Quantcast
  

Thursday, April 24, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 6 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Reid: Background checks will be in Senate gun bill

By Alan Fram

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 04:50 a.m. HST, Mar 22, 2013


WASHINGTON » Democrats who vowed a crackdown on guns after the horrific Newtown, Conn., school shooting are touting prospects for Senate passage of expanded federal background checks, even as they acknowledge there isn't enough support to restore a ban on assault-style weapons.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday that a measure likely to be debated in his chamber next month will include tougher laws and stiffer sentences for gun trafficking and increased school safety grants.

Closing background check loopholes will be the core of the legislation, just as it was the cornerstone of President Barack Obama's proposals for stemming gun violence following the December slayings of 20 first-graders and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

Including expanded checks in the gun legislation signals that Democrats feel they can win bipartisan support for the measure or are happy to dare Republicans to reject the entire gun-control package and face political consequences in next year's elections.

Reid, D-Nev., said he hoped a trio of senators would craft a bipartisan background check compromise. If not, he said, senators would consider a stricter version that allows fewer exemptions approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote.

"This moves the ball forward on gun safety in the Senate," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., one of the senators hunting a background check deal.

Schumer said he hoped an accord could be ready when the Senate returns from its upcoming two-week spring break. Moderate Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., who has an A-rating from the National Rifle Association, and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., are also involved.

The background check system is aimed at preventing criminals and others from acquiring firearms. It currently applies only to sales by federally licensed gun dealers, not private transactions at gun shows or online.

The fate of the overall legislation remains uncertain, with Democrats all but sure to need Republican support for it to survive. Action would then shift to the GOP-run House, where leaders have shown no taste for expanding background checks for private purchases.

Earlier, Reid decided to exclude a proposed assault weapons ban from the bill, fearing it would sink the legislation, but will allow a vote on the plan as an amendment. The ban's sponsor, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., seems sure to lose due to opposition from Republicans and moderate Democrats.

An Associated Press-GfK poll showed more than 8 in 10 people support broadening the background check requirement to gun shows. Other surveys show similar overwhelming support.

Critics appeared unbowed. The NRA and others say criminals ignore background checks in getting guns illegally, and warn the expansion would lead to a federal registry of gun owners.

"We remain as committed as we have been to opposing gun bans," said Andrew Arulanandam, an NRA spokesman. He declined to comment on a potential compromise but said if the Senate considers Schumer's version of background checks, "we will do whatever we can to defeat it."

The NRA wants Congress to fund more armed guards at schools, step up prosecutions of people who file false gun applications and increase the background check system's access to state records of people with mental and other problems.

Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said of Reid's announcement, "I don't know how the leader expects members to vote on an ever-changing piece of legislation that has yet to gain bipartisan support."

In a hint of possible movement, one option that Schumer, Manchin and Kirk are considering would require background checks and record-keeping for private sales at gun shows and commercial sales online. It would exclude in-person, noncommercial transactions between people who know each other. The idea was described by two lobbyists and Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private talks.

Other exclusions could include gun transactions between relatives and acquisitions by people with state-issued concealed carry permits, and there would be an online background check system for people in remote areas. Veterans officially determined to have some psychological problems would be given a way to appeal that decision, which would otherwise bar them from getting firearms.

Schumer has insisted on record-keeping for all private gun sales, saying the files are needed to keep the system effective. That led to stalemated talks with conservative leader Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who says the data would lead to federal records on gun owners.

If not included in the overall gun bill, an expansion of background checks could have been offered as an amendment. It likely would have needed support from 60 of the 100 senators to prevail — a difficult hurdle for Democrats.

"In order to be effective, any bill that passes the Senate must include background checks," Reid said in a written statement.

Gun control backers lauded the decision. Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, called it "a tremendous step and we recognize there is still a tough road ahead." He said his group would activate supporters to contact lawmakers.

"The majority leader's been a pretty steady guide throughout, and this a good example," said Mark Glaze, director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a group New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg helps lead.

Reid said that besides the assault weapons ban, he will allow votes on amendments including those related to high-capacity ammunition magazines and mental health. Many states poorly report mental health records to the federal background check system.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 6 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(6)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
soshaljustic wrote:
It seems pretty obvious, background checks are the way to go in keeping the questionable and illegal owner from owning a gun. I do not understand why a background check can be done to prevent someone from voting while a background check is such a difficult measure to pass for a republican lawmaker? One leaves the general (usually democratic) citizen at risk of being shot and maimed or murdered while the other leaves the democrat politician at risk of a vote. What is wrong with those Republicans, can't they see that dilemma?
on March 22,2013 | 07:10AM
serious wrote:
Reid just got reelected so he's safe for 6 years, Schumer is not running for reelection so they have no fears from the NRA. I don't think background checks would have stopped the killings in Conn or CO. Look at the murder capitals of the USA! Chicago, Detroit, DC all vote 100% (D), I think all D's should have a background check starting from the top.
on March 22,2013 | 08:40AM
Changalang wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on March 22,2013 | 07:34AM
pcman wrote:
My concern is that any "clean" person that might have the same name as a "bad guy" will be screwed, blued and tatooed. Like people on the TSA "No Fly" list, who is going to defend the good guys on the new federated list who already own guns and others who might want to own guns?
on March 22,2013 | 08:41AM
LanaUlulani wrote:

Except criminals have NO respect for laws. They find ways to hurt people and/or property. NO LAW WILL STOP THEM FROM COMMITTING CRIMES Period!

Me personally I do not want the federal government to know what kind of guns I HAVE. Reid wants INNOCENT PEOPLE like me to pay for what the GUILTY criminals do. Auwe. SHAMEFUL.


on March 22,2013 | 08:57AM
soshaljustic wrote:
Take a cue from car registration then-mandatory insurance on all firearms and registration if that is what it takes to get legal gun owners. Yes, car owners need not be legal either. Fact is the criminal will always be illegal once the criminal starts on that pathway in life, therefore begging the needed registration. Got a beef with that? Do not blame the politician, find a criminal and vent!
on March 22,2013 | 09:11AM
LanaUlulani wrote:


Driving is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT !

STATES RIGHTS prevail. Read the 2nd and 10th Amendments to the CONSTITUTION before preaching with your paternalistic. B.S.


on March 22,2013 | 09:15AM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs
Political Radar
Wait

Political Radar
Second request

Political Radar
Tipped

Warrior Beat
One last fling

Political Radar
Phased in

Political Radar
Palolo v. Pauoa