Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

Washington - Mayors Push Senate To Return To Washington For Gun Bill Vote

Published on: August 8, 2019 01:30 PM
By: AP
Change text size Text Size  

Washington - More than 200 mayors, including two anguished by mass shootings in Texas and Ohio, are urging the Senate to return to the Capitol to act on gun safety legislation amid criticism that Congress is failing to respond to back-to-back shootings that killed 31 people.

In a letter Thursday to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, the mayors wrote, “Our nation can no longer wait for our federal government to take the actions necessary to prevent people who should not have access to firearms from being able to purchase them.”

The mayors urged the Senate to vote on two House-passed bills expanding background checks for gun sales that passed that chamber earlier this year. It was signed by El Paso, Texas, Mayor Dee Margo, Dayton, Ohio, Mayor Nan Whaley and others where mass shootings have occurred, including Orlando and Parkland, Florida, Pittsburgh and Annapolis, Maryland.

Advertisement:

“Quick passage of these bills is a critical step to reducing gun violence in our country,” they wrote.

The push comes as McConnell, the Republican leader, resists pressure to recall senators from the congressional recess, despite wrenching calls to “do something” in the aftermath of the shootings.

Instead, the Republican leader is taking a more measured approach, as GOP senators talk frequently among themselves and with the White House in the face of mounting criticism that Congress is failing to act.

President Donald Trump is privately calling up senators while publicly pushing for an expansion of background checks for firearms purchases, but McConnell knows those ideas have little Republican support. In fact, the White House threatened to veto a House-passed background checks bill earlier this year. Yet, as the nation reels from the frequency of shootings and their grave toll, McConnell’s unwillingness to confront the gun lobby or move more swiftly is coming under scrutiny.

“I can only do what I can do,” the president told reporters Wednesday as he departed Washington for visits to El Paso and Dayton to comfort victims and families and to praise first responders.

Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown made a personal plea to Trump during his visit to “call on Sen. McConnell to bring the Senate back in session this week, to tell the Senate he wants the background checks bill that has already passed the House.”

The politics of gun violence are difficult for Republicans, including McConnell, who would risk losing support as he seeks reelection in Kentucky if he backed restricting access to firearms and ammunition. Other Republicans, including those in Colorado, Maine and swing states, also would face difficult votes, despite the clamor for some changes to gun laws.

“In Congress, we’re trying to come up with some answers,” Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn, who is also up for reelection, said after donating blood in El Paso.

In Kentucky, where McConnell is recuperating from a shoulder fracture sustained in a weekend fall, activists have been demonstrating at his home and protesting at his downtown Louisville office.

In the meantime, Trump continues to say there’s “great appetite” for background checks legislation.

But that is not the case, for now.

Instead, Republicans are trying to build support for more modest measures, including so-called red-flag bills from Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., that would allow friends and family members to petition authorities to keep guns away from people deemed a threat to themselves or others. But those efforts are also running into trouble from conservatives, who worry about due process and infringing on gun owners’ rights.

GOP senators are also considering changes to the existing federal background checks system, modeled on the so-called “fix-NICS” law signed last year that improved the National Instant Criminal Background Check system, as well as strengthening penalties for hate crimes.

While many of those proposals have bipartisan support, Democrats are unlikely to agree to them without consideration of the more substantive background checks bill.

“We Democrats are not going to settle for half-measures so Republicans can feel better and try to push the issue of gun violence off to the side,” Schumer said Wednesday.

Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat who, along with Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., is pushing a bill to expand background checks, said Trump’s support will be the determining factor in whatever gets done.

“At this point in time leadership comes from President Trump,” Manchin said.



More of today's headlines

Miami - A home health care aide was arrested for cheating an elderly Jewish couple in the Miami area out of at least $100,000, some of it Holocaust... Jerusalem - A European mental health association said it will rethink a decision to cancel a planned conference in Israel following widespread objections by academics...

 

Total9

Read Comments (9)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Aug 08, 2019 at 04:37 PM Educated Archy Says:

“Quick passage of these bills is a critical step to reducing gun violence in our country"

Nonsense bill. If anyone wants to kill they will get around a back ground check or buy it on the balck market. Such silly people. They think a murderer cares about the law?

If you want to stop the killings, change the culture. We don't need guns any more. Who needs to hunt? Lets end our romance with vilence and guns. End video games and other violent TV shows. get people to stop promoting violenece.

And you need to change this crazy hilly billy hick altitude about guns. I would say ban all guns but doubt that will help[. these guys will still get guns. But maybe chnage their altitude then ban all guns.

yes I am mad liberal when it comes to guns. But don't blame Trump for this american hick craziness.

2

 Aug 08, 2019 at 05:36 PM AH Says:

Reply to #1  
Educated Archy Says:

“Quick passage of these bills is a critical step to reducing gun violence in our country"

Nonsense bill. If anyone wants to kill they will get around a back ground check or buy it on the balck market. Such silly people. They think a murderer cares about the law?

If you want to stop the killings, change the culture. We don't need guns any more. Who needs to hunt? Lets end our romance with vilence and guns. End video games and other violent TV shows. get people to stop promoting violenece.

And you need to change this crazy hilly billy hick altitude about guns. I would say ban all guns but doubt that will help[. these guys will still get guns. But maybe chnage their altitude then ban all guns.

yes I am mad liberal when it comes to guns. But don't blame Trump for this american hick craziness.

If you were really that educated, Archy, you would know about something called the Second Amendment, and you would also know that it doesn't stem from "this crazy hilly billy hick a[t]titude about guns," or hunting, or whatever, but because it is the final fallback that allows the populace to resist a tyrannical government, as it did during the Revolutionary War.

Now, I'm not talking about the fantasies of hashomer and his acolytes or alter egos, who imagine Nazis everywhere from the White House downward, and themselves as the brave resistors (the real ones, of course, would spit in their faces). In real life, though, you have cases like Venezuela, where gun confiscation was the prelude to the government making war upon its own citizens, with them having no recourse.

3

 Aug 08, 2019 at 09:34 PM Educated Archy Says:

Reply to #2  
AH Says:

If you were really that educated, Archy, you would know about something called the Second Amendment, and you would also know that it doesn't stem from "this crazy hilly billy hick a[t]titude about guns," or hunting, or whatever, but because it is the final fallback that allows the populace to resist a tyrannical government, as it did during the Revolutionary War.

Now, I'm not talking about the fantasies of hashomer and his acolytes or alter egos, who imagine Nazis everywhere from the White House downward, and themselves as the brave resistors (the real ones, of course, would spit in their faces). In real life, though, you have cases like Venezuela, where gun confiscation was the prelude to the government making war upon its own citizens, with them having no recourse.

Sorry but this is one instance where I am liberal . Unlike the other fakers like tricky yoni , I speak the truth and I am not one sided .

Re the second amendment it's a stupid argument . Why should I care about the law ? If it's true that guns save lives the stupid law is meaningless . A law is only when it benefits society . If people ars dying then too bad on the law .

I am not sure that your rational is right either . America is an adavanced country and not run by a ruthless dictator . Other civilized countries do this and it works you can't live a paranoid life that the govt is Gona come get you if you give up your guns . That's just retarded . We do not need guns .

Now I do agree with you that my argument is purely ideologically. In reality passing any gun laws will just rile up the fanatics and cause more deaths . But it's worth noting the ideal method

4

 Aug 08, 2019 at 09:46 PM Hunter Says:

Reply to #3  
Educated Archy Says:

Sorry but this is one instance where I am liberal . Unlike the other fakers like tricky yoni , I speak the truth and I am not one sided .

Re the second amendment it's a stupid argument . Why should I care about the law ? If it's true that guns save lives the stupid law is meaningless . A law is only when it benefits society . If people ars dying then too bad on the law .

I am not sure that your rational is right either . America is an adavanced country and not run by a ruthless dictator . Other civilized countries do this and it works you can't live a paranoid life that the govt is Gona come get you if you give up your guns . That's just retarded . We do not need guns .

Now I do agree with you that my argument is purely ideologically. In reality passing any gun laws will just rile up the fanatics and cause more deaths . But it's worth noting the ideal method

Actually, Second Amendment or no Second Amendment, hunting is necessary to control prey animal populations. If hunting rifles were banned, we would see a surge in car accidents caused by deer.

Also, bears exist. They may look cute and cuddly, but they are actually huge and terrifying. If guns were banned, we would have to get up close to stab them with a knife and risk getting mauled.

5

 Aug 08, 2019 at 10:09 PM AH Says:

Reply to #3  
Educated Archy Says:

Sorry but this is one instance where I am liberal . Unlike the other fakers like tricky yoni , I speak the truth and I am not one sided .

Re the second amendment it's a stupid argument . Why should I care about the law ? If it's true that guns save lives the stupid law is meaningless . A law is only when it benefits society . If people ars dying then too bad on the law .

I am not sure that your rational is right either . America is an adavanced country and not run by a ruthless dictator . Other civilized countries do this and it works you can't live a paranoid life that the govt is Gona come get you if you give up your guns . That's just retarded . We do not need guns .

Now I do agree with you that my argument is purely ideologically. In reality passing any gun laws will just rile up the fanatics and cause more deaths . But it's worth noting the ideal method

Have you ever heard of Chesterton's Fence?

"In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, 'I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away.' To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: 'If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.'"

Just because you can't see the utility of the Second Amendment doesn't mean that others don't, or that that's a valid reason to abolish or restrict it.

6

 Aug 09, 2019 at 09:45 AM Educated Archy Says:

Reply to #4  
Hunter Says:

Actually, Second Amendment or no Second Amendment, hunting is necessary to control prey animal populations. If hunting rifles were banned, we would see a surge in car accidents caused by deer.

Also, bears exist. They may look cute and cuddly, but they are actually huge and terrifying. If guns were banned, we would have to get up close to stab them with a knife and risk getting mauled.

Hire special people to kill those stray animals or find other methods. In most states hunting deer us prohibited.

I think we can find solutions in the 21st century to the dangers you dsicuss without the necessity to use guns

7

 Aug 09, 2019 at 09:51 AM Educated Archy Says:

Reply to #5  
AH Says:

Have you ever heard of Chesterton's Fence?

"In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, 'I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away.' To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: 'If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.'"

Just because you can't see the utility of the Second Amendment doesn't mean that others don't, or that that's a valid reason to abolish or restrict it.

Its not just about not seeing the use of the amendment.

Its more that I see the harm. Guns kill and too many crzaies with no brians who sit and watch violent video games take it and shot up people.

The benefit you claim from the second amendment is pure paranio. Sorry I don't believe that in cvilzied society the govt wwill just come and lock people up if we wouldn't have guns but now that we have guns we are all safe. its just soo wacky and paraniod. Its not reality. And suerly not in the 21st centrury where if the govt wants they can easily over power you anyhow. Only wied hicks bileve in that kind of paranio. its just hyper nonsense.

Like i said, its not the NRA fault. And in reality a gun ban may be futile. it may have the opposite affect. Its a shame that there are so many crazies out there

8

 Aug 09, 2019 at 12:30 PM Hunter Says:

Reply to #6  
Educated Archy Says:

Hire special people to kill those stray animals or find other methods. In most states hunting deer us prohibited.

I think we can find solutions in the 21st century to the dangers you dsicuss without the necessity to use guns

Hire special people and other methods using what? A crossbow? You have to be pretty strong for that.
Also, states without hunting are the ones that didn't have the deer problem to start with.

9

 Aug 09, 2019 at 05:36 PM AH Says:

Reply to #7  
Educated Archy Says:

Its not just about not seeing the use of the amendment.

Its more that I see the harm. Guns kill and too many crzaies with no brians who sit and watch violent video games take it and shot up people.

The benefit you claim from the second amendment is pure paranio. Sorry I don't believe that in cvilzied society the govt wwill just come and lock people up if we wouldn't have guns but now that we have guns we are all safe. its just soo wacky and paraniod. Its not reality. And suerly not in the 21st centrury where if the govt wants they can easily over power you anyhow. Only wied hicks bileve in that kind of paranio. its just hyper nonsense.

Like i said, its not the NRA fault. And in reality a gun ban may be futile. it may have the opposite affect. Its a shame that there are so many crazies out there

Yes, and I'm sure that at one time it would have been thought to be paranoia in Venezuela too. Yet there they are. Remember the Mishnah in Avos 2:3, "Hevu zehirin barashus...."

You're also ignoring the present-day benefits of gun ownership, such as where someone with a gun stops a (potential or actual) killer. Most if not all of the recent shootings that made the news were in gun-free zones, for precisely that reason.

And so yes, if you see only the harm in the Second Amendment and not the usefulness of it, then that is precisely what Chesterton's Fence is all about, and you would do well to review the Federalist Papers and other documents relating to the adoption of the Second Amendment before commenting further on the topic.

10

Sign-in to post a comment

Click here to sign-in.

Scroll Up
Advertisements:
Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!