OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Republican and Democrat senators have agreed to the framework of a bipartisan gun safety bill.
It will take time to create the legislation but the agreement is said to be centered around increased scrutiny for gun purchasers younger than 21, increased funding for red flag laws, mental health and school security, Politico reported.
“The principles they announced today show the value of dialogue and cooperation,” Senate Majority Leader and Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell said.
“I continue to hope their discussion yield a bipartisan product that makes significant headway on key issues like mental health and school safety, respects the Second Amendment, earn broad support in the Senate and makes a difference for our country,” he said.
Will the final product get even more then 10 Rs?
This statement from @LeaderMcConnell — while not an endorsement — is pretty positive.
No doubt members of his conference will watch McConnell’s words and actions closely on this. pic.twitter.com/Y4Zcu0X7HH
— Gabe Fleisher (@WakeUp2Politics) June 12, 2022
Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) are the lead negotiators on the proposal, which would need 60 votes to reach the Senate floor once legislative text is completed.
More senators are poised to back the bill to demonstrate its breadth of support — to that end, a broader bipartisan group has held its own regular meetings on guns over the past three weeks since the elementary school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. Those talks have included Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.).
The most significant piece of the proposal would subject gun buyers 21 and younger to scrutiny of their criminal and mental health records as juveniles. It’s proved tricky to write because each state has different laws governing juvenile records.
In addition to provisions on red flag laws, which allow law enforcement to seek temporary removal of firearms from an individual who is a threat to himself or others, the package is also expected to close what’s known as the “boyfriend loophole” by broadening firearms restrictions on those who have abused their romantic partners.
A Republican aide involved in the negotiations warned that the agreement, reached on Sunday, is an “agreement on principles, not legislative text.”
“The details will be critical for Republicans, particularly the firearms-related provisions,” they said. “One or more of these principles could be dropped if text is not agreed to.”
President Joe Biden wants to make gun control a key campaign issue as polls show Democrats are set for a shellacking in the midterms.
The president was talking to reporters when one asked if he had a message to the protesters in Washington DC who are marching for new gun laws.
“Keep marching. It’s important. Look, this has to become an election issue. The way people listen — senators, congressmen — is when people say this is going to affect my vote. Too many people are dying needlessly and what’s even being proposed in the House and the Senate, it’s marginal. It’s important but it’s not all that needs to be done … the answer is, march,” he said.
“We’re still mildly optimistic, I spoke with (Senator Chris) Murphy several times, yesterday afternoon,” he said.
The comments are similar to the abhorrent comments he made after the Uvalde, Texas school shooting where he called on people to vote for politicians who support gun control.
He argued that the right to bear arms, enshrined in the Constitution, is “not absolute.”
“Sir, do you think there is anything different in how Republicans will approach the gun reform question now, given the circumstances?” a reporter said.
“Since I haven’t spoken to them, I don’t know. But my guess is, if they have — if they — yes, I think they’re going to have to take a hard look,” the president said.
“Is there one element — is it aid, is it red flag, is it some component that you think could be most successful now?” the reporter said before Biden went into a rant.
“Well, that’s hard to say because I have not been negotiating with any of the Republicans yet. And I deliberately did not engage in a debate about that with any Republican in — when we were down consoling the families in Texas. So I don’t — I don’t know what is the most — how far it goes,” he said.
“I know that it makes no sense to be able to purchase something that can fire up to 300 rounds. I know it makes — and I know what happened when we had rational action before, back in — when the crime bill was — the law that got passed. It did significantly cut down on mass murders.
“And so there’s only one reason for something that can fire, you know, 100 shots.
“I mean — and I’ll just conclude with this: Look when I first started doing hearings on the issue of what rational gun laws should be, it was during a period when I was a senator and the death rate was going up. Not that many more people were being shot, but the death rate was up. And when I think of — I’m not sure, I think it was (inaudible) hospital in New York — whatever the largest trauma hospital is,” the president said.
“And I sat with a trauma doctor, and I asked him — I said, ‘What’s the difference? Why are so many people…’ — and not that many more people were being shot. This is now 20 years ago, or 25 years. I said, ‘Why are they dying?’ And they showed me x-rays. He said, ‘A .22-caliber bullet will lodge in the lung, and we can probably get it out, may be able to get it, and save the life. A 9mm bullet blows the lung out of the body,’” he said.
“So the idea of these high-caliber weapons is of — there’s simply no rational basis for it in terms of thinking about self-protection, hunting. I mean, I just — and remember, the Constitution, the Second Amendment was never absolute. You couldn’t buy a cannon when the Second Amendment was passed. You couldn’t go out and purchase a lot of weapons,” he said, making the same ridiculous argument he has made before.
