Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 20 of 74 Posts

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
17,301 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
that many believe will pass. Rumors are that it will get 60+ in the Senate.

Intitial indications are its on Red Flag laws, increased community mental health, extending 3 day check time (not sure how long) for those under 21.

Nemo



 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
12,411 Posts
Only an agreement of principles, not a bill yet.

The deviled details will be in the text they reveal.

I hope everyone that votes yes on further infringements gets voted out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MSgt G

·
NRA Certified Instructor
Joined
·
6,099 Posts
Until they start cracking down on school bullies and arming teachers and staff that are willing this still is not common sense. Nor will it accomplish anything to aid in the reduction of deaths if someone want to shoot up a school.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
From the CNN article:

One source with knowledge of the discussions said negotiators were hoping to get 10 Republican senators to sign on to the agreement before it was announced, in order to show they can overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
In a Sunday morning statement, 10 senators in each party announced support for the deal.

 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
Ibid.

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. 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.

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. And with Democrats controlling only 50 Senate seats, the approval of 10 Republicans is critical to moving forward.

In addition to the core four negotiators, the legislation is backed by 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.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.). Portman, Toomey, Blunt and Burr are all retiring at the end of the year.

“Families are scared, and it is our duty to come together and get something done that will help restore their sense of safety and security in their communities,” the 20 senators said.
 

·
Romans 10:13
Joined
·
4,746 Posts
In its current form it's just a proposal. The devil is in the details. I believe something will pass since this is an election year and the republicans can proudly say that we did do something to curb gun violence.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
In its current form it's just a proposal. The devil is in the details. I believe something will pass since this is an election year and the republicans can proudly say that we did do something to curb gun violence.
Yep, note from the first paragraph quoted, "It's proved tricky to write . . ." ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,570 Posts
The concept of mental health and juvenile records from 5 years prior to the date of purchase has my curiosity. I’m not sure if it could be done but if all other responsible adults are required to pass a background check I don’t think this is an additional burden so long as records of minors are otherwise sealed.

Say a minor teen wanted to join the armed forces but had felony battery or involuntary mental health stays, would either of those be limiters?

I’ll state that I don’t think stupid things done as a minor should follow a person the rest of their life. However, if there is an 18yr old with a domestic violence record from age 13 to age 17, 11 months, and 3 weeks is there a reason this should not flag at 18yrs and 2 weeks?

How about the same question but with involuntary commitment(s) for mental health?

What say the strict constitutionalists?

DISCLAIMER: I have perfectly normal and healthy niblings (sorry if you have to look that up, it’s to anonymize the specifics) that have demonstrated responsibility and shot my firearms and I have others that have police and mental health records and have never seen my firearms so say something if I’m too close to be objective about this.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
Apparently Sen. C oo ns' name is so bad that the forum software automatically censors it with asterisks.


Who was it at the administrator level that thought this site had a problem with folks using language like that as a pejorative about an actual person?
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
17,301 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
Big Prez Joe says not enough.

Nemo

Of course, but pass it, and then every time there is a tragedy, take advantage of it to pass a little more. It will take a while, but you'll get us all disarmed eventually.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
29,299 Posts
So, this is a firearms related site
where you can't talk about
**** hunting??

Dog Dog breed Sharing Carnivore Photo caption
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
29,299 Posts
So, somebody give me some suggestions about a couple of US Senators I can write to asking them to oppose these new gun control initiatives.

Talking to Ossoff or Warnock would be a waste of breath.

Are there any moderate Republicans that are generally pro Second Amendment but might be inclined to switch sides this time because of all these public mass shootings?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
I think it is a mistake not to communicate with your own Senators. This is a bell I have been ringing for more than a decade and a half now, and here I am still ringing it.

Anyway, post #6 has the names of the 20 Senators in both parties, 10 from each, who have announced their support. Lindsey Graham, however, probably does not care much what some Georgian thinks on this issue. His job is to represent the interests of the state of South Carolina, not a voter from Georgia.




Well, since the adoption of the 17th Amendment, I suppose he represents the voters of his state, rather than the state itself, which was a hugely negative change to our Republic, but that is a discussion for another thread, and it has no significant impact on my point above since you are not a South Carolina voter.
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
17,301 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Don't waste your electrons on Warner or Kaine (both D) from VA. They are no doubt pushing to tighten this thing up much more than its initial appearances.

I will still be ranting trying to persuasively encourage them to be moderate though.

Nemo
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
29,299 Posts
If I were to write to Senators from some other states,
it wouldn't be just to ask them to "vote no" because I think it's a bad bill. I Would not imply that they are my representative and should carry my will forward in DC.

I would instead try to convince them that the proposal is either unconstitutional or ineffective or too burdensome on law abidng citizens .
 

·
Swollen Member
Joined
·
11,977 Posts
If I were to write to Senators from some other states,
it wouldn't be just to ask them to "vote no" because I think it's a bad bill. I Would not imply that they are my representative and should carry my will forward in DC.

I would instead try to convince them that the proposal is either unconstitutional or ineffective or too burdensome on law abidng citizens .
They already know that. They know this won't do crap. It's to placate the terrified masses.
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
17,301 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Overview (partial at least) of what is in and what is not in the new proposal.

Nemo

 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
72,237 Posts
Overview (partial at least) of what is in and what is not in the new proposal.

Nemo

Closing the so-called boyfriend loophole
The senators said the legislation will address the so-called boyfriend loophole, which deals with whether unmarried partners could keep guns if they were found guilty of violence against a dating partner.
Earlier this year, the Senate negotiators involved in the Violence Against Women Act dropped the provisionbecause of objections from the National Rifle Association, dealing a huge blow to Democrats. But its inclusion in this framework signals that at least 10 Republicans are willing to buck the nation's largest gun lobby on an issue where they have a long-held position.
Currently, only a person who has been married to, lived with or had a child with a partner they've been convicted of abusing are blocked from having a gun. Closing the loophole would mean that anyone who was deemed to have been in a serious dating relationship and convicted of domestic violence would no longer be eligible to own a gun.
 
1 - 20 of 74 Posts
Top