First Gun Legislation Passed in 30 Years

What does it actually cover?

President Biden giving a speech about the new Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (Photo via AP)

Not as much as you’d hope. Sorry.

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (Public Law 117–159), sponsored by Senator Marco Rubio (R — FL), starts with the tagline: “To make our communities safer” (117th Congress, 2022, p. 1). First, duh, that’s some pretty lazy writing there. Second, yes, you read that correctly. The big gun law that everyone is fighting for is sponsored by Florida Man, who bowed down in defeat to Former President Donald Trump. Remember that guy?

Though, the new face of gun control has been Senator Chris Murphy (D — CT), feeling a wave of pain in the near 10-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre in Newtown, CT, which echoes in the Robb Elementary School shooting in Ulvalde, TX. The day of the Uvalde shooting, Murphy took the Senate floor to ask his colleagues why they chose to have their positions.

“What are we doing? What are we doing? Just days after a shooter walked into a grocery store to gun down African-American patrons, we have another Sandy Hook on our hands. What are we doing?

“Why do you spend all this time running for the United States Senate? Why do you go through all the hassle of getting this job, of putting yourself in a position of authority if your answer is, as the slaughter increases, as our kids run for their lives, we do nothing? What are we doing? Why are you here? If not to solve a problem as existential as this.”

I could quote Murphy’s entire impromptu speech because all of it is powerful, regardless of what your thoughts are on gun control in this country. A massacre of children in an elementary school had just occurred and the death toll was rising when Murphy took the Floor. In his words and at his demeanor, anyone can see a man reliving the massacre that happened in his own state 10 years earlier, when 28 people (mostly children) were killed.

Why am I going on about this speech instead of the law that was just passed? Because it is this moment that Murphy, a Democrat, acknowledges the possibility for a bipartisan agreement that can be passed and go into law to save these children (C-SPAN, 2022). It is here that the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act began, with the acceptance that there will be give-and-take and gun violence will not be resolved. We all know this, but we don’t want to know this.

A Shallow Dive

Now, I’m not going to quote straight from the legislation because it is very difficult to comprehend and includes every edit written out, like Clippy if he was horrified by your school paper. Instead, I will be using this 3-page PDF from Senator Murphy’s website that bullet points everything in the bill without the fluff. If you wish to read the whole legislation, you can find it here.

1. $750 million will be given to states to create administration and ensure laws prohibiting “deadly weapons” are not given to those who pose a threat, including courts of mental health, drugs, and veterans, as well as those who have “extreme risk protection orders” (“BSCA One Pager”, 2022, p. 1). What does that mean? A crap ton of money will go to ensuring those who seem bad or crazy on paper cannot obtain a “deadly weapon.” This terminology is always weird — what counts as a deadly weapon? If we’re only talking guns, never mind literally anything else, does it stop at assault rifles, shotguns, pistols, or musket pistols? This is undefined.
2. Convicted domestic violence abusers in dating relationships will be registered in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). They will remain unable to purchase a gun for five years until their name is taken off the list, unless other crimes have been committed in that time, causing the individual to be unable to possess a gun (“BSCA One Pager”, 2022, p. 1).

If you’re confused, so am I. So many Q’s! Does that mean felons are unable to purchase a gun? Does the crime matter (violent offense vs peeing in a bush vs old marijuana possession charges)? Convicted DV abusers aren’t already in some kind of criminal database for a violent crime?

And the real issue: According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, in the US, every minute 20 people are harmed by their intimate partner (dating, married, etc.), totaling to about 10 million people per year (NCADV, 2020, p. 1). 10 million people. While there are repeat offenders (trust me, I know), it does not erase the fact that this is a rather high number.

But if you’re asking what I’m asking: How many of these 10 million go unreported? Well, according to USA Facts, in 2019, about 52% of incidents were reported (2021, par. 4). This was analyzed via surveys, so I would not hold reality to that exact number, though it is good to see more partner violence being reported than the decade before. Take the W’s whenever you can.

However, according to the new BSCA, this person must be convicted of domestic violence in order to land themself in the registry. What is the percentage of those who are reported? Not sure. My research comes up with random numbers that do not quite a solid ratio, but it is definitely a disappointing one. How many cases actually make it to court? How many of those result in a DV guilty verdict? How many serve a prison sentence?

Needless to say, the number is not 52% of total cases.

On an obvious note, NCADV states that an abuser’s access to a firearm increases the likelihood of violence, particularly toward women, by 400% (NCADV, 2020, p. 1). Hopefully, this new law can lower that percentage, though it does seem kind of like a Band-Aid for something that already happened. The firearm would have to not be there because the abuser was already convicted. But only for 5 years. Then they can have at it.

3. All dealers/sellers of firearms must be registered with the state, who will conduct background checks and keep records (whatever the latter means). This way the government can more easily find gun cartels and illegal distributors (possibly).

4. For people 21 and under, there will be an investigation into their juvenile and mental health records, including other checks and state databases. This is to be done within 3 days, unless something of substance is found, in which another 10 days of investigation may be added.

I wonder if this includes people with mental health disorders that they cannot help, including but not limited to clinical depression, any anxiety disorder, any eating disorder, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, personality disorders, learning disorders, ADHD/ADD, and Autism. All of these mental illnesses can be genetic or derived from a result of a devastating event, harm done to them at a young age, and being abandoned or neglected. All of these mental illnesses may be maintained under control with mental health services, including therapy and medication.

Here are the percentages of adults in the US who have one or more of these disorders:

• MDD (Major Depressive Disorder) or MDE (Episode): In 2020, 21 million US adults, or 8.4% (NIH, 2022)
• Any anxiety disorder (General Anxiety Disorder, Panic Disorder, OCD, etc.): 40 million US adults, or 19.1%, annually (ADAA, 2022)
• Any eating disorder (Anorexia, Bulimia, etc.): 28.8 million people, or 9%, in their lifetime (ANAD)
• PTSD: 3.5% of US adults annually (APA, 2020)
• Bipolar Disorder: 2.8% of US population annually (NAMI, 2022)
• Any personality disorder: 9% of US adults (APA, 2018)
• Learning disorder/disability: 65.6 million, or 20%, of US population (US Census Bureau qtd. in LDA)
• ADHD: 0.9% of US adults (WHO qtd. in ADDitude Mag, 2022)
• Autism (anywhere on spectrum): 5.4 million US adults, or 2.21% (CDC, 2022)

While each category alone seems like a small number or percentage of the US population, that’s a lot of people possibly unable to own a gun while others can. Are they not allowed to “protect themselves” or own a gun because of the hand they were dealt? What if a gun owner develops PTSD after buying the gun; do they have to give it back? How do we keep tabs on all of this?

Obviously, if someone has a history of or shows signs of harming themselves or others, they should not be allowed to own a firearm.

However, as we see now, if you want it, you will get it. Separating out portions of people based on events that happened in their lives or how they were born is not the answer to solving gun violence. In fact, it is more common for people with these disorders and disabilities to be victims of gun violence. Problem not solved.

5. No straw purchasing and trafficking, though I kinda already thought weapon trafficking was already illegal. Straw purchasing is when someone gets a firearm from another person. Not sure how straw purchasing will be regulated. Fake ID’s and what not. What is the legal ramifications for gun trafficking? I don’t know.

6. Community-Based Allocations:

• $250 million for “community-based violence prevention initiatives.” I’m not quite sure what this covers. The vagueness has begun.
• Improve access to mental health services (MHS) for children and families via Medicaid (ACA through Obama. Thanks, Obama!) and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and telehealth.
• More MHS and crisis training via the Department of Health and Human Services. They make backroom deals with community organizations all the time. Why stop now?
• $80 million to pediatric mental health care (MHC)
• $120 million over four years to train first responders in MHC. Great, can we reallocate police funds to those people instead of spending all that money?
• $250 million to states, DC, and other US territories for community services. Lots of money, lots of ambiguity.
• $40 million over four years for treating children and families after a traumatic event. Another $240 million over four years to train people for this job. What constitutes as a traumatic event? Does it have to be communal? (mass shooting, the death of a family member, victim of assault, etc.)
• The National Suicide Prevention Hotline is now a three-digit number: 9–8–8. Please note!

7. Schools:

• $500 million for School-Based MHS Grant Program that will put more providers and services where needed. Hopefully, underserved neighborhoods.
• $500 million for School-Based MHS Professionals Demonstration Grant that will train and diversify the MHS pipeline, including counselors, social workers, and school psychologists).
• $1 billion for Title IV-A [the Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) program] to improve conditions for student learning so that the SSAE program can be more effective in providing the most enriching education.
• $50 million to the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program for extracurriculars for older youth. This is the first point that mentions high-school-aged youth and it’s for after-school programs, not MHS, which is rather concerning. It is uncertain if other parameters also include this age group.
• $300 million for the STOP School Violence Act, which is a preventative measure that involves training for school personnel and students. Prohibits funds to be used on arming or training anyone in schools with “dangerous weapons”. Cool cool cool. But what is considered a “dangerous weapon”? This varies according to state, and sometimes by region. For example, laws regarding knives and pepper spray differ between New York City and New York State. Are dangerous weapons going to be clarified on the federal level?

Total Amount Due: $3.09 billion for community and school prevention and MHS

Is it worth it?

From my perspective, I see an emphasis on school safety and an effort to help our youth through their education with a new specialization in mental health. Guidance counselors are not usually trained in therapy or crisis prevention, so this is a good thing. I’m all about it!

My hope for this legislation is that it targets underserved neighborhoods, where education is under funded and schools have low graduation rates. They need this the most. They’ve been in need of this. Ensure that the most vulnerable are taken care of and then branch out to other areas.

I believe the over exaggeration of school and community services is how this law became “bipartisan.” However, I don’t think it is. We are throwing money at schools that will probably be misused without enacting the real laws we need to prevent gun violence, such as background checks for all, banning assault weapons and needless automatics, and education about gun violence in communities. Where are those laws to protect people in supermarkets, spas, convenience stores, malls, the street, and their own homes? None of that is in this legislation. The best we have are background checks on people between 18 and 21 because they are “most likely” to open fire in a school.

Yes, we need to protect our children, but we also need to protect Americans against violent hate crimes and mass gun violence. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, sponsored by Marco Rubio (oh now the schools-only thing makes sense), is not bipartisan, it is not common sense law, and it does not protect our children from gun violence.

For a big breakthrough that is the first of its kind in 30 years, this is a slap in the face to all victims from firearms. It looked like all the Democrats did was give and give, not take; and all the Republicans did was take and take, not give… up some of their guns. If our government truly cared about our youth, they would do more to outlaw weapons of war. This legislation comes down to nearly nothing for everyone out of high school. Yes to the mental health services in schools and from first responders! But no to everything else.

In the middle of President Biden’s speech, Parkland father Manuel Oliver, who lost his 17-year-old son Joaquin to the school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, shouted from his place in the audience, “You have to do more.” As Oliver was escorted out of the venue, President Biden said, “Let him talk.” But there wasn’t more to say.

This is NOT enough. And we cannot pretend like it is.