Republican Lawmaker Calls for Tougher Gun Laws

Send to Kindle

“Thoughts and prayers are not enough. And it’s time for action,” said congressman Bob Dold during his address before the House on Tuesday.

Dold, a Republican from Illinois, was talking about enacting tougher gun laws in the wake of the mass killing in Orlando this past weekend that left 50 dead, including the gunman.

Specifically, Dold wants the House to immediately vote on bills that would ban suspected terrorists from purchasing firearms, require universal background checks for gun transfers, enhance the background check system to notify law enforcement when someone fails a background check and expand the law as it relates to prohibiting domestic abusers from gaining access to guns.

“In short, there are numerous commonsense proposals that will keep guns out of the hands of those that should not have them, while protecting our Second Amendment rights,” Dold said.

“There is no quick and easy solution to all the problems underscored by the Orlando terrorist attack. But if we’re able to set aside partisan differences and unite in the best interests of our nation, we can make serious strides in the ongoing efforts to keep Americans safe and prevent future atrocities,” he concluded.

Maybe it goes without saying, but there are legitimate concerns or objections to all of those proposals. For example, suspected terrorists are not convicted terrorists. Giving the government the power to slap a “suspected terrorist” label on any U.S. citizen with the import that it would deprive them of basic rights, i.e. the right to keep and bear arms, without due process is opening up a huge can of worms. An extra-constitutional can of worms, at that.

Requiring universal background checks is akin to placing a tax on the 2A, as very few, if any, gun shops will process a NICS check pro bono. Notifying law enforcement every time someone fails a background check sounds good in theory, but it may be a problem of information overload as many denials may be simple glitches within the system itself.

Lastly, federal law already prohibits domestic abusers from possessing firearms. Extending the reach of the existing law to accused domestic abusers as opposed to convicted domestic abusers (or those with documented cases of domestic violence) raises the same constitutional issues as the suspected terrorists measure. Can we permanently remove a basic right from someone before they had their day in court? Long story short, each new call for tougher gun laws has to be heavily scrutinized.

Yet, lawmakers like Dold believe that is the only way forward following a tragedy like the shooting in Orlando.

“The hateful terrorist attack targeting America’s (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community in Orlando is another reminder of the pressing need to come together and work across party lines to root out terrorism, prevent gun violence and put an end to bigotry of all kinds,” he said.

“We cannot allow partisanship to define this debate,” Dold continued. “We must take decisive action and united action to ensure nothing like the attacks on Orlando, Paris, Newtown or San Bernardino ever happen again.”

While Dold may be one of few Republicans to call or more gun control, he certainly has support from lawmakers on the other side of the aisle.  The usual suspects, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer, are also aggressively making pushes to roll back the 2A rights of law-abiding citizens.

Both the senator from New York and the senator from California are pushing a version of Dold’s “suspected terrorist” bill, which would, as mentioned, give the government the power to remove one’s right to keep and bear arms if it believes one is an enemy of the state.

“There are currently nine categories of people who are prohibited from buying guns,” said Feinstein, earlier this week. “And those categories include felons, fugitives, domestic abusers, among some others. But they do not include known or suspected terrorists. And the bill we’re talking about today simply would close that loophole.

Schumer added, “If the FBI believes there’s a reasonable chance someone is going to use a gun in a terrorist attack, it should be able to make that determination and block the sale.”

“And now that we have lone wolves inspired by ISIL, even more the reason to do this than ever, ever before,” he continued.  “It made sense 10 years ago. It makes even more sense today.”

The terrorist watchlist has over 800,000 people on it.  Sure, only a small percentage are U.S. residents or legal permanent residents allowed to purchase guns, but are they all bad actors?  Do they all deserve to lose their right to keep and bear arms?  Should we trust the government to make that decision on its own?

{ 38 comments… add one }
  • Jeff June 16, 2017, 11:35 am

    Looks like Illinois needs to elect a real Republican. Dump the RINO before he really messes things op!

  • Mark From Bristol June 21, 2016, 10:31 pm

    Please everyone understand this and don’t get any wrong ideas. I am in no way a fan of or sympathetic to muslim terrorist, ISIS and the sort. They are evil people and should be done away with. And although I would never suggest such a thing and would actually suggest NOT doing it, but IF I woke up tomorrow morning and found out that during the night while I was sleeping that they came over and attacked and took over that septic tank formerly known as Washington DC and everyone in it, I would walk over to the refrigerator and drink ice cold milk right from the jug, then shave and shower, get dressed and go on with my day, with a smile and a chuckle.

  • Ron Stalnaker June 20, 2016, 2:10 pm

    As it has been proposed that punishing legal and abiding gun owners, let it also be proposed that since there are crooked politicians that all politicians should be horsed whipped at least once during their elected term. That would be fair now would it not?

  • Ron Stalnaker June 20, 2016, 2:01 pm

    As it has been proposed that punishing leagal and abiding gun owners, let it also be proposed that since there are crooked politicians that all politicians should be horsed whipped at least once during their elected term. That would be fair now would it not?

  • Carlos Jean Andrews, Sr. June 19, 2016, 7:23 pm

    If the state Representatives and Government knew what INFRINGEMENT meant and had allowed a carry law the 50 people could have been caring and there would be many still living today. They had not read the Constitution but they raised there right hand and swore to uphold the Constitution. Any person running for Public Office should have to read the Constitution and take a written test and passed with a 100% passing.

  • Larry Campbell June 19, 2016, 8:14 am

    Another piece of shit from Illinois.

  • DIYinSTL June 18, 2016, 6:34 pm

    Every time Congress rushes through a bill before the public has the opportunity to read it and weigh in, we get a crap sandwich. I smell another one coming our way.

  • Bob June 18, 2016, 8:26 am

    Doesn’t this Illinois Republican have bigger fish to fry such as the Illinois state budget crisis??? The state of Illinois is basically on the verge of going bankrupt and unable to provide pensions for a whole lot of people that thought they had actually earned a pension. How incredibly stupid that this clown feels that action has to be taken regardless of the fact that the proposed action would not have prevented the tragedy in Orlando from occurring. Focus on the real solution for this shooting which was the wife of this clown who knew he was planning this mass shooting and said nothing.

  • Veritas June 18, 2016, 1:56 am

    The gun grabbers will not give up their weapons but would deny us our rights. What other Constitutional rights would they deny to us without trial? Those that cannot prevent crime would enable those who are founders warned us against. These same individuals did nothing to prevent a radical Muslim from slaughtering Americans yet they bring these scum into the country without screening them.

    Its time to water the tree of liberty.

  • Joe McHugh June 17, 2016, 11:02 pm

    I’ll say it right now, the only people who should be denied access to firearms are the violent criminals and those adjudged to be dangerous to themselves or others. What gives the government the right to deny a citizen one of his or her constitutional rights? Try as I might, I cannot lay my finger on that article or amendment that gives legislators the right to do so.

    I’m almost certain that the Founding Fathers didn’t stipulate that violent felons and psychopathic killers shouldn’t have firearms because they actually believed that the people had common sense. Obviously, none of the Founders encountered a liberal minded automaton like the zombies who walk among us today.

    OK, I suggest that the thousands of anti gun laws, now on the Federal and state code books, be replaced by one law. That law could be written as follows: “It is illegal to threaten, injure or kill a law-abiding citizen with a firearm.” A sub-section to this law would be: “It is illegal to knowingly sell or give a firearm to a violent criminal or adjudged dangerous psychotic.

    It would help somewhat, if the Supreme Court of the United States would rule that the Second Amendment to the Constitution describes the right of all competent, law-abiding adult citizens to keep and bear arms in public with one exception, i.e. courtrooms and other government places that must have armed security and metal detectors. By the way, such court rooms would have to have gun check-in provisions for any who normally carry handguns for self-defense. Requirements that competent, law-abiding adult citizens have gun licenses or permits should be dispensed with. Not one of the rights, inferred in the Bill of Rights, should be subject to the arbitrary whims of bureaucrats or Sheriffs. A law-abiding citizen either has the same constitutional rights as citizens in other states or he doesn’t. The 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause should be incorporated to all 50 states, regarding the Second Amendment. Pssst! The state of Vermont has no license or permit program for carrying a concealed handgun. The people in Vermont actually use the Second Amendment as a guideline regarding firearms.

    Pop quiz: which state, Vermont or New York has a higher gun-related crime rate per capita? Hint: it’s not Vermont! The gun-related crime rate in the heavily regulated New York State is FIVE TIMES higher than Vermont’s! Perhaps the inanimate handguns in Vermont are more law-abiding than those in New York?

  • Robert Dewitt June 17, 2016, 9:32 pm

    Here we go again, the liberals are making noise over here on Gun Control to take the attention off
    Of their failed liberal actions that led up to all these tragedies. Question, who put out the order to
    Remove the shooter from the watch list and why ? There were plenty flags that should have signaled
    That this person was a risk and should have been denied the right to purchase a gun. We have enough
    Gun laws on the books now that is over looked for the expressed reason of political correctness. There are a lot of people out there who believe your BS but don’t think all of us are stupid as you think we are. It seems that all the liberal leaders in Washington D.C are bought and paid for.
    (Get a Grip)

  • JohnnyJT June 17, 2016, 4:33 pm

    All Politicians should be Part Time with Term Limits and No Pensions

  • JohnnyJT June 17, 2016, 3:10 pm

    We Need Part Time Politicians with Term Limits and No Pensions

  • Hiram A Biff June 17, 2016, 12:35 pm

    Last I checked, Treason was still punishable by death; . Obama and his admin. should be tried for Treason aiding terrorists by bringing 10,000 more of these psychopaths into our country, What the Hell is wrong with this country? Our founding fathers are rolliong over in their graves, SMIB, Amen!

  • Richard June 17, 2016, 12:29 pm

    The no fly list, wasn’t teddy kennedy on that list and as a US Senator didn’t it take him a longtime to get his name removed? If a US Senator Che be listed on the no fly list, who else can be on the list and is it possible for the common man or woman to get their name removed? These proposals are bull hockey.

  • reno June 17, 2016, 11:58 am

    this guy and Kirk &Durbin &chicago make me ashamed of being from Illinois. I would GIVE CHICAGO TO CANADA if i could

  • krinkov5.45 June 17, 2016, 10:40 am

    Dold kind of sounds like Dolt.

  • rt66paul June 17, 2016, 10:27 am

    This is just more of the same. Politicians pandering to the media and the public and/or trying to force more control over the populace. This is true of most of them, we have to be vigilent and elect the correct people. Republicans as well as Democrats want control of your guns, or want you without them.

    • Albert Howe April 28, 2017, 5:38 am

      The problem is they lie to us during the election i.e. Oboma’s budget, immigration, repeal of Obamacare and the list goes on and on! Or you live in an area where you are out numbered and keep voting in the same crooks like Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Alcee Hastings, Bill Nelson, Chuck Shumer, John McCain, Nancy Pelose and the list goes on and on! Unless of course you believe that there is the possibility of voter fraud by certain political groups. Until we get enough honest ones (ha, ha, ha, ha) to enact term limits (another never happen idea being that they would have to vote it themselves on themselves) it will never change. We get the government that we deserve !

  • Gregory Romeu June 17, 2016, 10:19 am

    Another lemming using the term, “best interest” as in, “best interest of the nation”! Look what happened to our children over the past 40 years when the feminists and left-wing politicians long ago utilized the term, “best interest of the child” when it / they came to custody and divorce matters? Look at how our children turned out now with the fatherless society because the father was driven away as he was hung with the title of, “non-custodial-parent” and “deadbeat dad” around his head, all in the “best interest of the children”?

    People you need to pay close attention to each and every word that comes out of the mouths of these legislators because if you fail in just one word or one term the day you realize and they’re allowed to pass their bills Society takes another hit and they remain in office to keep up the treasury that they pass along to us all under the guise of FREEDOM?

  • AK June 17, 2016, 9:51 am

    The proper model for US gun laws is obviously Europe, specifically, France. Things work well there….well….yes….well…..

  • Infidel7.62 June 17, 2016, 9:42 am

    The headline is not accurate, it should be RINO Lawmaker Calls For Tougher Gun Control Laws. As if disarming Americans while allowing terrorists in will make the US safer for anyone other than the terrorists.

  • Jim June 17, 2016, 9:04 am

    How are those “tougher gun laws” working out for you in Chicago, Senator? Yes, as wee can all see…..A BLAZING SUCCESS! Oh….not really, eh?

  • Chris June 17, 2016, 8:26 am

    “In short, there are numerous commonsense proposals that will keep guns out of the hands of those that should not have them, while protecting our Second Amendment rights,” Dold said.

    The problem with that statement is it is identical to statements made after every shooting in the United States and the glaring fact is they cannot come up with a single law that would have stopped the occurrence that drove the statement. This terrorist was dedicated to the ideology of ISIS – they inspired him to emulate their own actions. The only thing in the instance of Orlando that would have made a difference, other than a handful of those poor people packing concealed arms, would have been if we had a Federal Government that was serious about taking out ISIS and any other terror group. Remove them from the equation and you just prevented guys like Mateen from becoming indoctrinated by institutions of evil. In this case he may or may not have been radicalized by direct contact and/or involvement with the group, but he was indoctrinated nonetheless by watching their actions and viewing them as being in a position of power. No one in the entire world has hardly been able to make so much as a dent in the operation of these thugs. You drive them from one area, they take over two more. Our own commander-in-chief cannot bring himself to wage just war on these people and so they stand -empowered by the inaction of the entire world. I’m sorry, but 250 pairs of ‘boots on the ground’ is not, in my mind, taking this seriously enough. We need tanks on the ground, planes in the air, missiles and lead flying into ISIS bodies. Maybe Egypt will rise to the occasion when ISIS begins blowing up pharaohs tombs. Maybe Greece will when they blow up the Parthenon. Maybe Italy will when a bomb goes off and drops the Roman coliseum or the Roman forum into a crater. I thought France was going to go into all-out-war ensemble after the Hesbo incident, but maybe they will do so – after ISIS turns the Eiffel tower into confetti. What will it take? What in God’s name will it take? They’ve thrown homosexuals from buildings and yet, for all their vaunted support of the LGBT community – Obama and his czars stand idly by. They’ve enslaved women and young girls – and for all their supposed drive for women’s equality the women’s organizations and spokespersons of our country stand idly by – not saying a word.

    “All fled—all done, so lift me on the pyre—
    The Feast is over, and the lamps expire.”
    -REH

  • Al Friend June 17, 2016, 7:34 am

    I agree with him! Then we will say that most, if not all in the congress and the president, should be on the list. Look up the definition and you’ll see they are performing terrorist acts/terrorism by doing what they are now. Then let’s put all their security on the list as they are providing aid to terrorists. Then anyone who decides their view should be made law and advocate that publicly, and so on. Wow, isn’t this how the revolutionary war started?

  • MB June 17, 2016, 7:26 am

    We don’t have a gun control problem in this country ( gun use in violent crimes in down 74% since 1993 ) We have crime and moral control problem. Murder is already outlawed, has any murderer ever been stopped in his tracks by a law? Of course not, criminals by their very definition don’t care if there are 10 or 10,000 laws against whatever they intend, they do it anyway.
    Family values, enforcement of existing laws, and severe punishment by removal from society are the best weapons against those that wish to harm others. Terrorist need to be dealt with post haste, up to and including removal of countries that support and foster terrorism.

  • Ed Sunderland June 17, 2016, 6:34 am

    The problem with this law is this question: “Who determines who is a terrorist? Janet Napolotono already ascribed into the liberal narrative that Christians, patriots, and former military are already terrorists. Further, every time these fools make a feel good law there are repercussions no one ever thought and innocent Americans generally get hurt.

    The way to stop gun violence as we have seen in Florida, Ft. Hood, San Bernadino is to enforce the McCarran Walters Act of 1952 that says islam is illegal in this country. We have to stop importing terrorists and begin deporting muslims right now. Trump is right. The AR15 ban did not accomplish the reason it was written in the first place and doctors still kill more people than guns. https://youtu.be/NPdFoEE4_A0 and we need to make more of this https://youtu.be/pELwCqz2JfE

    The shooter in Florida was a gay muslim democrat just like Obama.

  • Donald Rasher June 17, 2016, 3:33 am

    No current gun law, or any proposed,……… repeat, ANY law you wish to pass will not even remotely stop terrorist violence against innocents! PERIOD! We were probably lucky this guy took a gun. If he hadn’t had a gun, he could have made a bomb out of kerosene and fertilizer, small enough to carry into the building, but powerful enough to kill everything within a full one block radius. Then the death toll would have been several hundred or more. If someone wants to commit violence, they will, ….. PERIOD! This legislator from Illinois wants more and more gun laws. Hey dude, check your city of Chicago! Toughest gun laws in the country, yet, just about the highest homicide and gun violence statistics in the country. MORE GUN LAWS DON”T WORK, to stop violence. All more gun legislation does is cave into the communist democrats who want us disarmed so they can kill us at will! And, like EVERY other country that has “given in’, we will be slaughtered. Slaughtered just as the 100 million people were slaughtered by their governments after they had their arms taken away in the last century!!! NEVER, EVER, NEVER, EVER SUBMIT TO THE GOVERNMENT TAKING YOUR GUNS!!! THE WHOLE WORLD IS DEPENDING ON US! IF THE USA FALLS, THERE IS NO HOPE LEFT IN THE WORLD!

    • 81537 June 17, 2016, 7:50 am

      Common Sense=give an inch, they’ll take a mile

  • REM1875 June 17, 2016, 3:32 am

    Each little law since 1968 was supposed to fix it and it never has been enough. Until we are totally disarmed it won’t be enough. Even after that they will need to fix more loopholes till we are on our knees with a muzzle at the back of our heads awaiting the flash and still the demonRats won’t blame the person who pulls the trigger- ever.

    • Gregory Romeu June 17, 2016, 10:25 am

      Which brings up the point that we do have fraud waste and abuse legislation and needs legislators are in fact committing fraud waste and abuse by wasting our taxpayer dollars and time by pushing these bogus, never work, never effective and crappy gun laws because even if they do get a prosecution and conviction some idiots going to let him out of prison on either a technicality or good behavior or overcrowding or because they’re a foreign National that came here illegally? They are making a mockery and a joke of our legal system altogether so the legislators and fax should be held accountable for their complicity and committing yet more crimes.

  • CharlieKing1 June 16, 2016, 12:42 pm

    Folks, we are on a slippery slope when ‘suspected’ equates to convicted. If we curb a person’s civil rights based on mere suspicion, we will never recover from this hijacking of the Constitution.
    The no fly list is an anathema to the Constitution, to link it to a Constitutional right is a horrible idea. I don’t like the idea that terrorists are getting their hands on firearms, but curbing my rights won’t solve the problem. Unshackle the law enforcement in this country, let them do their job without interference from the Administration and you just might see a difference.

  • DRAINO June 16, 2016, 9:33 am

    Yeah, How’s them tougher gun laws working in Chicago, there Mr. Dold? What? NUMEROUS people killed every weekend? Oh, that’s right……it doesn’t fit the media narrative so it doesn’t get reported….silly me, I forgot. Running your mouth when you can’t even control what’s going on in your own cities. You obviously are a fear-mongering politician….Yes, You, Sir, are a true politician. Something we Americans are tired of, for sure!

  • Ben Veach June 16, 2016, 7:15 am

    Both previous bloggers are correct in their eloquent way. I will add this;
    Our Founding Fathers would surely weep if only they knew how Stupid their following generations became. Tens of thousands are on the No-Fly list. Giving Anti-Gunners this Law….Hundreds of Thousands….

  • Cam June 16, 2016, 4:25 am

    No, if they are terrorist arrest them, otherwise you are denying people there constitutional right and due process. They are not convicted. The government will not tell how people get on the no fly, who is on the no fly or how to get off. Delay or denied due process is unconstituional.

  • Boba Fett June 15, 2016, 8:48 pm

    Blannelberry,

    As I’m sure you know, the NRA publicly announced today that it supports a delay in gun purchases for anyone on the nebulous “watchlist,” or “no-fly list.”

    Please, for the love of all that is sacred, PLEASE tell me that you’re going to make your readers aware of how dangerous this idea is, and that if the NRA actually pushes this through, it will be the beginning of the end of gun rights in this country. PLEASE tell me that you’re totally f*****g pissed that the NRA would betray the gun owners of this country like this, and you’re already working diligently on a piece that explains clearly to your readers why this is an absolutely, positively, HORRIBLE idea.

    Has the NRA forgotten about the Patriot Act? Have they forgotten what happened? It was a “well-intentioned” document designed to protect us from terrorism. We entrusted our freedom to a bunch of bureaucrats, and in return, they wiped the Fourth Amendment clean off the map. Rest assured, this will be no different.

    If any federal bureaucracy is given the power to “delay” (whatever that means) the purchase of any firearm for some arbitrary length of time, because somebody’s name was put on some list for some arbitrary reason, it will not be long before that power is abused. And it WILL be abused. Whatever bureaucrat is controlling the criteria for who goes on the list and who doesn’t (assuming any criteria even exists), will sell to the highest bidder. Within a few years, Bloomberg, et. al., will have poured millions upon millions in favors to expand these criteria to whatever they damn well please. Anti-gun elitists will be foaming at the mouth to get control of that list. They will be falling over each other to make the criteria for getting on the list as broad as possible, and to make the investigations drag out as long as possible. There will come a day when the type of speech that you hold dear on this website, as well as that kind your readers post in the comments sections will meet criteria of “dangerous,” or “suspicious.”

    I’m writing this to you because I’m a huge fan of your work. I’ve read tons of it- enough to bet my bottom dollar that you wholeheartedly agree with me on this. PLEASE tell me this is true, and that the good folks at Gunsamerica.com are doing everything in their power to get the word out to their readers about what an atrocious violation of the Second Amendment this is.

    • Ed Sunderland June 17, 2016, 6:41 am

      You right, the patriot act is no where authorized in the constitution and violates it in a dozen ways. I keep demanding my congressman Michael Burgess not sign the damned thing but he refuses and gives it more money and power each year. The NADA is unconstitutional and has to be stopped because what they have done is wrapped it around military appropriations and then say if you don’t vote for it you are against the troops. This is representative corruption in the highest degree.

  • Will Drider June 15, 2016, 5:07 pm

    The Government will not impose restrictions on Islamic terrorist free speech but want to FURTHER RESTRICT the 2A!
    How did decades of European firearms restrictions, and specifically France’s work out in Paris? How about the beheadings in England?

    Is that the unarmed vision of America gun grabbers want for us? This “Republican” from Illinois must clearly know how well the tight gun restrictions are working in Chiraq! He blames the iron pipeline for the flow of guns from outside the State. Has he ever heard of Mexico a place that flows drugs like water into the U.S.? Can’t stop it can we. Same source would bring in guns if the market demand and price was right. What would be solved, NOTHING; but more sheep pending slaughter.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend