Latest News

June 13, 2022

Sunday, a group of 10 Senate Republicans and 10 Democrats announced that they had reached a “breakthrough” deal on a "framework" of new gun laws. It’s not yet in the form of legislation. It doesn’t ban any particular guns, the way many Democrats want; but it includes money for mental health and school security, it would add juvenile records to background checks for any gun buyers under 21, it would deny guns to people convicted of domestic violence, and it includes grants for states to institute “red flag” laws. 

These Republicans argue that it would be easier for people caught in red flag laws to appeal on the state level, but I’d say that depends on the state. Some of the provisions are sensible, like increasing school security, while others sound sensible on the surface but wouldn’t have prevented recent school shootings (for instance, most of the shooters didn’t have anything on their records for a background check to catch.)

Even though having the support of 10 Republicans might seem to make this a slam dunk in the Senate, it’s not clear whether Democrats who are pushing for much more radical plans will settle for it, or whether these Republicans will all stand firm after they hear from their constituents, or after they see what Democrats might try to add to it. And it will take 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

In the meantime, conservative commentators are wondering why Republicans so close to a midterm election would want to tick off their constituents by backing new anti-gun laws that are wildly unpopular with them? (Daniel Horowitz, senior editor at The Blaze, noticed that of those 10 GOP Senators, four are retiring and none of the others are running for reelection this year. Coincidence?)

Even laws as seemingly reasonable as red flag laws can be abused to deny Second Amendment rights to someone who’s done nothing wrong. Good luck trying to convince Republican voters that they can trust the government never to falsely brand them as dangerous extremists or domestic terrorists.

The NRA issued a statement, but declined to go into detail until the “framework” actually becomes a piece of legislation.

At these links, Rick Moran of PJ Media and Spencer Brown of have more thoughts on this subject.

And Kevin Downey of PJ Media goes further, pointing out that Democrat DA’s aren’t even trying to arrest and lock up the people who are committing the vast majority of shootings. They call it “social justice” or “justice reform,” but Downey’s theory is that leftist DA’s have deliberately created a crime wave to give them an excuse to disarm the law-abiding.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Democrat ideas

Election interference

“Not This (BLEEP) Again!”

Biden to Morehouse College

Comments 1-10 of 21

  • George Elledge

    06/15/2022 06:04 PM

    I like your format. I need your help. My wife and I are both in our over mid 70s and like very little about the America we see changing in plain sight. In addition to writing e-mails and making phone calls to our Texas US Senators and Reps what else can or should we being doing.

    This red flag legislation really concerns me.

  • Rebecca Whitney

    06/15/2022 06:06 AM

    This sounds like a set up to me.
    America does not need more gun laws. Guns are NOT the problem.
    We don't need a "law" to protect schools.
    The answer lies in effective law enforcement, prosecution and punishment.
    The BASE of what is happening in America today starts with the family.
    The really BIG problem is the people who are pushing America to be a socialist nation.
    The base of that is Greed, money and power.

  • Warren Whitby

    06/14/2022 07:58 AM

    Mike, Mr. Horowitz from The Blaze is correct. All this will do is to make the Republican base angry. I am already hearing from several people I know who have said that if the Republicans pass any gun control, they are staying home in November. Gun Control and Abortion are the third rail for Republican politics. Support either of those, and you will lose votes.

  • Jai Jacobia

    06/14/2022 04:20 AM

    Allowing undefined "Red Flag" gun laws covered up with the jan 6 publicity stunt to become law is as stupid as allowing so-called journalists to call demonstrations "riots," citizens peacefully exercising their right to present grievances in the "People's House," alsi called the U.S. (Our) Capital Building, "mobs," call damage to a mere Building "violence," and blaming any crimes on the Proud Boys, etc. without using facial recognition prograns to prove it was more likely Soros' recycled BLM mobs and/or Antifa while allowing the same so called journalists in the name of conservatism to IGNORE the worst and possibly the only real violence, the murder of Ashli Babbit, undeniable only because it is reportedly "anonymously" on film.
    Liberals are using the same tactic that worked well with suspicion of Obama's fake birth certificate which is now never seen in print unless preceded by the over used adjective, "false."
    Expect the same with the ambiguous term, "Red Flag" all too easily corrupted to mean whatever is politically advantageous at the time . But the stupid never learn. We prefer to whine about how we - and our country - have been screwed AGAIN!

  • Ann Smith

    06/13/2022 07:10 PM

    One thing that I am afraid of is that the government is going to keep chipping away at our rights, little by little and before you know it you don't have any rights anymore. I am all for more mental health and school security, that should be addressed. The Red Flag law looks like a bureaucratic nightmare. Can you imagine trying to keep tabs of all the people that are sending in tips? Some might be valid but I imagine lots will be from people that are holding a grudge against another person. Sounds good on paper but in reality not so enforceable. So if you are labeled a domestic terrorist because you went to your child's school board meeting or sent an email asking for accountability will you be denied access to purchasing a weapon? I am not sure about the straw purchase? If I want to buy a gun for a family member for a present will I be prohibited? The straw purchase is sort of a gray area. I understand it but the wording is not specific from what I read.

  • Mark Hannah

    06/13/2022 06:55 PM

    The right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable natural right. Therefore, it can NEVER be taken and it is NOT granted by any government at any level, federal, state, or local. It exists within the U.S. Constitution as an enumeration of some, but not all, of the inalienable rights that the federal government is required to help citizens protect. If any state, local government, or another citizen tries to take away any of these inalienable rights, the federal government has the power, authority, and duty to help you protect them. If the federal government attempts to violate any of these inalienable rights, they have violated your inalienable rights, the public trust, and the contract that is U.S. Constitution, and in doing so has abrogated their privilege of governing us. Furthermore, as inalienable rights, if any future amendment was passed, it would only absolve the federal government of helping citizens protect them, the citizens will still keep their inalienable rights forever.

  • Robert Laverdure

    06/13/2022 05:15 PM

    As far as I'm concerned they can pass all the new "control" laws they want to.
    The laws will just hurt the law abiding citizens. If some loony wants a gun he or she will obtain it.
    I do oppose the "red flag" laws. All it takes is another person calling law enforcement and saying you are a potential threat. This could be an x girl friend, an x wife, a neighbor that doesn't like the color of your grass, or anyone you might have pissed off. Then the law confiscates your weapons with no reasonable articulable suspicion of your mental state. Then it will cost the victim a barrel of money to maybe get his property back and clear his name.

  • Sheldon Sturtevant

    06/13/2022 05:13 PM

    Why have we not been given any of the back story on the Texas shooter such as immigration status his parents immigration status, and how and were did he acquire his arsenal. Thanks for your newsletter it’s great!

  • Gloria Carol Thomas

    06/13/2022 04:52 PM

    I agree that the leftist DA's may be behind a lot of these shootings just to cause anyone from having a gun even law-abiding citizens! I've often wondered as much as I hate to say it, it would not surprise me if the left in general could have a lot to do even with the school shootings if they don't care about unborn babies why should they care about children in general! I'm just say'n!

  • John M Doudna

    06/13/2022 04:15 PM

    Every time a 'law' gets made it takes away freedoms of the law-abiding and the responsibility/accountability of those who already have broken laws and are most likely to ignore any new ones. Absolutely applies to every attempt made to disarm U.S.
    citizens. All members of Congress must be held accountable for refusing to do the work they swore to do -- serve and defend the Constitution and this country's lawful citizens.