Biden's found 10 Republican Senators to vote for reasonable gun control, what do you think?

[goaded]

"A cross-party group of US senators say they have agreed a framework for potential legislation on gun safety.
The measures would include support for tougher background checks for buyers under the age of 21 and cracking down on illegal gun purchases.
Crucially, the proposals are supported by 10 Republicans, meaning they have the numbers to be voted into law.
President Biden said the plans were "steps in the right direction" but they fall far short of what he called for."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61777310

No anonymous opinions; say it, own it!

Anybody could have done it

It's impressive

Don't know, see results

[BCA6010]

Overall it's not terrible, but it's largely the usual scummy politician crap that looks good on paper, but is really just money exchanging hands.

The under-21 background check expansion opens up juvie records, which historically are basically discarded at the time of becoming a legal adult. There would also likely be an unspecified wait time for those checks to clear. This means even if it were enacted today, there would be about 3 years worth of young adults still being basically grandfathered past it. Aside from that issue though, I think it's a good idea as personally I think crimes committed before becoming a legal adult should still be factors in a background check and shouldn't just magically disappear regardless.

Now the parts you aren't mentioning: federal funding offered to states to implement their own red flag laws, funding for mental health, and funding for increased school security. None of these go into specifics, which is fine, but it's also where the meat and potatoes of the proposal actually are.

Red Flag laws are themselves very problematic because of how easily they can be abused. The proposal here is that it's an optional grant and red flags must be issued by a judge. That sounds fine, but appointed judges are frequently political hacks funded by rich oligarchs like George Soros and the Kochs, so the avenue for abuse is already paved. They've also been largely ineffective in states that they already exist, such as New York, though preserving juvie records up through 21 could help in that regard.

Throwing money vaguely at mental health to open up large numbers of small clinics (the main proposal) is "better than nothing," but accessibility to mental health resources isn't the problem; it's that most people, especially men, will not seek it out in the first place, and Furthermore, the US approach to mental health heavily revolves around medication (pharma) rather than making active attempts to change people's outlook on life and worldview. This one is pretty transparent, because money that gets funneled into pharma comes right back to the house and Senate through lobbyists to the tune of approximately 25 times as much money as the gun lobby on any given year. I guarantee this is also the selling point because the politicians know that they can personally profit from it.

The problem with throwing money at schools for security is the lack of strings attached. They could easily address this one by setting minimum standards of what sorts of security hardening must be in every public school, but it's very likely that the teachers union and other lobbies will ensure that they have the ability to spend (or pocket) the money as they see fit, one way or another. Schools in Texas already received funding for this purpose and yet Uvalde had done none of it, and there's no way they're the only ones.

[RolandCuthbert]

I will have to spend some time looking at the measures.

I would like to see something results based. Legislation and an approach that makes a commitment to lowering the amount of gun violence every single year.

But I can't see the Republican party in its current state supporting anything tied to results.

[CrazyGirl2]

I think it’s a compromise, and that is always a good thing in politics! If both parties walk away from the table believing that they’ve lost something, laws will get made! Politics in general is sleazy. Finding a solution to a problem without punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty, is not easy… especially when you are negotiating over a solemn right.

[exitseven]

The democrats will make this alliance fall apart then they will blame the Republicans.

[Anonymous]

I think you should spend your time talking about politics in your own country. 🤷‍♂️

[goaded]

No-one's forcing you to read it.

[Jamie05rhs]

The BBC article was vague. The other article I read was also vague.
I'd like to see details.

[SlightlyEccentric]

Media doesn't care about details. Only care about instilling fear and paranoia to push an agenda.

[Snakeyes7]

Most of the republcan politicians in Congress are spineless so this isn't surprising at all.

[OldWorldOrder]

I think this whole thing is a laughable parade that will save nobody lol

[goaded]

You don't think its the thin end of the wedge that will take away all guns?

[OldWorldOrder]

You mean start a civil war? God, I sure hope so. :)

[goaded]

Thought you might.

[msc545]

There will never be any gun control.

[goaded]

There has been in the past, why shouldn't there be in the future? The NRA used to be about hunting and firearm safety, now it's about being against anything stopping people playing soldier, even if the targets are children. That can change back, although I don't hold out much hope.

[msc545]

Nobody will risk provoking a million rednecks to starting yet another insurrection.

[KrakenAttackin]

Those RINO's need to be ejected.

[goaded]

Bazookas for everyone!