in the meantime, Democratic state side has expressed caution Looking for a deal following optimism and the recent elementary school shootings in Uvalde, Texas-this suggests that this may be a tragedy to break. Decades of tightening on new gun control, according to Connecticut’s Supreme Democratic senator Chris Murphy, said that if Republicans voted to change gun control, “the sky will not fall politically for them. Prove that.
Other Democrats are trying to take advantage of the momentum, even if they don’t think the deal will solve the problem of gun violence.
President Joe Biden kindly said to Texas Senator John Cornyn and Kentucky Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, “they continue this way.” There is a perception that it cannot be done. “
“I’m feeling different feelings among my post-Yvarde colleagues,” Illinois Democrat Whip Dick Durbin, a Senate majority, told CNN on Sunday.
What the Democratic Party wants
The Democratic Party’s preference is to buy certain guns and raise the age limit to 21 to revive the ban on federal offensive weapons that expired in 2004. A majority of 60 people are required to pass the major laws that pass the Senate of 100 members.
What Republicans are saying
McConnell showed his vision to compromise gun control when he appeared in Kentucky on Tuesday. When he explained a bipartisan story without using the word “gun”.
Rather, in McConnell’s view, negotiators would “discuss how we can get together to target mental illness and school safety issues.”
The point: McConnell doesn’t think the problem is a gun.
Trump side of things
Former President Donald Trump, who remains in power among Republican voters, especially among Republican voters, said at the NRA’s annual meeting in Houston over the weekend that more guns should be placed in schools. rice field.
“The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” Trump said in a speech.
Turning the school into a fortress is endorsed by Trump and some of his fellow Republicans.
What are some wise gun limits?
According to CNN’s Eric Bradner and Jeff Zeleny, who reported from the convention, even some NRA members can understand the need for some new gun control.
They wrote: Max Shirley, an NRA member of Round Rock, Texas, said he supported “wise steps” to stop the shooting cycle at school. He said he believes it is necessary to raise the age limit for purchasing automatic weapons to 21 and reduce the ammunition clip size.
“If the opponent you’re defending isn’t down, or if the threat doesn’t diminish after 10 rounds or 10 shots, you’re in bigger trouble,” Shirley told CNN. “Or you are a bad shot.”
What’s on the table?
That kind of restriction that Shirley would accept doesn’t even seem to be at the Washington table.
Conin told reporters in Texas on Monday He said he would focus on mental health and the danger signal laws that may have already been enacted in some states to allow authorities to seize guns from endangered people. ..
“I said access to mental health treatment and diagnosis is absolutely important,” he said.
Cornyn has the need to make background checks part of a national conversation and other possible restrictions under federal law regarding the types of firearms that can be purchased, owned and maintained if there is a criminal or mental health record. Focused on. Look at all of them. “
Understand the opposition to all new gun control
The most useful thing I’ve seen in the weekend gun control debate was an interview with CNN Dana Bash about the “Allies” with Texas Republican Rep. Dunkrenshaw.
Why he opposes the Locomotive Acts at the national level
Clenshaw: “I think there are many problems with the Locomotive Acts, especially at the national level. When it comes to criminal law, it should be democratically decided at the local and state levels, but you still have to look. No. With these, I wonder what the actual purpose is. “
Why he opposes the Locomotive Acts of Texas
Clenshaw: “What we’re basically trying to do with the Danger Signals Act is to enforce the law before it’s broken. It’s really difficult. Assess if someone is a threat. Is difficult.
Well, if they are such a threat, they are already threatening someone with a weapon, well, they are already breaking the law, why do you need this other law? “
What’s wrong with Universal Background Check?
Clenshaw: “People need to understand the meaning of universal background checks. That is, I can no longer sell guns to friends. My neighbor, her husband is gone for a week, I Let’s say you want to rent a gun. Make us both ferrons.
This is the problem with Universal Background Check. And the ones most unlikely to stick to universal background checks are criminals who intend to do harm. Again, this is a matter of consequences. I don’t think the results will be what people think. “
What’s wrong with limiting the sale of certain guns to people under the age of 21?
Clenshaw: “Well, I’m not very impressed with the current 18-year-old Swath and its maturity, so you may need to have that conversation, but it needs to be widely applied. You are not an adult until ’21.
And what happens then? When we see a 22 year old boy committing atrocities, are we going to raise it again, and are we going to raise it again? “
However, the human brain is not fully developed at the age of 18.
Bash said the National Institutes of Health stated that the human brain was not fully developed until the mid-20s.
Clenshaw: “Yes, that’s true. That’s true. That’s what we-I think we’re actually 26. That means you’re not an adult until you’re 26?
By then, I think we had done the second deployment. So this is a difficult question. (Clenshaw was in the army.)
What does he support?
Clenshaw: “I think what needs to be changed is the one that has the most direct, concise and concrete effects on these things. It’s the actual safety of the school. So what the Republicans are. Is not unheard of. “
There are more guns than people in this country. it doesn’t matter?
Clenshaw: “No. Culturally, I think we’re a country that has a constitutional amendment that believes in self-defense for a long time. It doesn’t matter that I own a gun. think.
And I know that if I destroy all the guns, it has no effect on the crime. I’m not the one who goes to shoot someone, so it has no effect on the shooting. I’m the one who might prevent someone from being shot. ”
Did Framer envision these war weapons?
Bash points out that Article 2 of the Constitutional Amendment requires well-regulated militias, and does Clenshaw think the Founding Father intends to give people weapons of war? I asked you.
Clenshaw: “Let’s talk a bit about war weapons because you brought it out. So I went to war and used a lot of war weapons, so I actually used these rifles as war weapons. Do not classify.
We use them, but we use them-they are more self-defense weapons. And if SEAL or infantry teams launch an attack, they are using a much larger weapon that is not available to your civilian population. “
Source: www.cnn.com
