearly 400 officers rushing to the school, police waited well over an hour before confronting and killing the attacker - an "unacceptably long period of time" according to the report.
"We do not know at this time whether responders could have saved more lives by shortening that delay," the report adds.
The report also highlights a "void of leadership" - an apparent lack of anyone in charge which it says "could have contributed to the loss of life".
The Uvalde schools police chief Pete Arredondo wrote the district's active shooter response plan which assigns himself as incident commander, but testified that he did not consider himself to be in charge on the day.
The general view of witnesses interviewed for the report was either that Mr Arredondo was in charge, or that they could not tell who was in charge of a scene described by many as "chaos".
Mr Arredondo was placed on administrative leave last month and has since resigned.
However, the report points out that there were responders from numerous agencies on the scene - many better trained and better equipped than the school district police - who could have helped to take control of the situation.
<iframe width="400" height="500" frameborder="0" src=""></iframe>
Attacker entered 'unimpeded'
The criticism of the school centres around its lack of discipline in following security procedures designed to prevent such attacks.
The report said the school had a culture of leaving doors unlocked or propped open, sometimes to allow easier access for substitute teachers who didn't have keys.
The lock on room 111 - where much of the violence occurred - did not always work, the report found, but although the fault was widely known about it was not properly reported.
Because of these failures, the attacker was able to enter the school building and the classrooms unimpeded, and probably killed most of his victims before any responders set foot in the building.
"Of the approximately 142 rounds the attacker fired inside the building, it is almost certain that he rapidly fired over 100 of those rounds before any officer entered," the report says.
Earlier this week leaked CCTV footage from Uvalde was published by a local newspaper, showing the gunman's arrival and police waiting 77 minutes to confront him.
But it was published days before officials said they had planned to show the families or release it publicly.
Times Square will be designated a ‘gun-free zone’ beginning Thursday as New York gun law goes into effect
By Aya Elamroussi, CNN
Wed August 31, 2022
Robert Barrows, the head of NYPD's legal operations, holds a temporary Gun Free Zone sign during a New York City Council Committee on Public Safety hearing.
John McCarten/NYC Council Media
CNN — New York City lawmakers are still determining which parts of the famed Times Square tourist area will be considered a “gun-free zone” as a new state law limiting where firearms can be legally carried in public is set to go into effect Thursday.
The law was signed by Gov. Kathy Hochul in July in response to a controversial ruling by the US Supreme Court striking down a state law restricting carrying a concealed handgun outside the home.
The law outlines areas deemed “sensitive” where firearm possession will be illegal and they include Times Square, one of the world’s busiest tourist destinations drawing nearly 360,000 people daily.
Other areas the law defines as sensitive include government-owned buildings, schools, health care facilities, places of worship and public transportation. People who carry a gun in a prohibited location could be charged with a felony under the law.
The New York City Council is still hammering out the details of a bill that would delineate the boundaries of Times Square, which sprawls the Midtown region in the borough of Manhattan.
To ensure there are guidelines on Thursday, Times Square will be under emergency rules created by the New York Police Department and the city, council spokeswoman Breeana Mulligan told CNN.
There are several exceptions to the rules, including for those who, live in the area, who work in the area or are transiting through Times Square.
New “gun-free zone” signs are expected to be posted in Times Square on Wednesday. They will be placed at every entry and exit point of the area, according to Robert Barrows, the head of NYPD’s legal operations.
To help people understand which areas are gun-free zones, the city will also implement video messaging boards in certain locations.
Other aspects of the new law include a strict licensing process to obtain a concealed-carry permit, and it also requires background checks for ammunition sales.
Under the measure, gun owners will be required to store firearms in safe places in their homes if people under the age of 18 live in the residence – an increase from the previously established age of 16.
Efforts to track gun purchases
The new law comes at a time New York City is struggling with gun violence, despite Mayor Eric Adams attempts to curb it through a multi-point plan he unveiled in January after taking office.
City officials moved to implement an elevated focus on resident safety and law enforcement response at subways, where a mass shooting at a Brooklyn station injured 29 people in April.
The city is also seeing a more than 30% increase in major crimes through August 28 compared to last year, according to data from the NYPD.
How a tiny nonprofit with no full-time employees became the foremost tracker of gun violence in America
In an effort to crack down on illegal gun purchases, city officials have asked Visa, Mastercard and American Express to approve the creation of a merchant category code for gun shops across the country.
Such codes are already used for nearly any other good or service that can be purchased. If created for gun transactions, it can potentially make it easier to spot unusually large purchases of firearms and ammunition or purchases made in multiple stores.
Purchases currently made at gun shops come across as “miscellaneous” making it difficult to spot a suspicious sale.
“When you buy an airline ticket or pay for your groceries, your credit card company has a special code for those retailers. It’s just commonsense that we have the same policies in place for gun and ammunition stores,” Adams said in a news release.
Mastercard said it is reviewing the proposal and how it could be implemented.
“This will help us continue to deliver a payments system that supports all legal purchases while protecting the privacy and decisions of individual cardholders,” spokesperson Seth Eisen said.
CNN reached out to Visa and American Express for comment.
The credit card companies are voting members of the International Organization on Standardization, which sets the category codes.
At least two credit companies must agree for the merchant codes to be applied to gun stores – though they have not supported the proposal in the past, according to New York City Comptroller Brad Lander.
CNN’s Rob Frehse, Nicki Brown, Mark Morales and Melanie Schuman contributed to this report.
www.cnn.com
.
By Aya Elamroussi, CNN
Wed August 31, 2022
Robert Barrows, the head of NYPD's legal operations, holds a temporary Gun Free Zone sign during a New York City Council Committee on Public Safety hearing.
John McCarten/NYC Council Media
CNN — New York City lawmakers are still determining which parts of the famed Times Square tourist area will be considered a “gun-free zone” as a new state law limiting where firearms can be legally carried in public is set to go into effect Thursday.
The law was signed by Gov. Kathy Hochul in July in response to a controversial ruling by the US Supreme Court striking down a state law restricting carrying a concealed handgun outside the home.
The law outlines areas deemed “sensitive” where firearm possession will be illegal and they include Times Square, one of the world’s busiest tourist destinations drawing nearly 360,000 people daily.
Other areas the law defines as sensitive include government-owned buildings, schools, health care facilities, places of worship and public transportation. People who carry a gun in a prohibited location could be charged with a felony under the law.
The New York City Council is still hammering out the details of a bill that would delineate the boundaries of Times Square, which sprawls the Midtown region in the borough of Manhattan.
To ensure there are guidelines on Thursday, Times Square will be under emergency rules created by the New York Police Department and the city, council spokeswoman Breeana Mulligan told CNN.
There are several exceptions to the rules, including for those who, live in the area, who work in the area or are transiting through Times Square.
New “gun-free zone” signs are expected to be posted in Times Square on Wednesday. They will be placed at every entry and exit point of the area, according to Robert Barrows, the head of NYPD’s legal operations.
To help people understand which areas are gun-free zones, the city will also implement video messaging boards in certain locations.
Other aspects of the new law include a strict licensing process to obtain a concealed-carry permit, and it also requires background checks for ammunition sales.
Under the measure, gun owners will be required to store firearms in safe places in their homes if people under the age of 18 live in the residence – an increase from the previously established age of 16.
Efforts to track gun purchases
The new law comes at a time New York City is struggling with gun violence, despite Mayor Eric Adams attempts to curb it through a multi-point plan he unveiled in January after taking office.
City officials moved to implement an elevated focus on resident safety and law enforcement response at subways, where a mass shooting at a Brooklyn station injured 29 people in April.
The city is also seeing a more than 30% increase in major crimes through August 28 compared to last year, according to data from the NYPD.
How a tiny nonprofit with no full-time employees became the foremost tracker of gun violence in America
In an effort to crack down on illegal gun purchases, city officials have asked Visa, Mastercard and American Express to approve the creation of a merchant category code for gun shops across the country.
Such codes are already used for nearly any other good or service that can be purchased. If created for gun transactions, it can potentially make it easier to spot unusually large purchases of firearms and ammunition or purchases made in multiple stores.
Purchases currently made at gun shops come across as “miscellaneous” making it difficult to spot a suspicious sale.
“When you buy an airline ticket or pay for your groceries, your credit card company has a special code for those retailers. It’s just commonsense that we have the same policies in place for gun and ammunition stores,” Adams said in a news release.
Mastercard said it is reviewing the proposal and how it could be implemented.
“This will help us continue to deliver a payments system that supports all legal purchases while protecting the privacy and decisions of individual cardholders,” spokesperson Seth Eisen said.
CNN reached out to Visa and American Express for comment.
The credit card companies are voting members of the International Organization on Standardization, which sets the category codes.
At least two credit companies must agree for the merchant codes to be applied to gun stores – though they have not supported the proposal in the past, according to New York City Comptroller Brad Lander.
CNN’s Rob Frehse, Nicki Brown, Mark Morales and Melanie Schuman contributed to this report.
Times Square will be designated a 'gun-free zone' beginning Thursday as New York gun law goes into effect | CNN
New York City lawmakers are still determining which parts of the famed Times Square tourist area will be considered a "gun-free zone" as a new state law limiting where firearms can be legally carried in public is set to go into effect Thursday.
.