Congress Poised to Approve Most Significant Gun Bill in Decades

The Senate passed the measure Thursday by a vote of 65-33. Next up: the House.

By
22

Good morning. Congress is poised to send the most significant gun violence prevention bill in nearly three decades to the president’s desk for his signature.

Gun Violence Prevention Bill Passes Senate

Senators approved a bipartisan gun violence prevention measure Thursday night with a vote of 65-33, breaking Congress’ lengthy stalemate on imposing new gun restrictions.

The House is expected to consider it this morning—the last step before President Joe Biden can sign it into law. With Democrats controlling the House, it is expected to pass. 

It’s a quick victory, but one that took a great deal of work and negotiation after a bipartisan group of senators ran up against several hurdles when drafting the legislative text last week. They wanted to move it through the Senate this week, before senators left for a two-week recess.

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
22
By
Comments (22)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Rdtomasello51

    Completely agree that without the expertise of the CECC this bill might have met the fate of other bills, not even getting on the floor for any discussion. It is remarkable that a bill with some teeth made it through the process. At least I can point to one example where Congress passed a substantive bill. Foreign policy is one of my passions, even if it ranks near the bottom for most people. And this bill, which was so articulated well by you, Haley, is an important step in holding the Chinese government and its enablers accountable for its reprehensible actions toward the Uighurs and the Xinjiang area specifically.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    BillAZ

    "A man in a tactical vest with a semi-automatic rifle and holstered pistol prompted Broken Arrow Justice Center employees to lock their doors June 13, according to a news release.

    AT&T store employees who then saw the man proceeded to “run out the back of the store,” and multiple 911 calls came from the parking lot of a Target store that he was walking toward, Broken Arrow police said.

    Due to Oklahoma’s constitutional carry laws, police determined that at each location the man “was not breaking the law” with the rifle and vest.

    But “quite honestly, nobody needs to be walking down the street with a rifle,” Rogers County Sheriff Scott Walton said in an interview about dealing with such situations. “But I don’t make the laws; we just try to live by them and do a very difficult job in a world that’s got those people in it.”"

    Gosh, good luck with that sheriff and god save the rest of us.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Olympus Mons

    The whole thing seems pointless now. Apparently there are no gun control laws the Supreme Court wouldn't consider violating the 2nd amendment. At best it would've helped at the margins, but yesterday's ruling just erased any possible improvement here. Such a shame.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Richard Maxton

      That's not even close to what the SC decision says, OM. Catastrophizing the decision because you don't like it isn't helpful.

      From Justice Alito's concurrence: "Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything
      about the kinds of weapons that people may possess. Nor have we disturbed anything that we said in Heller or McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), about restrictions that may be imposed on the possession or carrying of guns."

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Olympus Mons

        Sure. And the Dobbs decision will have no bearing on other rights. Except Justice Thomas now says it does.

        The court has lost any credibility in my eyes (and probably a great many more). It's a completely political body at this point. Every issue before the court is open to interpretation. If it weren't, every case would be decided 9-0. I don't think the court was always this way. It had been more balanced. It's only been since Republicans have made it their gospel to have any judge go through their "means test" of a Federalist Society member. Republicans will not nominate any judge that doesn't vote "their way".
        Otherwise, why have the Federalist Society requirement? They hide behind their "Originalist" interpretation only because it justifies what they really want - a country still locked into an 18th century mindset, with all the bigotry and backwardness that implies. 2 centuries of progress will be wiped away by this court. Republicans have packed the court to serve their narrow interests, and now that court is delivering on their promises.

        The NY law was over a century old, and just now it's a problem? Bull. You watch. More and more gun laws will be struck down, and less and less regulation across the board. It will be a recipe for disaster.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          JohnM.

          "The court has lost any credibility in my eyes (and probably a great many more). It's a completely political body at this point."
          Interesting how this only happens when they issue opinions that you don't like. I'll give you credit though for not calling them 'illegitimate', or advocating packing the court or ignoring their rulings, as so many overwrought folks are saying right now.

          Collapse
  4. Acre00

    I was hopeful but skeptical of the gun control negotiations, and it seems my skepticism has been vindicated.

    The language in the final bill is both incredibly vague and incredibly broad. What is a "dating partner" as defined in this bill? I don't know, and neither does anyone else. "A continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature" to be defined by "frequency and type of interaction ", but not "casual acquaintanceship or ordinary fraternization in a business or social context". Is "friend with benefits" a "dating relationship"? It's continuing and intimate but not serious, so does that count? Do the individuals have to have sex for it to count? If not, how does one tell the difference between a "dating relationship" and "ordinary fraternization"? What happens when one individual says they were definitely dating and the other says it was just "ordinary fraternization"?

    The juvenile bar has a sunset provision, but the records will remain in NICS. Why? What possible legitimate reason is there for NICS to hold onto the records when they are no longer relevant to whether the individual is allowed to purchase a gun?

    The definition for a firearms dealer is whether one sells guns "for pecuniary gain". Want to sell a gun for more than you paid for it? Better get an FFL or face the possibility of a felony conviction and decades behind bars.

    There are some good things in this bill, but the one way ratchet continues to turn.

    I find it highly informative that every public statement from Cornyn stresses that he, I'm sorry "the public", wants him to "do something". Not something useful, not something effective, just "something". Talk about saying the quiet part out loud

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    BillAZ

    RE: Active Shooter Alert

    "It failed on a vote of 259-162."

    My god, that says it all. No wonder we're stuck with kludgey, weak tea legislation as the only kind of legislation that can attract enough votes. Congress wants to be seen doing something even if they can't quite actually do something.

    Collapse
    1. Acre00

      It only failed because Pelosi didn't want to use standard procedures. Had she used regular order it would have passed easily.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        BillAZ

        259 to 162... don't overthink it.

        Collapse
        1. Acre00

          I'm not sure I understand you response. You asserted that this shows that this bill's failure shows that only the most weak tea bills can get enough votes. I responded that it did get enough votes for moving it with regular order. How am I overthinking it?

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            BillAZ

            In what universe other than D.C. does legislation that "passes" 259 to 162 fail?

            We're not talking 50+1 here. Kind of liking winning the popular vote by 3 million votes and losing the Presidency. The perception and apparently the reality that a majority of the country is being mugged by a vocal minority isn't doing the republic or our "ordered liberty" any good.

            Collapse
  6. SazzyTX

    I’m grateful that Sen. Cornyn decided to lead and legislate this time. I’m also glad that Congress is not allowing the idea of perfection to get in the way of moderate improvement.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Rjosephpaquette

    I support the bill. I like that the red flag laws will be state by state, rather than one size fits all from the federal government.

    Collapse
  8. Francis Allocca

    " This bill will save lives, it will save thousands of lives." Great press release for the politicians.

    My guess is when I compare this years gun deaths with a year from now, very little will have change. The latests Pew research in 2020 listed 45,222 people were killed by guns. Over 97% by hand guns. The report outlines 54% of the deaths are suicides, mostly by older men, 43% are murder , mostly by young black or hispanic gang members and 3% other.. Make a note in your calendar for July 2023 and see if that number changes. Until prosecutors actively enforce any and all hand gun violations, little will change. Look back on the drop in gun deaths during the period of 'Stop and Frisk' in NY City, that was highly successful. Profiling aside..I once heard a wise farmer say" if your looking for eggs, check the hen house" We know where most of the crimes are being committed ... Time to aggressively enforce the current laws!

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Rjosephpaquette

      It's going to take at least 3 to 5 years to see the full effect of this new law--especially as states slowly adopt red flag laws across the nation.

      Collapse
      1. Francis Allocca

        A 'stop and frisk' application would quickly get guns and criminals off the street...push back from those feeling it profiling would be massive, as they abhor the reality of facts!

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Rjosephpaquette

          It’s very simple to reduce crime if we are willing to ignore the Bill of rights.

          Collapse
          1. Francis Allocca

            I agree with you comment, however there is nothing in the BOR that protects illegal gun ownership!

            Collapse