Bipartisan Group Of Senators Comes Out With Gun Laws

Most of these will not satisfy either side, especially the leftist gun grabbers. Nor would most of these have stopped any of the shooters

Bipartisan Gun Deal Announced: No ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban, No Raised Minimum Rifle Age

A bipartisan group of senators announced a deal on gun control legislation Sunday in the wake of recent mass shootings — though the compromise excludes President Joe Biden’s “assault weapons” ban and a raised minimum age for rifle purchases.

The deal includes Republican priorities such as expanded mental health services and school safety. It nods to Democratic priorities by adding expanded background checks for those under the age of 21, who will now have juvenile records screened before gun purchases.

A press released from the bipartisan group outlines the contours of the proposed legislation (original emphasis) :

WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Cory Booker (D- N.J.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) issued the following statement:

“Today, we are announcing a commonsense, bipartisan proposal to protect America’s children, keep our schools safe, and reduce the threat of violence across our country. 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. Our plan increases needed mental health resources, improves school safety and support for students, and helps ensure dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as mentally ill can’t purchase weapons. Most importantly, our plan saves lives while also protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans. We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense proposal into law.”The proposal includes:Support for State Crisis

But of course North Carolina’s two weenie Senators joined in. Burr has almost always been a disappointment, plus, he’s retiring. Tillis started strong, has gone complete RINO. Anyhow, this is what they are proposing

Intervention Orders
?     Provides resources to states and tribes to create and administer laws that help ensure deadly weapons are kept out of the hands of individuals whom a court has determined to be a significant danger to themselves or others, consistent with state and federal due process and constitutional protections. (The intervention orders are pretty much in every state anyhow, and are not the the red flag laws which blow off due process that Democrats want. This is just a way to get the feds more involved in state affairs. )

Investment in Children and Family Mental Health Services
?     National expansion of community behavioral health center model; major investments to increase access to mental health and suicide prevention programs; and other support services available in the community, including crisis and trauma intervention and recovery. (This is just a way to get the feds more involved in state affairs. )

Protections for Victims of Domestic Violence
?     Convicted domestic violence abusers and individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders are included in NICS, including those who have or have had a continuing relationship of a romantic or intimate nature. (Shouldn’t they already be in the NICS? Typically, yes, but, it requires reporting)

Funding for School-Based Mental Health and Supportive Services
?     Invests in programs to expand mental health and supportive services in schools, including: early identification and intervention programs and school based mental health and wrap-around services. (This is just a way to get the feds more involved in state affairs. )

Funding for School Safety Resources
?     Invests in programs to help institute safety measures in and around primary and secondary schools, support school violence prevention efforts and provide training to school personnel and students. (This is just a way to get the feds more involved in state affairs. And Dems will think this sounds dangerously close to LEOs in schools, which they’re against)

Clarification of Definition of Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer
?     Cracks down on criminals who illegally evade licensing requirements. (Um, shouldn’t that be happening already? Pretty sure there’s law on this now, but, this will allow Democrats to wipe out lots of dealers)

Telehealth Investments
?     Invests in programs that increase access to mental and behavioral health services for youth and families in crisis via telehealth. (This is just a way to get the feds more involved in state affairs. )

Under 21 Enhanced Review Process
?     For buyers under 21 years of age, requires an investigative period to review juvenile and mental health records, including checks with state databases and local law enforcement.

Penalties for Straw Purchasing
?     Cracks down on criminals who illegally straw purchase and traffic guns. (Um, we already have laws on this. Perhaps they should ask Joe about the Fast and Furious gun running program his boss, Barack Obama, ran)

I know many Conservatives might disagree, but, the only one on here which really makes sense is the under 21 enhanced review process. There certainly could be things in a juvenile record which would stop the purchase. But, they’ll have to be very careful on this in terms of violating a lot of laws that protect juvenile records. Perhaps a check with local law enforcement and prosecutors and judges could determine if it is necessary to open up the juvenile records.

The question here is whether there are enough votes to break the 60 vote threshold. Might not even be enough to hit 51. This is not gun grabbing enough for Democrats. Also, the danger here is giving Dems an inch, because then they’ll want a lot more quickly.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

22 Responses to “Bipartisan Group Of Senators Comes Out With Gun Laws”

  1. Hal P says:

    “Bipartisan Group Of Senators Comes Out With Gun Laws”

    NO It is a group of communists pass gun control.

  2. Professor Hale says:

    I don’t see anything objectionable in this other than the obvious:

    1. It isn’t even a firearms bill, it is a social programs spending bill. Just more money looted from the treasury to fund activists and their connected friends.

    2. Democrats have already announced ahead of time that this is a Trojan Horse to stuff a bunch of highly objectionable stuff into the conference bill, that doesn’t need a 60 vote in the Senate. As such, every Republican in the Senate should torpedo it on sight. But Republicans have a long and honorable history of surrendering to Democrats on anything important to Democrats with just enough votes to pass. At this point, Every Republican voter has tough scar tissue on his back where the knife keeps hitting the same spot.

    3. Bi-partisan = Republicans cave and let Democrats control the agenda. Every single time.

    4. Mid terms are coming up. Let’s let the politicians run on this issue and their proposed solutions and then let the winners decide.

    5. The under 21 provision is too weak. Obviously, most 18-21 year olds aren’t old enough to have a criminal record. So an enhanced background check will be pointless. But I agree in concept that 18-21 are not sufficiently developed to handle firearms except under the supervision of their parents. Effective immediately, the Armed forces should not recruit anyone under 21 for a position that required handling firearms. Scrapping paint on ships and refueling airplanes is still fine.

  3. Our esteemed host wrote:

    I know many Conservatives might disagree, but, the only one on here which really makes sense is the under 21 enhanced review process. There certainly could be things in a juvenile record which would stop the purchase. But, they’ll have to be very careful on this in terms of violating a lot of laws that protect juvenile records. Perhaps a check with local law enforcement and prosecutors and judges could determine if it is necessary to open up the juvenile records.

    That’s the only thing I find useful in this proposed legislation — which is just a framework; it hasn’t been written yet — but if it makes sense to review juvenile convictions, and it does, why not include juvenile records for those 21 and older?

    However, the Democrats are already looking at this as a foot in the door, to weaken resistance to further restrictions on our constitutional rights in the future. We are better off resisting the entire thing, now, to preserve our rights in the future.

    • Professor Hale says:

      I notice that only one side of the political debate is often the ones making reasonable proposals and even accepting the opposition proposals that are reasonable, while the other side remains goose-step rigid in repeating talking points. Thanks for your comment Dana.

      The issue of juvenile offenses is a pretty important one that shouldn’t be tossed out lightly. America has taken decades to get to the point where we allow juveniles to recover from their childhood offenses and lead normal lives as adults. This proposal would squash that like a bug. Do we really need super hero predictive powers to see where this will go? 50% of black male children will not be able to legally buy a gun as an adult. If the violent histories of juvenile offenders is important to keep them away from guns, why not also use it to keep them away from the overwhelming non-violent majority? After all, a violent person with a gun is just a violent person. Specifically, Shouldn’t employers and schools have the ability to exclude violent candidates from employment? Ad as long as we are opening that door, shouldn’t a juvenile sex offender’s record be fair game in background checks for employment?

      • UnkleC says:

        Professor, a suggested “compromise”, if a juvie offender wishes his record to remain sealed to an enhanced search, then allow the opportunity for the little felon to petition the court to keep the seal upon reaching legal age. If the court finds that our offender is a threat to society, then allow the record or a summary to be included in the enhanced search.
        And yes, employers should be aware if a potential hire has a violent past.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    90% of Americans do not want children slaughtered in schools, but there is just no way to prevent it. Other nations stop this only by obliterating the God-given rights of citizens, keeping them from the weapons that keep kids safe!! Anyway, America only 10 or 20 little kids are murdered in schools in a year, so it’s hardly a problem compared to Black on Black crime in Democrat run shithole cities where most of the people live. More kids are killed by accidental shootings every year than are slaughtered by crazy males with AR-15s!

    The only thing keeping Americans safe day in and day out is our near unfettered access to firearms. Note well that every other advanced tyrannical nation on Earth keep their citizens from AR-15 style rifles necessary to protect our children!!

    The problem in America is not too many weapons but too FEW! If the U.S. government wants to control We the People, THEY have the firepower to do it! We need to take back America, returning We the People’s God-given right to any and all weapons inherent to a Free People!! No one likes to admit it, but the U.S. Constitution is the inspired word of God. The government cannot keep 330,000,000 armed citizens down!!

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Rimjob thinks sarcasm is the solution.
      Bless his little heart.

      Bwaha! Lolgf

      • Professor Hale says:

        Obvious sarcasm. More like a parody of what Democrats believe Republicans think. Of course, it was only 10 years ago when most democrats agreed with republicans on this issue. It was a truly bi-partisan issue. But the communists have always been in favor of American disarmament. And now the Democratic party is dominated by their communist party wing. I’ve never understood the attraction that genocide has, but it seems to play well with a certain type of people from Ivey league schools.

        Of course, there aren’t 330 Mil American citizens, only about 280 million. The rest are non-citizen aliens. Further, many of those citizens are unarmed. The vast majority spend most of their days unarmed, even if they “keep” arms, they don’t “bear” them. No need to quibble that the number of people who are against child murder is actually asymptotically close to 100%. You have to be clinically crazy to be supportive of killing children. (see reference to communists)

    • Dana says:

      The distinguished Mr Dowd wrote:

      90% of Americans do not want children slaughtered in schools, but there is just no way to prevent it. Other nations stop this only by obliterating the God-given rights of citizens, keeping them from the weapons that keep kids safe!! Anyway, America only 10 or 20 little kids are murdered in schools in a year, so it’s hardly a problem compared to Black on Black crime in Democrat run shithole cities where most of the people live. More kids are killed by accidental shootings every year than are slaughtered by crazy males with AR-15s!

      Mr Dowd tries to use sarcasm, but he kind of fails at it. Yes, there really have been 227 murders in Philadelphia so far this year, in just 163 days, or 1.3926 per day.

      First the math on school shootings: The Washington Post reported that there have been 185 people killed in schools since Columbine, 185 in 23 years, or 8.04347826 per year. With a public school population of 50,700,000, that works out to a homicide rate of 0.0159 per 100,000 population. Students, teachers and administrators are far, far, far safer when they are in school than when they are out in public.

      Of course, the Post tried to skew the statistics to make it seem like there’s a Columbine every day:

      More than 311,000 students have experienced gun violence at school since Columbine. Read that, and you’d think that half the schools in America were being machine gunned down, which is, let’s be honest about it, exactly what the editors of The Washington Post want you to believe.
      But what, exactly, does “experienced gun violence at school” mean? From their methodology:

      To calculate how many children were exposed to gunfire in each school shooting, The Post relied on enrollment figures and demographic information from the U.S. Education Department, including the Common Core of Data and the Private School Universe Survey. The analysis used attendance figures from the year of the shooting for the vast majority of the schools. Then The Post deducted 7 percent from the enrollment total because that is, on average, how many students miss school each day, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Reporters subtracted 50 percent from a school’s enrollment if the act of gun violence occurred just before or after the school day.

      So, if a firearm was discharged on school grounds during school hours, but no one was struck, 93% of the school’s enrollment “experienced gun violence at school.

      * – One of the incidents shown by the Post was on November 15, 2021, when an armed 13-year-old boy in Poughkeepsie High School, in Poughkeepsie, New York, fired “several rounds in front of the school, striking multiple vehicles”, but neither killing nor injuring anyone. The Post counted that as 570 students “experiencing gun violence at school”.
      * – On November 19, 2021, at Hinkley High School in Aurora, Colorado, “Teenagers exchanged gunfire in the parking lot, wounding three students.” The Post counted that as 1,940 students “experiencing gun violence at school,” even though this was a gun battle between gangs, and not an attempt to shoot up the school.
      * – November 29, 2021, at Cesar Chavez High School in Laveen, Arizona, a 15-year-old boy shot the 16-year-old who had just sold him the gun in a school bathroom. While it was hardly an attempt to shoot up the school, the Post counts this a 2,400 students having “experienced gun violence at school.”
      * – December 1, 2021 at Sam Rayburn High School, in Pasadena, Texas, a 21-year-old man fired a shot into the air while robbing a student on campus, with no one injured or killed. The Post counts this as 2,530 students “experiencing gun violence at school.”
      * – February 28, 2022, at Jonesboro High School, in Clayton County, Georgia, a student discharged a weapon in school, hitting nobody. The Post counts this as 1,282 students “experiencing gun violence at school”.

      There are many, many more similar examples, of accidents, stray bullets, gang battles and one-on-one fights, things that make up the vast majority of the incidents compiled into the statistics, but which the editors hope you don’t read, which the editors hope the readers will conflate to thousands of Columbines or Marjory Stoneman Douglases.

      If Mr Dowd read my poor site, which he either does not or at least never comments there, he’d know how The Philadelphia Inquirer uses similar propaganda. The Inky reported that 13-year-old Marcus Stokes was “fatally shot on his way to school.” Kind of makes it sound like he was just an innocent kid walking to class, doesn’t it?

      But it turned out that young Mr Stokes and five other students at E W Rhodes School were not on their way to school, but sitting in a parked, and probably disabled car — neighbors had complained that the vehicle had been sitting at the intersection of North Judson and West Clearfield Streets for a while. That intersection is more than a quarter mile away from the school, and it occurred at, reportedly, 9:02 AM, well after all students were supposed to be in school.

      A man walked up and fired at least ten shots at the car, killing young Mr Stokes, and wounding some of the others.

      The coverage kind of dried up, but it was clear: the gunman was targeting someone, probably a drug dealer, and Mr Stokes was simply in the target zone. The media coverage never asked what six middle school students were doing, sitting in an abandoned car after school was supposed to start, but it doesn’t take a Wile E Coyote super-genius to figure it out: they were almost certainly getting high.

      Beware the credentialed media! It’s not that they actually lie, but they skew the stories in ways to influence your opinion on things, and it’s always, always, to the left.

      • The Liberal but not libertarian Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Neither Dana nor the puppy ‘groomer’ know the meaning of the word ‘sarcasm’.

        But that’s beside the point. Every other advanced nation on Earth has already solved the problem of crazy men shooting up schools, churches, stores, theaters, malls etc.

        How did they do it?

        Anyway, Mr Dana then writes my point in concrete by reciting what I predicted he would. “Slaughtered children are a small price to pay for FREEDOM!”, but it took him over 1000 words and he kind of failed at it.

        Like I said, there’s nothing to be done. Why? Because dead children is a small price and one we’re willing to pay as a nation. Dead Black teens are a price we’re willing to pay. Suicides are a price we’re willing to pay.

        Mr Dana feels that the reason Americans are horrified by slaughtered schoolchildren is ’cause media! He is wrong, but we’ll have to agree to disagree.

        Your job as ‘patriots’ is to fight to the death preventing ANY and ALL attempts to reduce gun violence in America. You’re winning!

        • drowningpuppies says:

          Neither Dana nor the puppy ‘groomer’ know the meaning of the word ‘sarcasm’.

          A cutting, often ironic remark intended to express contempt or ridicule.

          Bless his little heart, he tries so hard.

          Bwaha! Lolgfy

        • Est1950 says:

          If you eliminate every weapon in the United States people will just start mowing kids down on the playground with their cars.

          If you harden schools, the lunatics will just shoot up buses on the way to school. People will learn to make bombs, and/or use poisons. Killers must kill.

          If you put a waiting list on a gun, they will just wait to kill. These people are posting 150-page manifesto’s on the internet which takes time. If that is so then they can wait 72-96 hours for their gun. In the meantime, they can be buying up ammo all around town preparing for their day of insanity.

          If you eliminate guns you will just turn to alternative versions of terror. Black marketing of guns and then the problem of getting rid of 400 million guns owned by Americans and guaranteed by the constitution.

          The internet is the problem. This is what is driving the insanity of the world. Look at how each of you commenters here treats each other. If you do not agree with someone then the gloves come off and anger ensues. Using all kinds of vile names directed at each other.

          The fact that the mainstream media covers these events wall to wall nonstop for weeks encourages lunatics to lunacy. Unless and until you can stop manifestos being posted on the internet and an MSM that refuses to salivate at the next mass casualty event no matter its origin, then just doing away with guns will never end the violence in the USA.

          • Est1950 says:

            Elwood, you speak of nonviolence in other countries and that is simply not the case. What is in fact the case is that reporting of these events is nonexistent unless it is a mass casualty event. Remember the subway poisonings? Stabbings. Cars running over pedestrians and in the case where they chose, automatic weapons were used.

            If you do your research you will find that Per Capita which you often like to use when citing statistics gives us the top 11 nations’ homicide rates.

            El Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela, Virgin Islands, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Uraguay, Palau, Barbados, Panama, Argentina. Notice that 5 of these countries can be considered Central and South America.

            The street gang Mara Salvatrucha 13, commonly known as MS-13, was born in the United States. Formed in Los Angeles in the early 1980s by the children of Salvadoran immigrants who’d fled that country’s civil war, MS-13 was at first just Salvadoran kids hanging out on street corners.

            Why is the United States so violent. One simply has to look at the immigration policies of the country for two centuries to understand that violence fled to America, leaving behind them countries who were less violent. Thank you America.

          • The Liberal but not libertarian Elwood P. Dowd says:


            Yet other advanced nations who have figured it out do not have our homicide rate, or mass killing rate.

            I agree that the internet is a huuuuge problem. A proverb, ‘A lie will go round the world while truth is pulling its boots on’ is true.

            And yes the media mantra of, ‘If it bleeds it leads!’ is true.

            And true too that the 400,000,000 firearms in circulation makes the issue in the US unsolvable. It’s why I say that “Dead children are a small price to pay for our freedom!”

            This is why I need, and I am entitled to as an American, a Thompson submachine gun. Or at least an M4. It’s in the Constitution.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:


            I speak of advanced nations. Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Cyprus, Czech Rep, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, S Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Scotland, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland etc etc. You get the idea. I hope.

            The US of A is more violent than these nations. We are also more violent than many 2nd world nations too, e.g., India and China! And yes, much of South America is more violent than us. The Caribbean is more violent. Mexico is more violent.

            To blame US violence on immigration is intellectually lazy. Immigrants in the US are LESS likely to commit violent crimes than native born. And remember, America is the melting pot. We are all immigrants.

            What is true in the US is that violent crime tracks with poverty. White collar crime does not. And did you know white collar crime prosecutions have declined steadily since the early 90s? It’s now only 1/3 the number of the early 90s. Has white collar crime really decreased, LOL?

            According to the FBI, the annual cost of street crime is $15 billion compared to nearly $1 trillion for white-collar crime! Are you kidding me?

            Why are we as a people more concerned with street crime than white collar crime? Is it the media? Is it that poor Black people commit a lot of street crime?

          • drowningpuppies says:

            Yet other advanced nations who have figured it out do not have our homicide rate, or mass killing rate.

            4 times as many per capita died in mass shootings in FRANCE as in the US. 21 times in Norway.

            1: Other countries with vastly stricter gun laws than the US have higher rates of mass shootings.
            2: US jurisdictions w/ gun laws have exponentially higher rates of gun violence

            Out of 97 countries with data, the US is 64th in frequency of mass shootings and 65th in murder rate.
            And rates of mass shootings elsewhere are rising faster


            Bwaha! Lolgf

  5. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    The dog ‘groomer’ is SOOO perspicacious, said no one.

    Bless its little heart.

    • L'Roy White says:

      And yet oddly he’s got your number. Call it coincidence.

      Being a poor black child from Camden I had to look up perspicacious but that was your point wasn’t it? To try and humiliate the black guy with big white words? Thanks for participating in the oppression of my race by democrats. Since you can’t literally whip me like the good old days you can now figuratively whip me with words. Nice going. Democrats are nothing if not consistently whipping black people. Must be in your DNA.

      • The Liberal but not libertarian Elwood P. Dowd says:

        My reply was to the puppy ‘groomer’ not you. But we’re glad you weighed in.

        In any event, I’m not responsible for what you may or may not know. It’s confusing that you consider unfamiliar words racial oppression.

        Perspicacious – of acute mental vision or discernment, which is the opposite of the ‘groomer’. I used it as sarcasm, as opposed to satire. I will try to be more perspicuous in the future.

        I’m a poor white child from a family of 9 from the Missouri Ozarks. Unlike your white conservative ‘friends’ here, I fully admit that white kids, even poor white kids, have advantages not available to Black kids. Many advantages were overt, others more subtle. That is not to say that many black kids today don’t make bad decisions. I was lucky living on the poor side of a small town in that my elementary school was integrated! The ‘rich’ kids were in all white neighborhoods.

        No doubt me growing up in conservative small town America was a different experience than you growing up in Camden NJ. But I was fortunate to grow up with white kids, black kids and even two Mexican kids (twins) who had never seen snow!

        It’s surprising that a conservative ‘patriot’ such as you would take being introduced to a new word as humiliating, even calling it Democratic liberal oppression. You should run that concept past your ‘white friends’ here, LOL.

        I did not realize there are white and black words, but am willing to learn.

  6. Down on the Corner says:

    I have to opine that this feel good gun legislation is nothing more than a GIANT SOCIAL SPENDING BILL intended to give, once again, more power to the government to oversee your life.


    CONGRATULATIONS Conservatives. You have been sold another giant leftist bill of goods that EXPANDS the government but does precious little to prevent gun violence.

    This is always how the left works…..use a crisis….whip up a frenzy and then get 10 RINO’s to cave and voille….more regulations, more spent money, more government jobs and NOTHING to really address the problem.

  7. Down on the Corner says:

    Want a good gun control bill?

    Here……tongue in cheek for me….a wet dream for the left who continues to whittle away and the constitution daily.

    Every gun owner has to buy 5 million dollars worth of insurance in case they shoot someone.

    Every gun owner has to attend a class every year on gun safety.

    Every gun owner has to see a psychiatrist who can then take your guns away if he doesnt like you….since our RINO’s have sold us out yet again….sure sounds good to me.

    Every gun owner must register every weapon they own within one year or face a million dollar fine.

    Every gun owner who applies for a concealed carry permit must be charged 1000.00 and then 100.oo a month for the privlege.

    Every gun owner must pay a tax of 1000 percent on every weapon purchased that is not a bolt action or a single shot.

    Every gun owner must turn in their friends, family or neighbors and if any of them are involved in a a shooting then you are held personally liable and your 5 million insurance will be used to help cover the victims costs.

    See This is really what the left wants, and it is really where we are heading. More social programs is bullshit. This is a giant gun grab and why any RINO would agree to anything like this is mindblowing. They should immediately quit the GOP and join the Democratic party.

Pirate's Cove