South Florida Sun-Sentinel (Sunday)
On guns, Republican Florida Legislature surpasses Democratic-held Congress
Florida did more to stop gun violence after one school shooting than Congress is likely to do after a two-decades-plus string of school shootings and nationwide firearm carnage.
The bipartisan framework that emerged from post-Uvalde Senate negotiations would allocate money for more mental health services. It would slightly tighten background checks for those under 21 seeking to buy military-style rifles. It would encourage states — by offering federal money — to pass red-flag laws. It would close the “boyfriend loophole” for firearms purchases, possibly preventing all domestic abusers — not just husbands — from possessing firearms.
That’s it.
The legislation would not expand background checks to close loopholes for sales at gun shows and online, despite strong bipartisan support for doing so. It would not ban the sale of large-capacity magazines —more than 10 rounds — that have been used in so many mass shootings.
Most important, it would not ban the sale of those military-style weapons to people under 21 — even though 18-yearolds used them in the Buffalo and Uvalde massacres. Daniel Defense, maker of the Uvalde weapon, marketed it to young people.
Few state legislatures have genuflected before the National Rifle Association like Florida’s. Thirty-five years ago, Tallahassee preempted firearms regulation to the state. Florida became the first state to pass a “stand your ground” law. Marion Hammer, the Second Amendment zealot and state NRA lobbyist who recently announced her retirement, is in the Florida Women’s Hall of Fame.
Yet in 2018, after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting, the Legislature banned the sale of military-style rifles to those under 21, with exemptions for law enforcement and active-duty military. The Stoneman Douglas shooter used such a weapon.
In addition, the Legislature approved a red-flag law. It allows judges to prevent the possession or purchase of firearms by those whom law enforcement considers to be a danger to themselves or others.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., was one of the main negotiators on the Senate proposal. “The Florida law,” Murphy said, “is a good law, and it’s a signal of what’s possible.” Law enforcement has used it roughly 5,000 times.
Then-Gov. Rick Scott, now Florida’s junior senator, signed that bill. Scott did so even though he had granted Hammer and the NRA every other favor they wanted, such as expanding “stand your ground” to a degree that even many Republican state attorneys opposed.
But the passion of Stoneman Douglas students and victims’ families who demanded action overcame that NRA allegiance. The slaughter of 20 first-graders at Sandy Hook School in 2012 wasn’t enough to motivate Republicans in Congress, notably Marco Rubio. The slaughter of 17 high-schoolers was enough to motivate Republicans in Tallahassee.
Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, backed the current proposal, which still must be written into a bill. He called it a “start,” adding, “It can
and will make our country safer.”
He’s right about the second part, but only because Congress has done nothing on gun violence prevention since the Columbine High School shooting in 1999. So let’s be clear about the politics.
Any proposal would have to overcome a Senate filibuster. That requires 10 Republicans to agree. And they won’t agree unless Minority Leader Mitch McConnell agrees.
McConnell backs this proposal. So McConnell believes that the deal goes far enough to pretend that Republicans care about public safety but not far enough in an election year to anger the Second Amendment hard cases in the party’s base who consider violence an acceptable form of political protest.
Of the 10 Republican senators who participated in the discussions, four are retiring. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota likely reflected the GOP caucus’ overall attitude when he said that Republicans were interested more in a “red wave” — success this November — than in “red flags.” They want to talk about anything but the weapons without which this carnage could not happen.
Sadly, even if Congress responded like Florida, the NRA might win in the end. The NRA challenged the state’s 2018 law and lost at trial. But the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard arguments in March, is filled with Trump appointees. The NRA claims that the “well-armed” militia language of the Second Amendment allows 18-year-olds to arm themselves with battlefield weapons.
We don’t often say that the Florida Legislature is a good model for the country. On protecting children, though, Congress will come up way short of Tallahassee.