The Schumer’s Seek Expanded Gun Control Legislation

As reported in Time

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and his distant cousin, Amy Schumer, speak during a news conference in New York, Monday, Aug. 3, 2015. The Schumers are teaming up to try and enact gun control regulations. They cited the recent shooting in a Louisiana movie theater that killed two women and injured nine others during a screening of the movie "Trainwreck" starring Amy Schumer. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and his distant cousin, Amy Schumer, speak during a news conference in New York, Monday, Aug. 3, 2015. The Schumers are teaming up to try and enact gun control regulations. They cited the recent shooting in a Louisiana movie theater that killed two women and injured nine others during a screening of the movie “Trainwreck” starring Amy Schumer. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

Comedian Amy Schumer and U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer are teaming up to call for stricter gun laws, appearing together on Sunday in New York to push for expanded gun control legislation.

The Schumers, who are cousins, first announced their collaboration earlier this year after a deadly shooting in a Louisiana theater, where Amy’s movie Trainwreck was being screened.

“I don’t know why he picked my movie but … it’s something that I live with every day and I vowed to never forget the two lives that were tragically lost: Jillian Johnson, who was 33, and Mayci Breaux, who was just 21-years-old. These women are forever in my heart,” Schumer said on Sunday, the New York Daily News reports.

Sen. Chuck Schumer is pushing a proposal to prevent violent criminals, abusers and those with severe mental illnesses from purchasing firearms.

My Editorial Opinion

During this active political campaign for the White House, in addition to general debates and discussion on the issue of gun control, people bring up state rights to legislate their own gun laws.  In almost the same breath, the 2nd Amendment of the constitution is mentioned.  When will they stop being hypocrites and do something instead of passing the proverbial buck?  If it’s a constitutional amendment that allows citizens to bear arms, then it’s federal, and if it’s federal, then legislating gun control is under federal jurisdiction.

bernie-sanders-AP-640x480

Bernie Sanders

Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is campaigning for President, is known for a moderate record on gun control in hunting-friendly Vermont. Recently however, he called for extended federal background checks and ending of the sale and distribution of semi-automatic weapons whose “only goal is to kill people.”

Because the states are all over the place when it comes to guns, a federal law is necessary.   A federal registry would be a one-stop place for background checks and to license gun ownership. State law can then control if the owner complies with conceal carry licenses.

Enforcing laws where guns are found or used then becomes easier, as the lack of having a federal license to own a gun can be enforced.  It might also make it easier on law enforcement, because that data base should be available to them the same as how they check for ownership of vehicles and outstanding warrants.   Asking a suspect to place their gun on the ground or such, might result in less lives being taken on the basis of fearing that the suspect might have a gun.   In other words, it narrows down the number of persons not in the data base who law enforcement has a need to fear the unlawful possession of a weapon.

 

 

Posted on 10/27/2015, in Conceal Carry & SYG, Gun Control and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 20 Comments.

  1. Chuck Schumer has been a long time advocate for gun control I wrote a report on him back in College for my Poli Sci course.

    in 1994 he sponsored The Brady Bill which required waiting periods for gun purchases
    in that same year he also sponsored The Gun Violence prevention act

    again in 1994 he sponsored the Violent crime Control and Law Enforcement act which banned the manufacture and possession of Semi Automatic rifles known as Assault Rifles

    in 2000 he sponsored the Firearm licensing and record of sale act

    in 2003 he introduced legislation that would reauthorize the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, and, close a loophole in the law that allows large-capacity ammunition magazines to be imported into the U.S. The ban expired in September, 2004.

    later in 2003 he sponsored the 1974 bill designed to stop sunset ending the undetectable firearms act of 1988

    Liked by 3 people

  2. i support our natural rights 100% “gun control” is an attempt to deny a person the natural right to self defense, IF weapons are illegal then there can be NO right to LIFE itself, since an honest person has no means of defense against the criminals.

    Like

    • I don’t know Bill. First, I don’t think that gun control is the same as making guns illegal, anymore than I see that the revoking of a driver’s license for drunk driving makes vehicles illegal. Second, I can see how the phrase “gun control” is applied to guns, but it actually applies to people who should not have guns. Third, the apprehension of self-defense against criminals is not a situation that the average person can handle on the streets or in public anyway. Protecting the home? Sure.

      We have already experienced how people who kill others in public places make-up a defense that they thought their life was in danger when the facts are that they would not have done what they did, leading to the killing, had they not a gun. It’s like the person who drinks to give them courage. The gun gives SOME people courage to place themselves in situations that they would avoid if not for the gun. The entire population should not be punished because others have no respect for life, so background checks are necessary to weed those out who have no business legally owning a weapon.

      Liked by 3 people

      • ty for the well thought response, but the fact remains background checks nor any other law stops a criminal from acquiring a gun……

        Liked by 2 people

        • Bill,
          That is true, which is why the ways that guns are sold have become a focus most recently. Just the other week I blogged about a gun shop that was sued for selling a gun to a man who actually bought it for another guy, who used it and wounded two cops.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Two sides to a story

          I didn’t mean to like this, LOL!

          No one yelled about losing rights when we had more restrictive gun control laws in this country . . . they seemed to work well, too.

          Saying that we should have no controls just because criminals can find ways to get hold of guns is like saying we should have a big free-for-all with automobiles and stop registering them and issuing drivers’ licenses. Of course there will always be lawbreakers, but you decrease the chances that criminals can obtains with background checks and other measure that prevent them from falling into the wrong hands, in just the same way that you keep an eye on vehicular safety with auto registration and driving licenses.

          Liked by 3 people

        • scrodriguez

          but it makes it harder for them and thats whats needed

          Like

        • scrodriguez

          Sure background checks do not stop them from getting guns but check this out our border patrol agents dont stop people from crossing over illegally but we still have them there dont we?
          Our border patrol agents dont stop all the drugs from reaching US Soil but we still have them. Laws dont prevent crimes from happening but we still have them, cops dont secure crimes from being committed but we still have cops.
          You will never prevent things 100% but you can make it a bit more difficult for the wrong people to obtain guns and thats the point. The only people crying about Gun control are those who likely shouldnt have a gun in the first place.

          Like

          • Santiago

            The only people crying about Gun control are those who likely shouldnt have a gun in the first place.

            I’ve spoken with people who do not own a gun, but they are against gun control and their reason is because of crime. Uh– change that to fear of crime. Uh — change that again to an imaginary fear of crime. They have not been victims of crime or go places that are subject to crime. Their fear is that some drug dealer or “those people” are going to move into their neighborhood because of fair housing.

            I’ve taken to calling them the “George Zimmerman clan.”

            Like

      • Two sides to a story

        People who don’t have guns also have the right to be safe from those who do, and I feel this is enough to demand that there be background checks, mandatory safety classes, and any other necessary safeguards for gun ownership that make us all safer.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Two sides. I totally agree. In the same way, pedestrians want ordinances and laws that provide them with safety when crossing the street. We would not want just anyone being licensed to drive a car, nor anyone who is licensed being able to get behind the wheel when they are not sober.

          Like

    • scrodriguez

      Gun control is not about taking your guns away its about a registry program just like we register our cars, its about making sure guns do not get sold by means of straw purchases and that if guns are handed down as gifts that the new owner must register that gun its also about making sure they dont fall into the hands of people who are mentally ill I am sorry but could you imagine a man who thinks the world is out to get him gets his hands on a gun……Ohhh wait didnt that already happen somewhere in a movie theater in America?

      its also about keeping them out of the hands of criminals and limiting us to the types of guns that are actually needed for self defense, Assault rifles and weapons that are used in war should only be used in War no need for them in a personal collection at home.

      Liked by 3 people

    • The Constitution is a living breathing document intended to be amended and evolve along with the progress of America. We HAVE to do something. To do nothing is to say we don’t care, that we accept things the way they are. Most of us do not can not and will not accept that nothing can be done or that to do anything at all is an affront or limit of the 2nd A right.

      Over 4,000 weapons would be still be allowed. No one is taking away your right to defend and protect yourself. This legislation aims to prevent those with known mental illness, violent backgrounds and who are repeat abusers from having weapons.

      You as a responsible gun owner have the right to protect yourself and so do the rest of us, against being killed by those named in the legislation.

      A person with a mental illness and those who are known to be violent abusers DO NOT have more of a right to own a gun than my right, to my life.

      Liked by 4 people

  3. I had no idea Amy and the good Senator were related! I like her comedy although she can be a bit, well, what is the word I’m looking for… brash maybe? I admire Bernie Sander’s commitment to get on board with stricter background checks and limits on ammo and types of ARs

    Liked by 2 people

  4. i respect each persons opinion and right to express it and really appreciate the passion and caring but logic remains “laws” will never stop criminals from obtaining weapons…..if all guns could be removed from the earth this moment within days more would be being sold.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bill,
      Gun control and criminals getting their hands on weapons is just one part of the problem. The legislation sought is to keep others who are capable of using guns for criminal activity, even mass murderers, from acquiring guns legally. You might already know that in many cases where the defendant has acquired guns legally, there is no charge for possessing the weapon, and they can be acquitted on the crime they were arrested for. So, legislation will also give prosecutors ability to put people behind bars who are in illegal possession of a weapon.

      This issue has layers, and layers, and more layers. It takes discussion and seeing all the layers to be able to work towards resolution. I appreciate your input.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Two sides to a story

      There are credible studies that show otherwise. When gun laws are stronger and loopholes like anything goes gun shows and internet sales are closed, criminals have less access to guns too and the crime rate reflects this.

      Pro-gun people are fond of pointing out the crime rates in Chicago and other places with tough gun laws, etc. but the pipeline for guns into Chicago and other places is from neighboring states who barely control them. It’s also a fact that the more guns we have, the more tragic accidental shootings, domestic violence situations, and suicides we have. The situation isn’t just about crime. An abundance of guns breeds problems with people who should not have them. Just as some people should not have a drivers’ license or a vehicle, so some people should not own firearms. It’s not a right, it’s a privilege that comes with many responsibilities.

      Liked by 2 people

    • scrodriguez

      as I said before drug laws dont stop people from buying and selling drugs but we still have them

      Liked by 1 person

%d bloggers like this: