Quote:Nearly 10 days after a “framework” agreement on additional federal gun laws was reached by a group of 20 members of the United States Senate, the text of the bill was released by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) Tuesday night, and the Senate is currently (as of press time) taking a vote on whether or not to begin debate on the bill – even while analysts are still digesting it.

For those who don’t want to read for themselves or wait for trusted analysts, Murphy posted a tweet thread asking people to “let [him] tell you what it does.”

Pardon us if we’re not going to take Murphy’s word on the bill’s provisions.

According to a cursory reading, here’s what we see that the bill does:

Allots more than $100 million to states and tribal authorities in the form of grants to “expand” mental health services, including mental health services delivered on school campuses
Expands Byrne JAG grant program to cover implementation of “extreme risk protection orders,” a/k/a red flag laws, with zero framework for that except a cursory, “don’t violate their due process rights” warning
Includes juvenile criminal convictions and commitment to a mental health institution (after age 16) as prohibiting factors
“Closing” the supposed “boyfriend” (or girlfriend depending on how they identify) loophole by adding even more undefined/loosely defined terminology and stronger penalties
Enhances sentencing for “straw purchasers” under federal law
(Laughably) goes after drug dealers/cartels for gun running (more on that in an additional piece)
Allocates $100,000,000 to the FBI for “salaries and expenses…to meet additional resource needs of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System”
Awards $1,400,000,000 (yes, that’s $1.4 billion) to the Department of Justice for “State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance,” $750 million of which is earmarked for Byrne JAG grants
$100,000,000 to the FBI to be used “for competitive grants to be administered by the Community Oriented Policing Services Office for purposes authorized under the STOP School Violence Act of 2018”
The text of the bill can be read here.

Now, no one is against students, particularly teenagers, who might be at risk of violently attacking their classmates, receiving necessary mental health care to prevent a horrific outcome.

But why are we including things like DHHS sharing “best practices for delivering telehealth services” to underserved communities, including billing to Medicare/Medicaid, in a gun control bill? Shouldn’t DHHS be doing that as a matter of course, as a matter of streamlining program delivery?

Why are we including directives to ensure that CHIP and Medicare/Medicaid funding pays for things called for in a student’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP) in a gun control bill? Shouldn’t that already be happening, and if it isn’t, shouldn’t it be part of its own bill?

Why are we including a provision to “ensure ongoing coordination and collaboration between the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education with respect to the provision of, and payment for, assistance under Medicaid by local educational agencies” in a gun control bill?

This provision stood out to me:

$50,000,000 for fiscal year 2022 for the Secretary to award grants to States for the purpose of implementing, enhancing, or expanding the provision of assistance through school-based entities under Medicaid or CHIP. A State shall not use any grant funds to provide medical assistance, child health assistance, or other health services.

Is that why the Hyde Amendment was such a sticking point? Did they foresee using those funds for abortions? Do we have any confidence whatsoever that those monies will be used to help the students truly at risk for violence? It’s not like we don’t know the profile of a school shooter by now.

As a resident of California, where most terrible laws start and are abused, I read the “extreme risk protection orders” section with great concern. Just because the bill says that procedures have to be in place to ensure that one’s due process and other constitutional rights are protected, that one is entitled to counsel at no charge, has the right to confront witnesses, et cetera, et cetera, doesn’t mean that’s what the state-based laws will actually do in practice. In fact, a provision on page 34 gives it away (emphasis mine):

Such programs must include, at the appropriate phase to prevent any violation of constitutional rights, at minimum, notice, the right to an in-person hearing, an unbiased adjudicator, the right to know opposing evidence, the right to present evidence, and the right to confront adverse witnesses;

An ex parte order can be granted if a judge determines that there is cause for the ex parte hearing, which means that you are not guaranteed notice before your rights are stripped. And, because there are no — zero — guidelines in this bill as to what constitutes a trigger for an extreme risk protection order, the US Senate cannot even debate the pros and cons of those triggers.

The National Rifle Association issued a statement late Tuesday:

The NRA will support legislation that improves school security, promotes mental health services, and helps reduce violent crime. However, we will oppose this gun control legislation because it falls short at every level. It does little to truly address violent crime while opening the door to unnecessary burdens on the exercise of Second Amendment freedom by law-abiding gun owners.

This legislation can be abused to restrict lawful gun purchases, infringe upon the rights of law-abiding Americans, and use federal dollars to fund gun control measures being adopted by state and local politicians. This bill leaves too much discretion in the hands of government officials and also contains undefined and overbroad provisions – inviting interference with our constitutional freedoms.

Decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Heller and McDonald cases make clear that the Second Amendment is an individual constitutional freedom. We will always fight for those freedoms – and the fundamental values we have defended for over 150 years.

This is a blank check to Moms Demand and Everytown, signed by Mitch McConnell and the vast majority of the GOP members of the US Senate. Given that the 10 GOP senators who are part of this Gang of 20 aren’t up for election this year and many are retiring, it’s certainly within the realm of possibility that McConnell and a number of Republican senators concocted this plan, allowing 10 members who wouldn’t face an angry electorate this November to take the PR hit.

Every effort must be made to stop this terrible bill from becoming law.

Link

(06-22-2022 09:34 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:Nearly 10 days after a “framework” agreement on additional federal gun laws was reached by a group of 20 members of the United States Senate, the text of the bill was released by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) Tuesday night, and the Senate is currently (as of press time) taking a vote on whether or not to begin debate on the bill – even while analysts are still digesting it.

For those who don’t want to read for themselves or wait for trusted analysts, Murphy posted a tweet thread asking people to “let [him] tell you what it does.”

Pardon us if we’re not going to take Murphy’s word on the bill’s provisions.

According to a cursory reading, here’s what we see that the bill does:

Allots more than $100 million to states and tribal authorities in the form of grants to “expand” mental health services, including mental health services delivered on school campuses
Expands Byrne JAG grant program to cover implementation of “extreme risk protection orders,” a/k/a red flag laws, with zero framework for that except a cursory, “don’t violate their due process rights” warning
Includes juvenile criminal convictions and commitment to a mental health institution (after age 16) as prohibiting factors
“Closing” the supposed “boyfriend” (or girlfriend depending on how they identify) loophole by adding even more undefined/loosely defined terminology and stronger penalties
Enhances sentencing for “straw purchasers” under federal law
(Laughably) goes after drug dealers/cartels for gun running (more on that in an additional piece)
Allocates $100,000,000 to the FBI for “salaries and expenses…to meet additional resource needs of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System”
Awards $1,400,000,000 (yes, that’s $1.4 billion) to the Department of Justice for “State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance,” $750 million of which is earmarked for Byrne JAG grants
$100,000,000 to the FBI to be used “for competitive grants to be administered by the Community Oriented Policing Services Office for purposes authorized under the STOP School Violence Act of 2018”
The text of the bill can be read here.

Now, no one is against students, particularly teenagers, who might be at risk of violently attacking their classmates, receiving necessary mental health care to prevent a horrific outcome.

But why are we including things like DHHS sharing “best practices for delivering telehealth services” to underserved communities, including billing to Medicare/Medicaid, in a gun control bill? Shouldn’t DHHS be doing that as a matter of course, as a matter of streamlining program delivery?

Why are we including directives to ensure that CHIP and Medicare/Medicaid funding pays for things called for in a student’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP) in a gun control bill? Shouldn’t that already be happening, and if it isn’t, shouldn’t it be part of its own bill?

Why are we including a provision to “ensure ongoing coordination and collaboration between the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education with respect to the provision of, and payment for, assistance under Medicaid by local educational agencies” in a gun control bill?

This provision stood out to me:

$50,000,000 for fiscal year 2022 for the Secretary to award grants to States for the purpose of implementing, enhancing, or expanding the provision of assistance through school-based entities under Medicaid or CHIP. A State shall not use any grant funds to provide medical assistance, child health assistance, or other health services.

Is that why the Hyde Amendment was such a sticking point? Did they foresee using those funds for abortions? Do we have any confidence whatsoever that those monies will be used to help the students truly at risk for violence? It’s not like we don’t know the profile of a school shooter by now.

As a resident of California, where most terrible laws start and are abused, I read the “extreme risk protection orders” section with great concern. Just because the bill says that procedures have to be in place to ensure that one’s due process and other constitutional rights are protected, that one is entitled to counsel at no charge, has the right to confront witnesses, et cetera, et cetera, doesn’t mean that’s what the state-based laws will actually do in practice. In fact, a provision on page 34 gives it away (emphasis mine):

Such programs must include, at the appropriate phase to prevent any violation of constitutional rights, at minimum, notice, the right to an in-person hearing, an unbiased adjudicator, the right to know opposing evidence, the right to present evidence, and the right to confront adverse witnesses;

An ex parte order can be granted if a judge determines that there is cause for the ex parte hearing, which means that you are not guaranteed notice before your rights are stripped. And, because there are no — zero — guidelines in this bill as to what constitutes a trigger for an extreme risk protection order, the US Senate cannot even debate the pros and cons of those triggers.

The National Rifle Association issued a statement late Tuesday:

The NRA will support legislation that improves school security, promotes mental health services, and helps reduce violent crime. However, we will oppose this gun control legislation because it falls short at every level. It does little to truly address violent crime while opening the door to unnecessary burdens on the exercise of Second Amendment freedom by law-abiding gun owners.

This legislation can be abused to restrict lawful gun purchases, infringe upon the rights of law-abiding Americans, and use federal dollars to fund gun control measures being adopted by state and local politicians. This bill leaves too much discretion in the hands of government officials and also contains undefined and overbroad provisions – inviting interference with our constitutional freedoms.

Decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Heller and McDonald cases make clear that the Second Amendment is an individual constitutional freedom. We will always fight for those freedoms – and the fundamental values we have defended for over 150 years.

This is a blank check to Moms Demand and Everytown, signed by Mitch McConnell and the vast majority of the GOP members of the US Senate. Given that the 10 GOP senators who are part of this Gang of 20 aren’t up for election this year and many are retiring, it’s certainly within the realm of possibility that McConnell and a number of Republican senators concocted this plan, allowing 10 members who wouldn’t face an angry electorate this November to take the PR hit.

Every effort must be made to stop this terrible bill from becoming law.

Link

Republicans need to call it the "Hyper Funding of Police Bill" or something similar and it will go away.

1 step closer to Civil War 2

Background checks have never bothered me if they are handled competently and are not a ruse to create a national database or harass law abiding citizens.

All of the other stuff in this bill is just a slush fund for federal agencies to bloat their salary rolls and possibly do something feel goody. Perhaps.

How does a background check catch someone with no history of mental illness, crime, aggressiveness, potential ability to commit murder?

Nothing has changed or will change with this bill. However, it does give the FBI and the federal government more access and power over the rights of ordinary people.

(06-22-2022 10:03 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Background checks have never bothered me if they are handled competently and are not a ruse to create a national database or harass law abiding citizens.

All of the other stuff in this bill is just a slush fund for federal agencies to bloat their salary rolls and possibly do something feel goody. Perhaps.

In Texas, and I assume most other states are doing something similar, we already do some sort of instant background check. My concern is that the red flag law will be used against conservatives by "Karens" and activist to elevate virtually any disagreement into a "red flag". Its pretty easy to see where this can be abused. One can easily get an idea of what progressives can construe as hate speech (for instance the entirely imagined category of "micro-aggression's") to manufacture out of thin air "grounds" to have someone's fire arms confiscated for little or no reason. The concept of red flag laws sounds reasonable in theory---but with the Progressive Totalitarianism government people in charge today----nothing is ever done in a reasonable manner.

(06-22-2022 10:19 AM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  How does a background check catch someone with no history of mental illness, crime, aggressiveness, potential ability to commit murder?

Nothing has changed or will change with this bill. However, it does give the FBI and the federal government more access and power over the rights of ordinary people.

And that's why they want red flag laws that can be easily be abused.

It all comes down the "we must do something" mentality. When in reality nothing can really stop these lone wolf mass shootings outside of a ban on firearms, but the deranged will just find another means to carry out their destruction.

People would be better served channeling that "we must do something" mentality to trying to solve "normal" gun violence committed by felons that take far more lives every year than these random rampages.

This will not save one life from gun violence...

Not One

(06-22-2022 11:25 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  This will not save one life from gun violence...

Not One

I say do a test run in Chicago, NYC, Philly, and LA first.

Mitch McConnell Issues Statement After Senate Votes to Advance Bipartisan Gun Control Legislation

Quote:Senators have moved to the brink of an agreement on a bipartisan gun violence bill, Democrats’ lead negotiator said Tuesday, potentially teeing up votes this week on an incremental but notable package that would stand as Congress’s response to mass shootings in Texas and New York that shook the nation.

Nine days after Senate bargainers agreed to a framework proposal — and 29 years after Congress last enacted a major measure curbing firearms — Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told reporters that a final agreement on the proposal’s details was at hand.

The legislation lawmakers have been working toward would toughen background checks for the youngest firearms buyers, require more sellers to conduct background checks and beef up penalties on gun traffickers. It also would disburse money to states and communities aimed at improving school safety and mental health initiatives.

“I think we’ve reached agreement,” Murphy said. “And just we’re dotting the I’s and crossing the T’s right now. I think we’re in good shape.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, the chief Republican bargainer, spoke on the Senate floor moments later and said he, Murphy and the other two top Senate bargainers had “reached agreement.”

NPR reports that the gun control expands background checks for gun buyers ages 18-20. The legislation also expands the prohibited buyers list by adding dating relationships under the domestic violence clause, thus closing the “boyfriend loophole” Democrats have been arguing against for years.

The legislation also contains financial incentives for states that agree to adopt red flag laws.

The NRA responded to the gun control by saying it “falls short at every level.”

They added, “This legislation can be abused to restrict lawful gun purchases, infringe upon the rights of law-abiding Americans, & use fed dollars to fund gun control measures being adopted by state & local politicians.”

The NRA noted, “This bill leaves too much discretion in the hands of government officials and also contains undefined and overboard provisions — inviting interference with our constitutional freedoms.”

Senate Minority Leader McConnell offered his support for the bill after the text became available.

“I support the bill text that Senator Cornyn and our colleagues have produced,” McConnell said in a statement. “For years, the far left falsely claimed that Congress could only address the terrible issue of mass murders by trampling on law-abiding Americans’ constitutional rights. This bill proves that false. Our colleagues have put together a commonsense package of popular steps that will help make these horrifying incidents less likely while fully upholding the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

In a statement, Schumer said, “I will now put this life-saving legislation on the Senate floor for a vote, with an initial procedural vote as soon as tonight and, following that, we will move to final passage as quickly as possible.”

A lot of dollars going out the door. Not really seeing anything that will stop a psycho on the loose.

This Bill will pass and there will continue to be school shootings. This is just another BS example of the Senate throwing (taxpayers') money at an issue just to say "well, we did OUR part".

At the end of the day, things remain the same.

And the harder truth is about 95% of these elected Senators will be RE-ELECTED.

The US citizens do it to themselves. LOL. Bend over and take it.

And here's the problem. Republicans have had years to put together some legislation that would address the problem and have basically done nothing, so we end up stuck with this because somebody has to do something. This is the fault of republican inaction as much as socialist/communist democrats.

(06-22-2022 02:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  And here's the problem. Republicans have had years to put together some legislation that would address the problem and have basically done nothing, so we end up stuck with this because somebody has to do something. This is the fault of republican inaction as much as socialist/communist democrats.

Republicans haven’t done anything because any sort of gun control is opening Pandora’s box to more regulations in the future.

Give government a chance to get their foot in the door and see how it turns out.

School safety needs to be the driving force.

(06-22-2022 04:23 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(06-22-2022 02:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  And here's the problem. Republicans have had years to put together some legislation that would address the problem and have basically done nothing, so we end up stuck with this because somebody has to do something. This is the fault of republican inaction as much as socialist/communist democrats.

Republicans haven’t done anything because any sort of gun control is opening Pandora’s box to more regulations in the future.
Give government a chance to get their foot in the door and see how it turns out.
School safety needs to be the driving force.

Absolutely, and that's where they should have gone years ago.

It's certainly not the bill I'd like to see, but I applaud this bill as the best available at this time that may actually pass. The fact that the NRA opposes the bill tells me we are indeed getting something of value here, even if much less than we would like. Good for both parties for taking what few steps they can find agreement on this time, instead of mindlessly mouthing "thoughts and prayers" and doing nothing again.

(06-23-2022 10:35 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  It's certainly not the bill I'd like to see, but I applaud this bill as the best available at this time that may actually pass. The fact that the NRA opposes the bill tells me we are indeed getting something of value here, even if much less than we would like. Good for both parties for taking what few steps they can find agreement on this time, instead of mindlessly mouthing "thoughts and prayers" and doing nothing again.

It's not the best available. It's more nearly the worst available.

There is nothing of value in that bill. There is nothing that will reduce the incidence of mass shootings one iota. There is nothing that would have prevented the mass shootings that we have had.

Its only purpose is to get the camel's nose under the tent in order to pave the way for draconian (and contrary to the 2nd Amendment) "gun control" measures later.

Don't mistake what I am saying. I am as strongly opposed to the current mass shootings as anyone. But I focus on what might work, instead of a preconceived political agenda. When a nutcase gets inside a school (or any other "gun free zone") with a gun, any gun, lots of people are going to die. The kind of gun is irrelevant, so "assault weapons" (whatever they are) bans are useless. What will work are 1) taking truly crazy people out of circulation in the general population and putting them into mental institutions (note that the proliferation of mass shootings began about the time that we started closing down mental hospitals) and 2) requiring restricted access enforced by armed security at all "gun free zones," including schools (to a shooter, "gun free zone" means easy target).