Disgrace: Democrats Torpedo Moment Of Silence For Orlando Shooting Victims On House Floor

Matt Vespa
|
Posted: Jun 14, 2016 1:40 PM
Disgrace: Democrats Torpedo Moment Of Silence For Orlando Shooting Victims On House Floor

Democrats torpedoed the respect given to the victims of the Orlando attack on the House floor yesterday by shouting about the lack of gun control bills right after a moment of silence was observed. Frustrated that they can't get anything going on gun control, The Hill reported that some Democrats chanted “where’s the bill?” after the moment of silence concluded, while some of their colleagues—seemingly horrified—yelled back “show some respect.”

After Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) led the House in the moment of silence in honor of the 49 people who died in the massacre on Sunday, the chamber erupted into shouting as Democrats expressed frustration over the lack of votes to restrict guns after repeated mass shootings.

"Where's the bill?" Democrats chanted.

"Show some respect!" other Democrats shouted.

Some lawmakers walked out of the House chamber before the moment of silence began in protest, including Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.). Earlier in the day, Himes declared he would not participate in any more moments of silence as a form of protest of the lack of legislative responses to mass shootings.

"The fact is that a moment of silence is an act of respect, and we supported that. But it is a not a license to do nothing," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters off the House floor afterward.

[…]

Democratic leaders said they want votes on three specific bills: legislation to close the so-called "Charleston loophole," which allowed the shooter in that case to buy a gun after three days even though a background check wasn't completed; prevent people who are on the FBI's no-fly list from buying guns; and prohibit anyone convicted of a hate crime from purchasing firearms.

The so-called Charleston loophole isn’t a loophole at all. It’s a provision within the gun control community-backed 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. It’s called a delayed release, where a gun transfer is authorized after three days if a background check comes up inconclusive for the transferee. This occurs when the National Instant Background Check System wrongly flags someone with the same name as a convicted felon. The FFL dealer isn’t obligated to transfer the firearms after three days, they’re extremely rare occurrences, and if a transfer goes through where the transferee turns out to be a prohibited person, then the dealer contacts the ATF, who refers the matter to its firearm retrieval unit. Banning those on the no-fly list from buying guns is a grossly unconstitutional initiative, where mere suspicion strips you of your constitutional rights. There’s little to no due process regarding these secret lists. Last, but not least, I’m pretty sure those convicted of hate crimes are already barred from owning firearms post-conviction. Hate crimes usually involve assaulting someone, which is a violent crime. So, it’s an exercise in redundancy—a clue that maybe existing federal gun laws are already pretty solid. Then again, I’m not a liberal that is addicted to expanding government power.