The Post says the group of senators working on a bipartisan deal on gun safety will announce a tentative agreement shortly:
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 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 article says the senators who’ve been working on the deal are trying to get 10 Republicans to sign on as a signal that they have the votes to pass it. One of the leaders of the effort, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, was realistic about the possibilities given the current configuration of the U.S. Senate. He says he’s open to changes in the text as long as the bill contains provisions that would save lives. Speaker Pelosi echoed that sentiment.
Murphy and other Dems who’ve worked on the bill have been criticized for giving bipartisan cover to Republican intransigence on this issue. I understand that criticism. Now Republicans will claim they’ve “done something on guns,” even though this bill is a band-aid on a sucking chest wound. Maybe that will relieve the pressure on them, which they don’t deserve.
Also, I’m wary of the “school security programs” component. Robb Elementary was already a “hardened” school, and there were cops on hand. It didn’t save those kids. Schools are already too prison-like thanks to gun-humpers’ inability to face the fact that it’s The Precious that’s the problem rather than a lack of school security or access to mental health care.
But my initial thought is this bill is better than nothing and worth doing. The bill Republicans passed here in Florida after the Parkland massacre wasn’t nearly enough either, but the red flag law component alone has almost certainly saved lives since it’s been used more than 5,000 times since passage to keep guns out of the hands of people who were deemed a danger.
I wouldn’t call it a “breakthrough” necessarily, but it’s a crack in the armor, and that’s not nothing.
Open thread.
ETA: The WaPo updated the article to reflect the announcement, which was signed by 10 Democrats and 10 Republicans.
Baud
Dems are either giving in or not getting anything done. There’s always going to be people who think they can do better without ever having to prove it.
Mai Naem mobile
I don’t care for this ‘encourage’ states to set up red flag laws. That just means states like Texas, like with expanding Medicaid, will never do it.
RepubAnon
Any breach in the gun-humpers’ wall of “none shall pass” is a step to better laws, however small.
Baud
@Mai Naem mobile:
You can’t make a state pass a law. You either bribe them or the feds do it themselves.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: Fair enough, but I think it’s a legit point that since Republicans refuse to do anything substantial on gun safety, they should have to defend that very unpopular position. Passing half measures does give them some cover. I’m convinced by Murphy’s argument that anything that can be done to save lives is worth doing, but the critics aren’t 100% wrong, IMO.
hells littlest angel
Oh boy, a tentative agreement that does not include at least ten Republicans. Tentative hooray!
UncleEbeneezer
“Now Republicans will claim they’ve “done something on guns,” even though this bill is a band-aid on a sucking chest wound. Maybe that will relieve the pressure on them, which they don’t deserve.”
And we can retort: you were willing to do X then, so how about we now take it a step further and do Y now. And maybe those who do this don’t lose their next primary and we start to finally break the GOP fear of ever doing anything about guns. That’s my optimistic hope.
We have to start somewhere and until we have 60 Dem Senators or enough to kill the filibuster, that means getting Republicans on board in order to pass anything.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
When have the GOP ever been held to account for their position in guns at the federal level?
Eljai
I’ve heard several reporters and pundits say that we seem to have finally found the will to do something about guns. A will that was lacking when Sandy Hook happened. What they fail to note is that Republicans had a majority in the House in 2012 and the John Boehner refused to take up any kind of gun legislation even after the Sandy Hook tragedy. Republicans would continue to have majorities in one or both houses of Congress until the current congressional session. If Republicans still held a majority in either the House or Senate, I can pretty much goddamguarantee you that we would not be taking even the tiniest of steps we’re attempting to make now.
Baud
@Eljai:
Exactly right.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: Never as far as I’m aware, but IMO, that doesn’t mean it’s not possible that they ever will be. I think the growing lived experience parents and children have with lockdowns and active shooter drills/scares is moving people in the right direction, however slowly.
trollhattan
Will take whatever table scraps they wish to throw our way. We have federal judges (Bush and Trump appointees) tossing various California gun regulations out the window (including semiautomatic gun and 18-21 YO restrictions) and only a federal law can prevent that shit.
Betty Cracker
@hells littlest angel: I updated the post — 10 Republicans did sign the announcement. I’m not sure which ones yet.
Calouste
More money going to the guns-security extortion racket.
UncleEbeneezer
OT Betty, I saw your skillet pizza on Twitter. Here’s the recipe my wife found a couple years ago, that is really great!
Mike in NC
Moscow Mitch will derail this effort. Bank on it.
JPL
It’s a start and democrats can talk about there’s more to be done.
Villago Delenda Est
The best “school security program” would be a massive mandatory buyback of military grade weapons.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
They won’t be held to account as long as our political discourse focuses on Dem strategic choices rather than GOP policies.
Villago Delenda Est
@Calouste: DING DING DING DING DING. The merchants of death need to be outlawed.
Betty Cracker
Here’s a link to Chris Murphy’s tweet-thread overview of the agreement’s provisions. There’s some progress there. Not enough. But progress!
@UncleEbeneezer: Thanks! King Arthur recipes are excellent, in my experience.
Raoul Paste
I didn’t know that handguns had a federal over-21 limit. That really makes it absurd that the same limit isn’t on an AR 15
MazeDancer
Of course, it’s crumbs. Until we elect more Senators, it’s what we got.
Had to get off Twitter for a bit. Too much yelling “not enough”. Like Chris Murphy doesn’t know that.
You know what is really “not enough”? Dem Senators. Go work on electing more, smart guy.
brantl
@Betty Cracker: If one of them is Collinsgula, we’re still screwed.
Deputinize Eurasia from the Kuriles to St Petersburg
Easiest solution is for people to change their kids’ names to Sam Alito, Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh or Neil Gorsuch. That way, any legislation will be immediate, far reaching and more than “thoughtsn’prayers”.
Kent
Exactly. And red flag laws require local implementation. There is absolutely no way to implement and enforce it at the national level without state and local authorities doing all the actual work.
Another Scott
That’s my take as well (he’s my rep.). Progress is always incremental. Take the win, campaign on it, and run up the score in November.
Cheers,
Scott.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: interesting theory, but IMO, the focus on Dem strategy is more of a distraction than a primary obstacle. Gun nuts are single-issue voters, but the majority who want gun safety reform aren’t single issue voters. That’s the real problem, IMO, and it won’t change until a sufficient number of people feel personally threatened enough to make it a priority.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
If it’s a distraction, then we should treat it as a distraction and ignore it.
Baud
Biden promised the parents he would do something. I hope something passes.
piratedan
while this is not exactly the change we wanted, getting the GOP to do anything and using it as a wedge for further change is encouraging…. have to be pragmatic and an incrementalist because we’re forced to be that way with damn near everything else, even when it comes to what should be a no brainer such as this that should evoke dramatic change.
lowtechcyclist
@Baud:
The question Betty C. raised wasn’t whether a better bill could be had in this Congress, but rather, is it worth putting the Rethugs in a position of being able to claim they’ve done something about guns, given how little this bill does? I quote:
She comes down in the affirmative, but it’s certainly a valid question. But I expect that their base will be so mad at them for even doing this baby step that they’ll be afraid to take credit for it this fall.
Kent
School security is an absolute red herring short of a 10 TRILLION DOLLAR infrastructure to rebuild most of the schools in the country from ground up. The average age of a public school in the US is nearly 50 years. The HS that I currently teach at as built in the early 1970s and has at last count 127 separate exterior doors. Most of them classroom doors leading to the outside that need to stay unlocked during the school day because kids are constantly coming and going every class period, for bathroom breaks, tardies, errands, etc. The school is also surrounded by streets and neighborhoods on all sides and parking lots on 3 sides where kids can park and walk directly into their classrooms without passing any central security checkpoint of which there is none. You going to search every backpack and gym bag?
Students are also coming and going constantly during the day. Many take classes at other magnet campuses or the local community college. Some are part-time homeschoolers who come to school only for science or music. Many staff are part-time or work at more than one school.
This is what the current school looks like from the air. Over 10 separate buildings, the majority of which don’t have interior hallways but exterior classroom doors leading to breezeways and the outside. https://goo.gl/maps/VAp8SSWNcHvSkudp9 They are actually building a new school next door but not primarily for security but because the old one is obsolete, too small for the current 1700 students, full of asbestos, with inadequate handicapped access everywhere, and all kinds of other problems. But that has been a 10 year project starting from the passage of community bonds. Not every school district can afford to replace its old schools like this.
Explain to me how you take a school like this (which is very common) and do as Ted Cruz suggests and only have one secure entrance and exit.
eclare
@Raoul Paste:
Seriously? That makes no sense. You can only kill six people with a revolver, and that is only if you are highly trained.
Baud
@lowtechcyclist:
One can have a reasonable position against passage of this compromise. Having a reasonable criticism against those who support passage takes more effort.
eclare
@Kent:
Worked with the feds effectively raising the drinking age to 21 by withholding highway funds.
raven
@Kent: a moat
Kent
Typical school shooters like the Sandy Hook shooter only manage to kill about 1 person for every 5 or 6 shots fired from their AR-15s. So if we apply that kill ratio, the average school shooter armed with a revolver is likely to only kill one person, not 20+
The Moar You Know
I will take the crumbs because it’s better than nothing at all, and until we can add twelve more Dem senators crumbs is what we will get.
Bottom line: a few lives get saved. If we play it right we can even get credit for it. That’s worth doing.
Kent
Yes, but we didn’t have an entire political party invested in the constitutional right of teenagers to drink and drive. Most police and conservatives actually supported raising the drinking age and the evangelical community most certainly did. The only real reasons why it hasn’t been done before in most states was political inertia and liquor industry lobbying.
Red flag laws are going to require every damn right wing MAGA elected sheriff in states like Texas to implement them and enforce them. You think that is going to happen? The first one who tries will get spun out of office faster than you can blink.
That is why Federal laws governing the sale and transfer of firearms, and do things like national registration and background checks are going to be more effective. They don’t require local government implementation.
eclare
@Kent: My former boss’s dad counted the shots as he serpentined away from someone who thought he had been cheated.
Kay
@Baud:
It’s worth doing just for that- and for all the other parents and siblings and friends of all the the other victims.
But I want to see the dollars allocated to school security v mental health. I’m opposed to more money for school security- I don’t think it’s practical or effective- but community mental health clinics (Stabenow’s model- Michigan is one of ten states already piloting them) are a good idea and a good investment. I want a good deal within the parameters of the deal they could get.
lowtechcyclist
@Baud:
I’m unclear about the distinction you’re drawing. How does one take a position against passage without implicitly criticizing the arguments of those who support passage?
ETA: Just to be clear, I support this bill. It’s what we can get now, and there’s no guarantee that we’ll be able to pass a better bill anytime soon.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: It’s a distraction in that focusing solely on Dem strategic choices lets Republicans off the hook. IMO, analyzing Dem strategies in terms of effectiveness and criticizing Dem politicians’ choices when there’s disagreement is just an unavoidable and even necessary part of being in a coalition.
oatler
future ABC news: “Tonight! Compromise: Democrats and Republicans coming together on guns. The stakes incredibly high. next: Pain at the pump. Consumers furious. Is Biden being sunk by malaise? Here to answer: Chris Christie.’
sab
@Kent: What you describe is nothing like schools in my city, built anywhere from 1910 to 2018. They all have a central door. There are other doors for fire escape, but everyone coming in goes through the front door ( actually two front doors, high school one side and junior high on the other side.)
My elementary school in Florida did have many doors because we didn’t actually have halls, just outside breezeways, so every classroom had its own exterior door.
Kay
@oatler:
When Chris Christie left office he was one of the most unpopular governors in the country. Media reinvented him as a success. Just amazing to watch. They wuv him so much.
Kent
For those of you not close to public education. Be aware that there is a giant school security ‘industrial complex’ rapidly growing in this country. I’m talking about corporations who suck up billions of dollars of public money for useless or close to useless consulting fees, trainings, and security “packages” sold to school districts that range from software monitoring of students to facial recognition cameras and software, to stainless steel security gates and grates. It is like the charter school grift but a whole different other group of private companies looking to suck off the public teat. And every dime a school district spends on expensive school security nonsense is a dime not spent on things like science, music, special education, staff salaries, etc.
So beware the mindless call for more school security. It is really a call to divert billions of dollars away from students and towards private “security” companies. Every time politicians call for more school security the pressure increases on school boards and school districts to toss millions of dollars towards these charlatans
Because every time state politicians like Abbott in Texas call for increased school security they are not proposing to add a dime of new state funding. They are simply calling for school districts to divert already scarce dollars towards these largely GOP-run security consulting businesses.
Winston
Watch 50 republicans filibuster it
Ruckus
@Mai Naem mobile:
I hate to say this but there are 49 other states. Texas likes to go it’s own stubborn way and screw as many of it’s citizens as possible. Other than one major city they are not on the national grid and it cost the lives of Texas citizens for the state government’s utter disregard of life. They have to decide if they want to exist and be part of an actual modern world, I don’t think we can decide that for them. IOW, I know we have to teach children to respect life and living. If they are old enough to be the leaders of state government they are no longer legally children, even if they act like spoiled brats. Is this fair? Many would say no but the reality is that this is who they are. If the citizens don’t like it then they should be able to throw them out and elect new, better leaders. Or they could move to better states, ones that reflect the needs of all of their citizens.
Brachiator
Over the past couple of years I have seen conservatives insist that “red flag” laws are all you need to prevent troubled youth from getting their hands on weapons, freeing their healthy brethren and sisteren to get all the guns they want. Conservatives in law enforcement, including prosecutors, are especially certain that this will work. Some even have no problem with involuntary confinement of those the state has deemed to be dangerous. I will note the claims that these laws have been applied successfully, but am still skeptical.
No closing of the gun show loophole for background checks?
Hardened schools are nonsense. This can just as easily make it more difficult for law enforcement to get inside a building. What else are we going to harden next?
The point of these laws seem to be to make sure that nothing be done to actually control guns.
But it may be a start.
Kent
@Ruckus: It is not just Texas. Here in blue Washington State there are lots of elected rural sheriffs from the red parts of the state who are refusing.
Not that I don’t think red flag laws are a good idea. I do. But it is going to be a long hard slog to get them into place in much of the country. And actually working like they are intended rather than having red flag requests just land on the inbox of some MAGA sheriff who does nothing with it or slow-walks it to death. So they are hardly a magic pill at the Federal level.
eclare
@Ruckus: I am tired of the “just move” sentiment. I moved to TN to help my elderly parents. I now have a paid for house and low expenses, where the fuck do you think I could go, cheaply?
UncleEbeneezer
@Betty Cracker: Using a ton of cheese and very little sauce, are the key to this particular approach. Plus the dough recipe is great and it rises very well.
Kent
@eclare: Exactly. We are not 50 separate states. We are the “United States”. We settled that back in the Civil War. All of us are invested in what happens in every part of this country, just just our own city, county, or state.
Ruckus
@Kent:
This is modern America. In so many aspects of all of our lives. People who have figured out that passing laws that sound like they might fix a problem and which really just pour money into the pockets of the people with these oh so bright scams. Do Something is their slogan, Do Jack Shit is their action plan. And it all surrounds the stigma of modern American life – profit above all else. Above results. Above rational ideas/ideals. Above every other damn thing. PROFIT.
Kay
@sab:
He’s right about students coming and going though. They don’t go in at 7:30 and stay until 3:30 anymore. They have a lot of options.Students at my ordinary rural public high school can be at school, or they can be taking some vocational classes, or at the community college, or they can be at work/study. They can do some online and some in person. Public schools were told to accommodate options and not be “one size fits all” and they did that. Ted Cruz’s children attend a traditional fancy private school. They can probably lock that down, but not a public high school, not anymore.
trollhattan
@Kay: He’s the perfect combo of avuncular and Jersey mean. Like Huckabee, but with “gravitas.”
SamIAm
@Baud:
Betty Cracker nailed it in her post. You yourself admitted that this requires state and local enforcement. What makes you think there will be any meaningful follow through should this legislation pass?
Furthermore what possible evidence do you have to believe that it won’t be used by the GQP to say “we already passed Federal gun control legislation and look it’s done nothing.” since obviously it doesn’t address the root problem?
A far smarter move would be to put the items Biden advocated into a bill called “SCOTUS Protection Act” but have it cover everyone. When the GQP fails to vote for it or blocks it hammer the message “Republicans don’t want to protect the Supreme court justices”.
That gives them NO cover and enacts meaningful change.
trollhattan
@Kay: Was introduced to the concept of “zero period” because it’s when music and various other extra classes take place before first bell. Then, there are sports, etc. that take place after last bell.
Even “closed” campuses have kids dribbling in and out throughout the day. Grade school requires a parent be present but by middle school a note to the office will suffice.
Geminid
@Kent: Virginia passed it’s red flag law in 2020, and Governor Northam shrewdly gave the State Police a principal role in enforcing it. Some of the sheriffs were making big talk about “2nd Amendment sanctuaries” etc. But everyone here is scared of the State Police and local law enforcement is no exception.
When Democrats won majorities in both General Assembly houses in 2019, it was partly on the strength of the gun safety issue. So the gun rights people mobilized and many rural counties (including my own) declared themselves 2nd Amendment sanctuaries. I never heard of any passing ordinances to implement that status. Perhaps their insurance carriers warned them of major premium increases if they did.
The gun rights forces also staged a 10,000+ person demonstration around the Capitol in Richmond. When the six gun safety laws passed by the General Assembly came into effect in July 2020, though, I did not hear of any public protests. The laws all polled at 70% or more approval. A seventh proposal would have banned new sales of high powered “assault” rifles and registration of those already sold. That one had only 54% approval and it was punted to a commission for further study.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
As is criticizing the critics.
Villago Delenda Est
@Kent: Rafael Cruz can go gargle a grenade.
Baud
@SamIAm:
Why is that a smarter move? Where’s the evidence you demanded of me?
Ruckus
@Kent:
@eclare:
I am being very largely tongue in cheek. Extremely. Trying to make a point.
Just moving and not solving the problem is what shitty politicians do. They try to move responsibility around, they try bullshit “ideas” that were never intended to work because they are irrational, they try just plain bullshit because they either have no ideas or really just don’t give a fuck or they are in the profit stream for their bullshit ideas. Or all of the above. Many politicians do not in any way work for the people. OK they “work” for their paychecks, even though that is likely a minor point in their income stream.
My point is that they don’t give a fuck about anything but their bank accounts. Or they are just plain assholes – ted cruz. Or both.
We have huge problems in this country, and if you look, in many parts of the world in general. Now we can’t likely solve any other countries problems but we can ours. Maybe. We have to fix the tax issues that give preference to wealth over the general health of the country. We’ve had to do this before and it worked for a while. We need to do this again.
SamIAm
@Betty Cracker:
Agreed, not to mention it’s part of getting “better Democrats”. Public feedback/criticism on proposed legislation (and the legislators that propose it) are ppl art of our civic duties. Unless@Baud you are arguing we only have input during elections and have to sit quietly on the sidelines until the next election if we don’t like what’s happening.
Kay
@trollhattan:
I genuinely feel he’s been shoved down our throats. He was an unpopular governor. There are a lot of those. Oh, well. The way I’ll always see him is standing behind Trump in the endorsement/hostage video looking like someone had hit him over the head.
SamIAm
@Baud:
Do you actually think before posting your two sentence quips?
I want you to address the questions I raised in my post. Is that not obvious?
And this time put a little thought and effort in considering the points that I and others are raising.
Kay
@trollhattan:
It’s really different. It might help if we had some people in government who had children who actually attend public school. They don’t seem to know anything about public schools. You gotta enter one once in a while!
Betsy DeVos was the Secretary of Education and she describes public schools like it’s 1981. I don’t think there’s been a single generation of DeVos’ who attended one, so I suppose I should be grateful she’s that current.
Tazj
I’m glad there’s something getting passed. It should help. Disappointed and a little angry there’s not more being done but apparently it’s the best we can do for the moment.
Fred Guttenberg (Jamie’s dad from Parkland)is happy about it even though he knows there’s more that has to change.
Villago Delenda Est
@Geminid:
Getting the “market forces” of the insurance industry involved with this is a smart move. Making ammosexuals pay above and beyond for their deadly toys will definitely serve as a deterrent, and the terrorist organization that is the NRA will fight it like mad.
RaflW
I’m seeing a ton of pessimism and frustration on twitts. FFS I think we take an inch when we can get it, crow about the NRA losing their power to block everything, and keep pushing.
Kay
@trollhattan:
I had kids in public schools so long it was kind of bewildering to me, the shift. I’m like “I don’t know- he seems crazy immature to start COLLEGE, but I’ll do my best trying to figure out this schedule. Can’t we just put him in “algebra”? Of course it’s appealing to THEM so they’re “I want to join a bowling league for gym credit”. I’m “okay, but lets be clear the bowling alley here is a bar with some occasional bowling going on between rounds”.
Geminid
@Villago Delenda Est: As I’ve suggested before, laws imposing strict liability on anyone who sells a firearm outside of legal reporting requirements, for any damage the gun causes no matter who uses it, would cut down on straw purchases and other shady transfers
A legal requirement to report stolen guns would also help some. That was one of the six gun safety measures passed by Virginia in 2020.
Kay
Just to put this in perspective, Obama’s Race to the Top, a competitive grant program for every public school district in the country – his signature K-12 program- was funded at 4.35 billion.
Omnes Omnibus
@eclare: Not all hand guns are revolvers.
Omnes Omnibus
@Winston: If ten have signed on to it, there won’t be 50 to filibuster. If all 50 filibuster, then we campaign on that.
Albatrossity
@Omnes Omnibus: Maybe. It wouldn’t surprise me if Manchin or Sinema decide they need to block it…
Geminid
@SamIAm: I don’t think the issue you raise with the other commenter can be resolved by argument. For my part, I figure that Chris Murphy cares about gun violence, and he’s no dope. If Murphy thinks this modest agreement is worth doing I’m not going to kick about it.
sab
@Kay: I agree. My grandkids school has everyone wandering in and out all day long. But only thru the two front doors. Not like it was in my day, when we came in for home room before first period, and stayed for study hall in the last period even if we had no more class scheduled.
Kay
@Albatrossity:
Oh, Manchin and Sinema will vote for it. It doesn’t include rescinding any of the Trump tax cuts so they’ll support it. Those two go to work each day with one goal- protect the Trump tax cuts.
Skepticat
@Raoul Paste:
Absurd is an understatement. I’d go for ludicrous, insane, and nucking futz to start.
Baud
I believe Bernie suggested this the other day, so hopefully there won’t be a lot of infighting about messaging.
Ryan
I think it’s worth it purely because demonstrating that the sky won’t fall and the guns won’t be grabbed by the most minimalist piece of legislating is worth something.
Betty Cracker
@UncleEbeneezer: A while back we tried a “grandma pizza” recipe that sounds similar. You bake it in a sheet pan, and it sounds like too much cheese and not enough sauce at first, but it’s really good! The recipe we tried also had minced garlic in olive oil dribbled on top. It was fantastic!
Anonymous At Work
I got 20 bucks here that one of the 10 Republicans get upset over the removal of an Oxford comma and sinks the entire thing. Any takers?
dimmsdale
I’m really livid about this worthless “compromise” bullshit legislation, because there’s this Boston University study I ran across recently that has some persuasive (to me anyway) statistical evidence for what works and what doesn’t, and this legislation, by and large, ignores all the measures the study talks about. A lot of my frustration grows out of a fear that this’ll be IT, such that when the next mass shooting happens (and there WILL be a “next” mass shooting, since this legislation does zilch to thwart it) the R’s who voted for this shit will throw up their hands and say “See? Gun laws don’t work!”
Everything depends on the midterms, and on getting enough new Dems into the senate so that Sinemanchin and the NRA Republicans can be swept aside to pass future legislation that actually works (is this merely foolish fantasy? I don’t know).
And then there’s what the SC will do to implement shall-issue concealed carry nationwide, yet to be determined, and how quickly firearms-related homicides will skyrocket as a result.
Frankly I’m pessimistic about the public’s attention span and legislators’ (particularly Democrats’) ability to stay sufficiently focused on an issue long enough to take decisive steps over multiple rounds of legislation.
I hope to be wrong about all this, and a lot of comments in this thread from people whose opinions I respect suggest I may be.
Link to the BU study writeup: https://www.bu.edu/articles/2019/state-gun-laws-that-reduce-gun-deaths/
JML
I don’t love this kind of bill (doesn’t go far enough, not effective enough, too much useless crap in it) but at the same time there are a few things to remember: 1) there are some thing that will save some lives. If we save ONE, it’s worth doing. 2) No republican is going to run on this bill, so we don’t really need to worry about giving them cover, but it does give Dems something to run on. 3) Most of the GOP is going to vote against this, and making them vote against sensible gun laws that a majority supports and making them look like the out of touch lunatics they are is always a good idea. Sometimes you have to force the votes.
Betty
Disappointing compromise with continued focus on traumatizing children with shooting drills and the like, but advocates do feel it contains some important measures. So better than no deal.
kindness
I think the thing that would save lives most (since it doesn’t seem as if the right would ever give up their AR15s) is just limit the magazine to 5 rounds with no grandfather clause (I would make 22s excempt). Include a buy back provision for the now illegal magazines. Make being caught with an oversize magazine a felony (so anyone holding out would lose their right to own guns at all.
Immanentize
@eclare: I read this thread and I CANNOT BELIEVE that no one posted this regarding your former boss’s dad’s scary shooting scene:
Getting off the plane in Tijuara
Super Dave
@Betty Cracker: The critics are right, this gives cover and also takes the pressure off for doing the things proven to help. I say screw them and get them all on the record voting against protecting the kids and teachers.
schrodingers_cat
@Baud: Bernie spawn are first to complain and last to do anything concrete.
BTW St. Bernie voted several times against the Brady Bill but do they have any smoke for him? No.
Twitter story in 3 acts.
1,Leftist Populist Twitter: Democrats should do something
2. Democrats do something
3. Leftist Populist Twitter: No not that.
Super Dave
@kindness: I love this!
dimmsdale
@dimmsdale: Here’s a quick sentence from the study writeup: “Analysis revealed that universal background checks, permit requirements, ‘may issue’ laws (where local authorities have discretion in approving who can carry a concealed weapon), and laws banning people convicted of violent misdemeanors from possessing firearms are, individually and collectively, significantly able to reduce gun-related deaths.”
I was always a big fan of reducing magazine capacity and rate of fire, but the study’s conclusion is: first go after the people, NOT the guns, since even the worst mass shootings committed with AR-15 platform weapons are statistically insignificant overall (though, of course, horrendous); but targeting potential mass murderers via background checks and violent-behavior ownership prohibitions has a MUCH greater effect overall.
This is the kind of study that has been missing (thanks to the R-Fascisti in congress and the NRA, who have thwarted public-health based studies). Maybe that can change…AFTER the midterms.
gene108
@Betty Cracker:
I think gun control will have to move like healthcare reform. A bunch of small steps, plenty of failures, and some relatively big, but not fully sufficient measures, which once in place are hard for the forces of evil to undo.
Medicare and Medicaid were relatively big deals for the time, but not sufficient to insure everybody. Extending coverage after leaving a job or getting fired via COBRA, and ER’s not refusing patients based on ability to pay, in the 1980’s, were small steps but better than nothing.
Clinton-Care flamed out, SCHIP passed later in the decade that extended coverage to more people.
I just think gun control is going to go the same way. Too many powerful entrenched interests have bought one of the two major parties to get any serious reform done in one big bill.
A Tepid Little Bit of Gun Reform, Maybe | The Mahablog
[…] in the Senate on new gun control legislation. As expected, it’s underwhelming. I agree with Betty Cracker that the agreement is “a band-aid on a sucking chest wound.” It’s better than […]
Another Scott
Biden’s statement from WH.gov:
Good, good.
Cheers,
Scott.
Feathers
I am for the bill, but dead set against the massive spending on school shooter drills. One thing the Dems need to do is stop finding these right wing propaganda efforts.
These drills are run by bad people doing bad things and we need to be honest about it, not pretend they are honorable. It always ends up badly for us. It’s like the funding for no mention of birth control sex ed. Actively harmful to children and lets the wingnuts take the moral high ground.
Urban Suburbanite
@kindness:
The magazine restrictions have been tried before, and those failed – not only because the firearms set have some effective litigators (the NRA are pikers compared to people like Larry Pratt), but also due to poorly written laws. And it seems like the latter has been hobbling the gun control advocates for quite a while – I really doubt they understand guns well enough to build effective controls on them.
There’s also been a building tendency among leftist types to be armed. It’s not the same as your elite tactical operator with his Threeper and fascist coffee swag, these are people who view firearms as a necessity against those wanting to harm them and the last six years haven’t exactly proven them wrong. They’re also against gun control, but for different reasons.
Honestly, I don’t see any real changes on firearms regulations happening for a decade, and that’s being optimistic.
J R in WV
@Raoul Paste:
Back when I was a smaller person, I used part of my allowance to buy .22 rounds to target shoot with my grandma, who taught me to shoot with her .22 rifle on her tiny farm — this was probably in the early 1960s.
One day the guy at the grocery store / hardware store said he couldn’t sell me .22 ammo any more, since it could be used in pistols, you had to be 21, and I was only 12 or so. So grandma had to come downstairs to buy the box of 50 rounds for $0.89. No one was harmed in our target practice but tin cans used as targets.
I think everyone who wants to own guns should have to apply for a permit, pass a back ground check, take a class and pass, just like I did for the concealed carry permit I got 20 years ago. I like having it, it lets the police everywhere know my county sheriff knows I’m not a dangerous nut job and makes carrying cased weapons around legally much easier.
Geminid
@Urban Suburbanite: I’ve read of leftists advocating for like minded people to arm themselves. I expect some are. But of those who do, I wonder how many oppose gun safety laws like those Democrats are proposing, or have already enacted in states like Massachusetts and California. I’m sure that some of the loud ones oppose more restrictions on firearms, but the loud ones tend to be contrarians who disdain anything that liberals propose.
I don’t know any lefty gun owners myself. My only two gun owning friends are committed Democrats. They also happen to be lesbians who decided years ago to keep firearms to protect themselves and their loved ones from hostiles. They don’t encourage their children to own firearms, but they made sure to teach them how to handle firearms safely, and to shoot. Stephanie and Debbie welcomed the six gun safety laws Virginia passed two years ago, and would have no problem with the state imposing tighter restrictions like California’s.
I read that Parkland survivor David Hogg gave an encouraging speech at yesterday’s rally in DC. He believes there has been a shift in opinion about gun control, both among the general public and among gun owners.
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
There is a twitter thread by Fred Gutenberg about an incident in DC that is worth reading.
https://twitter.com/fred_guttenberg/status/1535952811174813696
I think a lot of people are at the stage of personally threatened, I know that on my daily walk, I have awareness about it, like I did in the military. I think this may be different in other parts of the country but the school shootings, someone needing to feel all powerful that they will breach a school to kill, is getting a lot of national and worldwide attention. And of course the cops standing around with their thumbs up their butts didn’t help. I wonder how much the lawsuits are going to be for, which will of course never make up for the dead students/teachers but might break the resolve of the stand around and do jack shit city government there. Or their bank accounts at least.
Geminid
@schrodingers_cat: Back before the 2020 primaries I was worried some that the junior senator from Vermont might seriously contend for the nomination. So, I researched his backstory as best I could. There were some very Sanders-averse Democrats who were finding the dirt, and it wasn’t hard to access their research. I’m sure Republicans had a thick file assembled too, but they were holding it close in hopes that Sanders would be the nominee.
Vermont media was also a good source. I remember a story in one of the outlets, either VtDigger or Seven Days Vermont. They wrote about Sanders and gun issues, and had interviewed a man who knew him from the 1970s and 80s. Bernie was a Trotskyite, the man explained, and Trotsky strongly believed that the working class should not give up their guns. So Sanders was happy to have the NRA’s support when he won his House seat the first time. He ran as an Independent and beat the Republican incumbent who had voted for an assault weapons ban.
Geminid
@Urban Suburbanite: There are large capacity magazines restrictions in place in eight states, according to world population review.org. These states include Colorado, which enacted a law after the 2012 Aurora theatre shooting. It makes possession or sale of a magazine with a capacity greater than 15 rounds a Class 2 misdemeanor. Penalties for using such a magazine in a crime are much stiffer.
The murderer who committed the theater shootings had a 100 round drum magazine, but fortunately it jammed.
Mai Naem mobile
@Ruckus: unfortunately its not just Texas. I just mentioned Texas because that’s where Uvalde happened(BTW all the help that Abbott set up as far as health care funding ,mental.health care, counselors is strictly temporary but that’s a whole other story.) Its the South, the Plains states, Idaho, Wyoming, Indiana, Iowa,possibly Maine and NH. We then wait for a major rural shooting in one of those states for LE and the legislature to possibly enforce red flag laws. I’ll take whatever they can pass but just for once I would like the Dems to have an easy win. I am just tired of this multi year struggle for crumbs. The GOP gets massive tax cuts and super conservative judges without appearing to try that hard. I am really upset at Obama for not working harder at getting Garland on the court. He of all people should have known the consequences. Such a huge miscalculation on his part.
Kay
@Feathers:
I just wish it could be measured. There’s lots and lots of studies that say expanding subsidies to include mental health services reduces crime, maybe not school shooting specifically, but crime so at least it’s not wasted and is a good investment.
The school shooting defense industry is only 20 years old, has no qualifications attached to it, and it’s packed with charlatans and grifters. 40,000 dollars for the consultant to tell students to put their textbooks in front of their faces or use their desk as a shield, which isn’t going to work anyway so is just pathetic and sad. The kids themselves could have figured out to hide behind a desk. What are these prices based on? They invented this whole industry and then just pulled the “cost” of it out of their ass.
Put air conditioning in all public schools, including the low income schools. You’ll employ hard working HVAC people who have a measurable benchmark – the air conditioning works- and the kids will be happier.
Urban Suburbanite
@Geminid:
It’s been picking up among the leftist sphere in the last six years.
When it comes to gun control, they’re conflicted. They don’t agree with folks like Hogg because in their view, history has shown being the unarmed party just means you’re an easy target. They tend to view gun control as something that is either ineffective or targets marginalized groups when enforced.
Urban Suburbanite
@Geminid:
The problem with magazine restrictions in these crimes is that the shooters aren’t acting as normal criminals. This isn’t, say, an armed robbery or a drug deal where the perpetrator will actually be concerned about sentence enhancements if he’s busted with a gun. These shooters are living out murder fantasies that end with their death. They’re not concerned about getting away or what comes after the act. They want people to die before them, and if they can livestream the killings for online clout, even better.
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
I carried an 8 shot M1911 .45 semi auto pistol in the early 70s in the navy. You might have carried the same weapon. The navy put only 5 rounds in the magazine at a time, to save the loading spring, as we didn’t shoot them all that often (I did once, off the fantail to qualify. Had to hit the water. Hey I made it, 2 mags about 10 seconds total. About a 3 foot radius total, about 40 ft out-starting. Not bad, standing, ship moving about 15 knots.)
Geminid
@Urban Suburbanite: This is true. But there are “problems” with every gun safety measure. I think Coloradans are safer with magazine restrictions than they would be without. Sure, there still are magazines available on the black market. They are a lot harder to get though. And a black market dealer has good reason to pass up a sale to someone they think is unbalanced. That’s a good way to get a long prison sentence if a shooter survives and squeals.
dimmsdale
@Urban Suburbanite: Seem that’s exactly the kind of street-level scenario that we ought to be (or the CDC ought to be) collecting data on, to find out a) IF it happens at all, outside of gun humpers’ wet dreams and b) how often it happens, whether it’s statistically significant, etc. My contention is that a lot of these imaginary scenarios put forward as excuses for doing nothing are just that. But, that’s something statistical studies could tell us. Just nobody’s bothering with it. (I don’t know why the CDC or relevant government agencies aren’t doing that now, come to think of it.)
Urban Suburbanite
@Geminid:
Maybe? It didn’t stop a 40-something edgelord from shooting multiple people in Denver a couple months back. (Not sure if he had a drum or extended magazine) I get that it’s a simpler legislative solution than going after semi-auto rifles (holy fuck, is that going to be a huge fight), but I think the gun control advocates are missing some fundamental details. No one ever mentions the online firearms market, which is huge and only going to get bigger. There’s also the problem that extended magazines (drum magazines are widely derided by gun people because they’re dumb as hell and jam a lot) are really common (it’s also not that hard to get around magazine restrictions, either.) And then there’s going to be the challenges against these laws. Groups like Gun of Owners of America and Second Amendment Foundation are insane, but they’re aggressive litigators and pretty good at it.
These laws could have your typical criminal pause because that guy is more inclined to weigh the potential benefits of criming against whatever charges he catches. I doubt that calculation is going to be applicable with the overly online teenager posting about Saint Brennan and heading out with his meme gun after a posting an incoherent manifesto loaded with 8chan jokes.
Geminid
@Urban Suburbanite: First you start out saying that attempts to regulate high capacity magazines have not stood up because gun control advocates don’t know enough about the subject to draft good laws. When it’s pointed out that there are in fact such restrictions standing in eight states you revert to arguing they can’t work. But the arguments you make apply to any and all gun control measures. Your argument is that mitigation of gun violence has little value because it doesn’t prevent all gun violence.
And the assertion that “no one ever mentions the online firearms market” is an obvious whopper. You are assuming superiority in knowledge to those proposing gun control measures. But you’re the one who was unaware that restrictions on magazine capacity are in fact the law in eight states.