Senate gun bill would expand background checks
WASHINGTON (AP) — Gun control legislation the Senate debates next month will include an expansion of federal background checks for firearms buyers, Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday in a victory for advocates of gun restrictions.
The announcement underscores that Democrats intend to take an aggressive approach in the effort to broaden the checks, currently required for transactions involving federally licensed firearms dealers but not private sales at gun shows or online.
President Barack Obama and many supporters of curbing guns consider an expansion of the system to private gun sales to be the most effective response lawmakers could take in the wake of December's elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn. The system is designed to keep guns from criminals, people with serious mental problems and others considered potentially dangerous.
The overall gun measure will also include legislation boosting penalties for illegal gun trafficking and modestly expanding a grant program for school security, said Reid, D-Nev. Its fate remains uncertain, and it will all but certainly need Republican support to survive.
Reid said that during Congress' upcoming two-week break, he hopes senators will strike a bipartisan compromise on broadening background checks. Without a deal, he indicated the gun bill would include a stricter version approved this month by the Senate Judiciary Committee and authored by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., expanding the system to virtually all private gun transactions with few exceptions.
"I want to be clear: In order to be effective, any bill that passes the Senate must include background checks," Reid said in a written statement.
Opponents including the National Rifle Association say background checks are easily sidestepped by criminals and threaten creation of a government file on gun owners — which is illegal under federal law.
"We remain as committed as we have been to opposing gun bans. History shows us that gun bans don't work to reduce crimes," 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 serious mental illness 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."
If not included in the overall gun bill, an expansion of background checks could have been offered as an amendment. But that would have likely meant it would have needed support from 60 of the 100 senators to prevail — a difficult hurdle for Democrats.
Including expanded checks in the gun legislation signals either of two courses by Democrats: A feeling that they can win bipartisan support for the measure, or a willingness to essentially challenge Republicans to reject the entire gun-control package and face the political consequences in next year's elections.
It also pleases gun control backers who have said that in response to the Newtown killings, they expect Congress to do more than toughen gun trafficking penalties and boost school safety aid.
"Senator Reid's announcement is a tremendous step and we recognize there is still a tough road ahead," said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, adding that 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 City Mayor Michael Bloomberg helps lead.
Reid said during next months' debate, he will allow votes on amendments including an assault weapons ban, curbs on high-capacity ammunition magazines and mental health. There is wide-ranging agreement that many states poorly report mental health records to the federal background check system.
Days ago, supporters of gun restrictions suffered a blow when Reid decided to exclude a proposed assault weapons ban from the gun bill the Senate will debate.
Reid said the ban lacked the 60 votes it would need and including it would risk defeat of the entire package. The ban's sponsor, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., plans to offer the provision as an amendment that seems certain to lose.
In a hint of possible movement, Schumer and two other senators who have spent weeks searching for a bipartisan deal are considering several options, including requiring background checks and record keeping for private sales at gun shows and commercial sales online. It would exclude in-person, non-commercial transactions between people who know each other. The idea was described by a lobbyist 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.
Besides Schumer, the Senate's No. 2 Democratic leader, other senators involved are moderate Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who has an NRA A-rating for his votes, and moderate Republican Mark Kirk of Illinois.
Schumer has been insisting 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.
On Thursday, Bloomberg stepped up pressure on Congress to expand background checks, saying it would save lives and win broad public support.
"The only question is whether Congress will have the courage to do the right thing, or whether they will allow more innocent people, including innocent children, to be gunned down," he said at a New York news conference.
"It's time for the political establishment to show the courage your daughter showed," said Vice President Joe Biden, standing beside Bloomberg and motioning to the nearby family of a substitute teacher among 26 first-graders and educators killed at Newtown.
Biden later sent a Tweet thanking Reid for his decision.
___
Associated Press writer Jennifer Peltz in New York contributed to this report.
The announcement underscores that Democrats intend to take an aggressive approach in the effort to broaden the checks, currently required for transactions involving federally licensed firearms dealers but not private sales at gun shows or online.
President Barack Obama and many supporters of curbing guns consider an expansion of the system to private gun sales to be the most effective response lawmakers could take in the wake of December's elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn. The system is designed to keep guns from criminals, people with serious mental problems and others considered potentially dangerous.
The overall gun measure will also include legislation boosting penalties for illegal gun trafficking and modestly expanding a grant program for school security, said Reid, D-Nev. Its fate remains uncertain, and it will all but certainly need Republican support to survive.
Reid said that during Congress' upcoming two-week break, he hopes senators will strike a bipartisan compromise on broadening background checks. Without a deal, he indicated the gun bill would include a stricter version approved this month by the Senate Judiciary Committee and authored by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., expanding the system to virtually all private gun transactions with few exceptions.
"I want to be clear: In order to be effective, any bill that passes the Senate must include background checks," Reid said in a written statement.
Opponents including the National Rifle Association say background checks are easily sidestepped by criminals and threaten creation of a government file on gun owners — which is illegal under federal law.
"We remain as committed as we have been to opposing gun bans. History shows us that gun bans don't work to reduce crimes," 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 serious mental illness 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."
If not included in the overall gun bill, an expansion of background checks could have been offered as an amendment. But that would have likely meant it would have needed support from 60 of the 100 senators to prevail — a difficult hurdle for Democrats.
Including expanded checks in the gun legislation signals either of two courses by Democrats: A feeling that they can win bipartisan support for the measure, or a willingness to essentially challenge Republicans to reject the entire gun-control package and face the political consequences in next year's elections.
It also pleases gun control backers who have said that in response to the Newtown killings, they expect Congress to do more than toughen gun trafficking penalties and boost school safety aid.
"Senator Reid's announcement is a tremendous step and we recognize there is still a tough road ahead," said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, adding that 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 City Mayor Michael Bloomberg helps lead.
Reid said during next months' debate, he will allow votes on amendments including an assault weapons ban, curbs on high-capacity ammunition magazines and mental health. There is wide-ranging agreement that many states poorly report mental health records to the federal background check system.
Days ago, supporters of gun restrictions suffered a blow when Reid decided to exclude a proposed assault weapons ban from the gun bill the Senate will debate.
Reid said the ban lacked the 60 votes it would need and including it would risk defeat of the entire package. The ban's sponsor, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., plans to offer the provision as an amendment that seems certain to lose.
In a hint of possible movement, Schumer and two other senators who have spent weeks searching for a bipartisan deal are considering several options, including requiring background checks and record keeping for private sales at gun shows and commercial sales online. It would exclude in-person, non-commercial transactions between people who know each other. The idea was described by a lobbyist 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.
Besides Schumer, the Senate's No. 2 Democratic leader, other senators involved are moderate Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who has an NRA A-rating for his votes, and moderate Republican Mark Kirk of Illinois.
Schumer has been insisting 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.
On Thursday, Bloomberg stepped up pressure on Congress to expand background checks, saying it would save lives and win broad public support.
"The only question is whether Congress will have the courage to do the right thing, or whether they will allow more innocent people, including innocent children, to be gunned down," he said at a New York news conference.
"It's time for the political establishment to show the courage your daughter showed," said Vice President Joe Biden, standing beside Bloomberg and motioning to the nearby family of a substitute teacher among 26 first-graders and educators killed at Newtown.
Biden later sent a Tweet thanking Reid for his decision.
___
Associated Press writer Jennifer Peltz in New York contributed to this report.
Anyone that subverts our Constitution or the Bill of rights should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, which should include TREASON! The punishment for TREASON should be death! The punishment should be carried out within the month of conviction!
@Freedom1267Â You realize "the punishment should be carried out within the month of conviction" violates the US Constitution, right? Â You don't get to pick and choose......
How does our government plan to background check the people who steal guns and then commit crimes?
@Unknown They don't. The plan is just to attack innocent people with onerous laws.
most of the recent gun rampage nutcases had clean backgrounds at the time they got the weapons. so what good will this do in preventing such incidents?
@Phuzz
Nothing.
This crap is "feel good", but doesn't do anything about nut cases with a weapon.
We won  the cold war against the Soviets by mutually assured destruction.  Our founders gave us this same doctrine in the second amendment in case our own government turns on us and also to outgun the criminals.  But Obama people are better red than dead cowards not live free or die believers.  Oppression sure to follow disarmament dont be bullied by leftist idiots into registration or disarmament.  They just hate your freedom and want power without any potential resistance.  Arms are the last defense against enslavement. People are evil not guns.  If police are armed  to protect and to serve it means they serve we the people and we are their bosses.  So if you trust your servant with a tool, trust yourself and if you need training, it is available.
@Ramona
MAD is an insane policy. Arm your self to the teeth and it works with a rational opponent. We are now dealing with the irrational....
@Ramona We beat the commies because we are genetically superior to them.
@TreeWizard @Ramona Well that too as well as replacing the peanut farmer. Â
"I want to be clear: In order to be effective, any bill that passes the Senate must include background checks," Reid said in a written statement.
'In a hint of possible movement, Schumer and two other senators who have spent weeks searching for a bipartisan deal are considering several options, including requiring background checks and record keeping for private sales at gun shows and commercial sales online. It would exclude in-person, non-commercial transactions between people who know each other. The idea was described by a lobbyist 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.'
I want to be clear, this bill is as functionally useless as our current Federal Congress.Â
Dude, I.. like... have known this guy since forever... he's like, my bestest buddie. So, can I buy your gun now (legally) without a background check?Â
Look, I can get behind requiring some type of background checks being required at gunshows, I could even support laws requiring passing some sort of background checks for online purchases. The innanity of the proposed depth and breadth of such laws is what is so stuuuupid to me. Then, they hang loopholes big enough that even a law abiding citizen such as myself can see the potential for exploitation of them. Good phred.
 That and the 'record keeping' requirements are going to be pretty much a deal killer for the NRA and it's pet Congresspersons.Â
I suppose I support background checks but I know from personal experience that I've purchased my guns from friends and friends of friends.I own four firearms that I purchased without a background check.It's a given that the bad guys simply go the same route as myself.
@noneofyourbizzness If you're caught committing a crime while in possession of any of those weapons, it should be an automatic 10 years added to your sentence.
@badcat @noneofyourbizzness *standing ovation*
I FULLY support that idea.Â
Anyone caught illegally in possession of a firearm, BAM, automatic 5 year sentence.Â
Anyone caught illegally in possession of a firearm used in the commission of a crime, BAM, automatic 10 year sentence.Â
These sentences are in addition to sentences applied for any other crimes committed, and cannot be served concurrently to additional sentencing.Â
Of course, the inevitable question then becomes how to fund the exponential increase in prison populations.Â
@Sundowner @Unknown @MarkKpic Yes and no. I mean, I get the 'hard line' idealism when it comes to guns and criminal element, but as M11 has shows us, there is no 'magic pill' when it comes to solving criminal behaviors. There has been an exponential increase in the cost of the states prisons because of the influx of M11 convicts, but there has been no major concurrent decrease in crime rates that doesn't mirror national trends. So, it's not as simple as saying lock 'em up, that will solve the problem.Â
 The other elephant in the room is how the money is spend in regards to prisons. As with any public agency, there is good evidence to suggest that much of the increase in cost doesn't open more beds, it just increases salaries and benefits packages.Â
I read an interesting study that sought to answer the question of the decrease in major gun violence and crime rates in NY about a decade or so ago. One of the key conclusions was that the zero-tollerance automatic sentencing of gun crimes did have an effect. Although, one thing that wasn't studied was the increase in social services costs because of the corresponding rise in unemployable convicted felons.Â
@Unknown @MarkKpic If that's what your concern is, maybe that attitude is part of the problem?  At some point people are either going to need to put their money where their mouth is or shut up.
@MarkKpic How much will that 10 years of incarceration cost the taxpayers?
@badcat @noneofyourbizzness I don't have any immediate plans to commit any crimes with or without my guns.All of my guns have been purchased from people in L.E btw
@noneofyourbizzness You're more likely to be killed by law enforcement than you are a civilian.
@noneofyourbizzness That's good.
The bill will never get through the House.
@RalphCramden I doubt it gets through the Senate Ralph. Predictably, Reid dropped the AWB so as to not force anyone to go on record with an anti-firearm vote into 2014. If anything makes it to the House, it will die there.Â
The damage is done in my opinion, Democrats will die on the gun control hill they've been led to by their leader.
The Senate Democrats know they're playing with fire, all puns intended.
@Torino_v2
Many of the southern democrats know they better not vote for this is they want to get reelected. A lot of them have an A rating from the NRA.
"In a hint of possible movement, Schumer and two other senators who have spent weeks searching for a bipartisan deal are considering several options, including requiring background checks and record keeping for private sales at gun shows and commercial sales online. It would exclude in-person, non-commercial transactions between people who know each other."
Now you're cooking with gas Chucky.
 On Thursday, Bloomberg stepped up pressure on Congress to expand background checks, saying it would save lives and win broad public support.
"The only question is whether Congress will have the courage to do the right thing, or whether they will allow more innocent people, including innocent children, to be gunned down," he said at a New York news conference.
Bloomberg, your city has a shameful crime rate, and the some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, how's that working out for you? Jerk!
Bloom & Schum, two peas in a pod.
The three times I have been a victim of gun control. The criminal had control of the gun. I had to give money to the gun control person
@tally That us usually how it works. According to criminals in Chicago Gun Control is great makes their job much easier.
All the checks in the universe would not have prevented the Sandy Hook shooting. The POS that committed that crime stole the weapons after killing his own mother, so tell me how new laws would have prevented that.  It has nothing to do with preventing crime and everything to do with more control over the subjects.  Hail to the King.
Harry Reid is a pitiful excuse for a representative of the people. Â But, no surprise, he's a democrat. Â
@Shadow Snake eyes.
@Shadow When you say "of the people" you mean the people of Nevada right?Â
Don't kid yourslef. If slick harry ran for office in Oregon, he would win.
@JTesla @Biker1085 I'm with you on this one, JT -- I scrolled all over looking for Davie -- didn't think he was talking to me but wasn't sure.
@JTesla, easy, easy. Care for a shot or two of Crown Royal:-). Was talking about David Wu, and no, I wasn't aiming my previous post at you ( I read and understood your post). I was talking in terms of  the majority of liberals in general, and democratic women in particular that continued to reelect Wu time and time again in the face of his reputation in Washington and his escapades here in Oregon. As you pointed out in your next post...." elected that patsy Bonomici." I know you didn't support Wu from your first post, and obviously you've made clear you don't care much for Bonomici either. I should have clarified my previous post better. Â
@Biker1085Â What the hell are you talking about? Are you addressing me, or Sundowner, who's Davie Boy? Then somehow I elected that patsy Bonamici. Either lay off the booze, or share it with the rest of us.
Oh yes Davie boy. The liberals poster child of what the perfect little "progressive" should be........big spender, catatonic stare into space, hit and run driver (that's okay, all libs are bad drivers, most couldn't find their car engine if their life depended on it), hit on various women (just like your buddy "ahh feeel your painnnn"). Then you doinks (women in Wu's district) turn around and elect Bonomeechi. Her husband was the attorney that defended Wu all these years from facing up to his misconduct to all of those women. Why aren't democratic women outraged over that. You libs would be all over that like a fly on s**t if a Republican couple was involved in the same senario. Â
@Sendero Works for me.  He can take the job my "representative" has -- Walden. Â
@Sendero How am I kidding myself? The Congressional district I'm in re-elected a clown in a tiger suit who had zero respect in Washington DC, of course we'd elect Reid. It doesn't change the fact that the people Reid represents are the people of Nevada.
Anything Schumer is involved in crafting should be quickly tabled. As former Senator Gordon Smith once opined, he is "......not sure the Senate is better for him (Schumer) having been there...."  Schumer is one of the worst influence peddlers and shake down artists in the Senate. Makes both of the Chicago windbags (Jesse Sr. & Jr.) look like choir boys in comparison.
@Biker1085Â Are you talking about the same Senator Gordon Smith who finally gained some wisdom and came out against the war in Iraq? Â That guy? Â Yeah, you Republicans didn't even support him in his last election bid. Â Personally, I admired him after the stand he took against the war, but I guess you guys didn't. Â Nice to see you're finally liking him now.
@ Sundowner. You imply the Iraq war was completely without merit.......Ever hear of the "Arab Spring"?......Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria soon, Iran next. 50 years from now it will be looked on as one of the most far-sighted positive steps taken by an American administration. Maybe you remember Reagan consigning communism in East Europe and the Soviet Union to the ash heap of history. And you have a problem with what.....Â
@badcat. Oh, so the US was supporting Quaddaffi in Libya and the Taliban in Afghanistan?  And we are supporting elAssad, and Ahmedinijad currently?? News to me. We supported Hussein in Iraq until the mid 80's. Egypt with Mubarak, I'll give you that one. Reagan sure had a close relationship with Gorbachav  and Angela Merkel of East Germany to name a couple, among many in Eastern Europe that admired him.  Time will tell in the Middle East. If you are so against intervention in Middle east politics, why don't you and your fellow dems tell Barry to quit snuggling up to Netanyahoo. Oh that's right four out five American Jews supported Barry, can't go against the grain and challenge AIPAC. After all we need to have American Jews keep thinking that our foreign policy is controlled from Tel Aviv. As far as W isn't invited to certain "official ceremonies", who cares.......
@badcat @Biker1085 So he took the whole "My Pet Goat" thing seriously?  I love it when I learn something new every day. Â
@Biker1085Right, because the Arab Spring didn't undermine 50 years of American intervention in Middle East politics and supporting the dictators that were taken down. LOL  Ever wonder why W isn't invited to any official ceremonies? He always seems strangely absent, no? Oh, maybe this is why.... http://www.theonion.com/articles/george-w-bush-returns-to-america-after-spending-4,29688/
@Biker1085Â So the Iraq war was good because it brought Twitter to people many years after it was over? Interesting.
@Sundowner I voted for him Smith every time he ran for the Senate, I certainly wouldn't have voted for Merkle, Wyden or Bradbury. As Smith said in the debates..."I'll put my record up as an eastern oregon businessman, against your record (Merkle) as an east portland landlord."
"Schumer has been insisting on record keeping for all private gun sales, saying the files are needed to keep the system effective."
That's called registration.
@HuskyKMAÂ Registration leads to confiscation.
@Jeremy @HuskyKMA --- Registration leads to confiscation = civil war
@badcat @The ResistanceÂ
That's why we were able to defeat the North Vietnamese in just a few weeks and the Taliban in less than a day.
Oh, wait a minute ..........
Even if the government did come for our guns,  do you really think a soldier from Oregon or Washington would shoot people from Eugene or Spokane? Or would the military  revert to Civil War era organization and use  the 27th Massachusetts to invade the PNW?
@The Resistance Yeah, keep your AR-15s locked and loaded. They'll help defend against napalm and cruise missiles.