Friday, June 28, 2013

Beau Biden confused, News Journal clueless about defeat of HB 88

You gotta love it when press-release journalism tries to figure out why real people didn't stick to their script:

The firearm legislation, which earlier had passed the House overwhelmingly on a 40 to 1 vote, would have required mental health providers to call police if they suspected a patient presented a danger to themselves or others. The measure would have allowed police to investigate and submit a report to the Department of Justice. Justice Department attorneys would then have had the ability to petition a judge to compel the patient to turn over any firearms in his or her possession. 
After the 13-6 vote, Biden said the legislation was “directly responsive” to mass shootings around the country involving shooters with mental illnesses. 
“I cannot explain what happened,” Biden said. “This was just a common sense bill.”
First off, Beau, you sent an idiot to testify who apparently hadn't even read the bill and got the particulars wrong.

Secondly, you are still trying to ignore the fact that this "common-sense" bill so lowered the infraction bar and the proof levels for removing a basic constitutional right that it would have applied to anyone who ever smoked a joint or took somebody else's prescription meds, not the near-criminally insane.

But, hey, that's OK.  Keep trying.

As for the WNJ, you can feel their confusion in these sentences:
Senate Majority Leader David McBride, D-Hawk’s Nest, was among those voting against the bill. Sen. Bryan Townsend, a Newark Democrat who did not cast a vote, said he heard concerns from constituents who worried the law would be applied inappropriately. Other senators said they received calls and emails Thursday morning in opposition to the bill. A National Rifle Association lobbyist said the gun advocacy group was neutral on the bill. 
Apparently the News Journal reporters have never heard of the Delaware Campaign for Liberty and can't imagine that any opposition to a piece of gun legislation could arise without orders from the NRA.

Two thoughts:

1.  That makes the Markell administration 1 for 5 this year on gun control legislation.  After all the initial big push, only the "universal" background checks made it through into law, and I am hearing that several representatives are thinking about bills to weaken that one next session.

2.  It would really have been interesting if the News Journal reports had asked Senator McBride which provisions in the bill worried him with regard to inappropriate behaviors by police, but I guess that would be too much to ask.


Anonymous said...

This is what worries me and what i have been saying for a while...They will water it down so anyone who say a shrink for depression when they were 14 and adjusting to the loss of a parent/grandparent, etc will have a gun forcebly removed from them. Any woman who suffered post partum depression will be on the hit list. What? you took antidepresents after your divorce - NO GUN FOR YOU...

Nancy Willing said...

I listened to the Senate debate online for this bill and was happy that it didn't pass considering the issues raised. The bill was not ready for prime time just as you have pointed out. No one at DE Liberal has figured it out yet. They are worried about whether Karen Peterson *gasp* might have voted against it and darkly impugn Townsend and Cloutier for their rejection.

delacrat said...

If the General Assembly really objected to the overly broad reporting requirements and criteria for confiscation they would have passed the amendments as suggested by Mr. Newton.

That it went to a final vote with such obvious poison pills indicates they have no genuine interest in gun control.