The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a universal background check bill — which, if the Senate were interested in passing it, would be the most significant gun control legislation in a generation. Under current federal law, licensed dealers are required to run a background check to make sure a buyer doesn’t have a criminal record, history of mental illness, or any other factor that legally bars him from purchasing a gun. But the law has a big loophole: Private sellers — meaning unlicensed sellers — don’t have to run a background check. So someone who doesn’t run a licensed gun shop can sell or gift a firearm at a gun show, over the internet, or to friends and family without verifying through a background check that the buyer isn’t legally prohibited from purchasing the weapon. The new bill, HR 8, would close this loophole, although it would leave some exemptions for gun transfers among family and temporary transfers (like lending a gun) while hunting. For years, the proposal — for universal or comprehensive background checks — has been the top item on gun control advocates’ wish list. It polls extremely well among gun owners, people who don’t own guns, Democrats, Republicans — basically everyone. And it certainly makes sense: If there’s a loophole that potentially lets criminals get guns, why not close it? Yet the House proposal faces tough odds in the Senate, which is controlled by Republican lawmakers who have been much more reluctant to approve any gun control bills — despite widespread support for universal background checks among GOP constituents. President Donald Trump’s administration has also come out against the bill. And some research suggests a universal background check bill alone may not do much to reduce gun violence in the US. Several studies published in the past year found background checks would have a limited effect on gun deaths, whether homicides or suicides. Still, advocates and experts argue that comprehensive background checks are a much-needed foundation. Daniel Webster, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, previously told me that they’re a “logical first step.” Based on the research, though, more will be necessary. Universal background checks may have a limited effect on gun violence The universal background check bill would help close a major loophole under the current law. About one in five gun transfers (sales or otherwise) are done without any background check at all, based on recent research. The bill would aim to close this loophole and, in doing so, attempt to ensure that fewer potentially dangerous people are obtaining firearms. But several studies in the past year have found that universal background checks, enacted at the state level, have a limited effect: One study, by UC Davis and Johns Hopkins researchers, found that after California enacted comprehensive background checks, as well as misdemeanor violence prohibitions for guns, the policy changes were not associated with changes in the firearm homicide or suicide rates. (A caveat: It’s possible comprehensive background checks had some effect, but it was just too small to detect in a population-level study.) Another study, from UC Davis, UC Berkeley, and Johns Hopkins researchers, found that after Indiana and Tennessee repealed comprehensive background checks, the repeals were not associated with changes in the firearm homicide or suicide rates. (Again, it’s also possible that there was an effect, but it was simply too small for the study to detect.) A study by Johns Hopkins researchers found that comprehensive background checks alone in urban counties were actually associated with an increase in firearm homicides, although the authors cautioned that background checks very likely did not cause the increase and instead had little effect while homicides were already increasing. Previously, the research base on background checks was limited but promising. A review of the evidence released by the RAND Corporation early last year looked at the best US-based studies for all sorts of gun policies, including background checks. RAND found “limited” to “moderate” evidence that background checks in general reduce violent crime, including homicides, and suicides. But RAND cautioned that the research just on closing the background check loopholes, to go from having a system at all to making the system more universal, was “inconclusive” when it came to firearm homicides. The newer studies fill in that gap — and they don’t look good for comprehensive background checks. In short: Establishing a background check system, as the US has already done on a national scale, likely has an effect. But making the system more comprehensive or universal doesn’t seem to have a significant effect on its own, at least at a population level. That doesn’t mean universal background checks are useless. Policies that are proven to be far more effective, such as a gun licensing system, are built in part on background checks — to ensure that, say, someone’s criminal record doesn’t prohibit him from getting a license. To that end, comprehensive background checks may be worth enacting even if they don’t do much on their own. “There’s some challenges with background check systems as they currently stand, but you can’t have the other laws function without requiring a background check for every sale,” Cassandra Crifasi, a researcher (and gun owner) at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, told me. The problem with universal background checks may come down to poor implementation and enforcement. For example, the California study looked at the policy during a period when the state’s background check system was less sophisticated and comprehensive — missing some records, particularly for mental health history. Perhaps background checks are now better by virtue of having fuller data to work with. “What this new body of research is telling us is not that these policies don’t work,” Rose Kagawa, one of the UC Davis researchers involved in the new studies, told me, “but that they need to be designed and implemented in really rigorous and effective ways.” There are also some practical questions. Even if a system is built well, how can officials possibly track every single gun transfer, especially when it happens between two friends or family members in a private home or vehicle? Governments can encourage individuals to record and report these transfers, but it will be a constant challenge to ensure this always happens. Other problems can arise. Maybe a system is underresourced or understaffed, limiting just how thorough the checks, even under a supposedly universal system, can be. Perhaps some law enforcement officials just aren’t taking warning signs seriously enough, as has been found to be true in the past with the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Some experts, like Crifasi, argue that there needs to be a cultural change too, creating “a social norm that selling a gun without a background check is a bad thing.” All these limitations lead to a limited effect in the evidence so far. Other policies could have stronger effects on gun violence The disappointing results for background checks don’t mean gun control policies are totally ineffective. In fact, there’s growing evidence for at least one approach: a licensing system, which requires people to obtain a permit, typically via a police department, before they can purchase a gun from a licensed or private seller. The big studies so far come out of Connecticut and Missouri. In Connecticut, researchers looked at what happened after the state passed a permit-to-purchase law for handguns — finding a 40 percent drop in gun homicides and 15 percent reduction in handgun suicides. In Missouri, researchers looked at the aftermath of the state repealing its handgun permit-to-purchase law — finding a 23 percent increase in firearm homicides but no significant increase in non-firearm homicides, as well as 16 percent higher handgun suicides. In the past, advocates pointed to these studies as evidence that comprehensive background checks work, because the licensing systems in the states were paired with comprehensive background checks. But the evidence increasingly suggests that it’s the licensing system, not the comprehensive background checks, that’s key.<doc-sep>McBath willing to work across the aisle for gun bill (CNN) — The House of Representatives on Wednesday passed significant gun control legislation for the first time in more than two decades, a move that Democrats hope will intensify a pressure campaign for a vote in the Senate. The universal background check bill, H.R. 8, requires background checks on all firearm sales in the country. Currently, only licensed gun dealers must perform background checks for anyone seeking to purchase a firearm. Most unlicensed sellers do not; H.R. 8 would make that illegal. There are exemptions to the law like “gifts to family members and transfers for hunting, target shooting, and self-defense,” according to the House Judiciary Committee website. The measure passed 240-190. Eight Republicans voted for the bill, and two Democrats, Jared Golden of Maine and Collin Peterson of Minnesota, voted against it. The bill will move to the Senate, where it is unlikely to pass in the Republican-majority chamber as legislation often needs 60 or more votes to advance. The bill, sponsored by a bipartisan duo of Reps. Mike Thompson, a California Democrat, and Peter King, a New York Republican, remains an outlier right now in the House since it has bipartisan support. Most of the legislation related to gun control has been sponsored by Democrats. Four other Republicans co-sponsored the bill: Brian Mast of Florida, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Chris Smith of New Jersey and Fred Upton of Michigan. King told CNN on Tuesday that he may get a few more Republican colleagues to vote for the measure, but “no more than a handful.” At a 25-year anniversary party for the gun control group the Brady Campaign on Tuesday evening, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed confidence that the universal background checks bill would pass the House of Representatives. At the event, Pelosi also recalled her efforts with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in the 1990s on gun control as “hard,” but a “triumph that saved millions of lives.” “Tomorrow we’re going to send him the background check legislation,” Pelosi said to her Senate colleague with a wide smile. Schumer predicted that the country is on the “precipice of great change” on the issue of gun safety. “We have a Democratic House that will not flinch. We have a Senate Democratic minority that will not flinch. Most of all, we have a public who is aroused and strong.” Democrats, including Pelosi, have made this a top policy priority in the new Congress, staging public hearings on the topic which had not been held for years in Congress. The legislation also has the backing of a multitude of outside groups, including the former congresswoman and gun control advocate Gabby Giffords, the Brady Campaign, Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action. “Today’s historic gun safety victory in Congress is a testament to courage,” Giffords said in a statement after the passage of the bill. “When the days were darkest, when it looked like the gun lobby’s money and influence would forever silence any debate in Washington about stronger gun laws, courage shone through.” Ted Deutch, a Florida Democrat who represents the district where the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting occurred last year, called the passage “a really incredible moment to be on the House floor as we passed the first piece of gun legislation in decades.” On Tuesday, King urged his Senate colleagues to consider the bill. “I would think that they should let it come to a vote,” he said, adding that the average American supports the universal background checks bill. “This is not going to affect more than probably less than 1% of the American people and the ones it will affect either suffer from mental illness or are criminals. So to me, it’s a phony issue being raised by some of the gun groups,” he said. King understands that public opinion is on his side on this issue. A recent Quinnipiac poll conducted in January found that 92% of Americans support requiring background checks for all gun buyers. Of that 92%, Republicans supported the idea of background checks 89% of the time and Democrats supported it 95%. Despite pressure from the House, Senate Republicans are unlikely to take up the legislation, according to a member of Senate leadership. Majority Whip John Thune – the second ranking Republican in the chamber – told CNN on Tuesday that it’s “unlikely” that the Senate will take up the bill for debate soon. Thune pointed to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System modernization bill that the Senate approved last year. That legislation – which was sponsored by Republican John Cornyn and Democrat Chris Murphy – improved reporting to the national background check system. In the simplest terms, the bill didn’t strengthen background checks but instead incentivized state and federal authorities to report more data to the database. “I think that we’ve dealt with that issue here,” he said of last year’s efforts. Another sign of coordinated efforts around the vote: Gun control group Everytown is dumping $400,000 into advertisement purchasing and sponsorships with media outlets and targeted ads on Facebook asking people to contact their representative about the bill, according to a spokesperson for the group. This story has been updated with additional developments Wednesday.<doc-sep>Lisa Desjardins: All right, one passed yesterday, and one passed tonight. Let's look at them very quickly, first the one that passed yesterday. This bill would basically require background checks for almost every gun sale or gun transfer in America. It allows exceptions for family members, hunting, sporting. That includes if you want to go to a shooting range. And also for law enforcement. That wouldn't necessarily require background checks. Now, this background — and the background check bill that passed today would allow 20 days total for a background check. That's a big change, Judy, from the current, which is just three days. Now, that's considered the Charleston loophole. That is the situation where the massacre in Charleston in which nine churchgoers were killed, that gunman obtained the weapon because the background check didn't come back within those three days. And the gun seller was allowed to sell that gun. Democrats want to raise that limit to 20 days instead. No surprise. Republicans have some big problems with these bills. They say that the restrictions go too far. In particular, they say that kind of 20-day window for a background check is too long for victims of domestic violence, women in particular, who may want to get a weapon to protect themselves. And that argument was raised on the floor today right before the vote to counter that. A very passionate speech came from Michigan Democrat Debbie Dingell. I want to play some of what she said.<doc-sep>
WASHINGTON — Gun control supporters and victims of gun violence in the U.S. House gallery yelled “thank you” to the group of mostly Democratic lawmakers who passed a bill Wednesday that would expand federal background checks for gun purchases and transfers. The vote on the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019 was 240-190, the first time in at least 25 years that the U.S. House has approved a substantial gun control measure. The bill, which garnered only eight GOP votes on Wednesday, was introduced more than six years ago in response to the 2012 killing of 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, but failed to win enough support in the Senate and was never put forth for a vote in the House. “This day has been a long time coming,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., who came over from the Senate to witness the historic vote on the House floor. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., also kept an eye on the House proceedings. “The families of Sandy Hook were in my heart and on my mind today as I watched the House take a historic step toward making America safer,” he said. “It is a clear sign that momentum is on the side of commonsense gun violence reform and the gun lobby’s grip on Congress is weakening.” The gun safety advocates’ victory is expected to be short-lived, however. The bill is unlikely to be considered in the Senate, where Republicans hold a 53-vote majority and 60 votes are needed to advance legislation. President Donald Trump issued a veto threat Tuesday for the legislation, which would require FBI background checks of prospective buyers for individual gun sales on the Internet and at gun shows. During debate on the bill Wednesday, several amendments were defeated. But lawmakers approved a Republican amendment that would require the FBI to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement when an undocumented immigrant attempts to purchase a gun. Like other supporters of the legislation, Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., said universal background checks have the support of 97 percent of Americans and would keep more guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals. But he said the legislation is not “a panacea.” “We need additional legislation to make guns safer, keep weapons that are designed only to kill off the street, and provide better mental health support for Americans,” said Himes, who represents Connecticut’s 4th District. Rep. Jared Golden, a freshman lawmaker from Maine, and Minnesota’s Rep. Colin Peterson were the only House Democrats to vote against the bill. While gun control helped a number of Democrats in last year’s midterm elections, the National Rifle Association, which strongly opposed the background check bill, continues to have a strong influence on Republicans in Congress. The NRA says the legislation would lead to a national gun registry and “make criminals out of law-abiding gun owners for simply loaning a firearm to a friend or some family members.” Before the vote, Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., called the bill a “partisan show” that would not have prevented the mass shootings in Newtown, Las Vegas, San Bernadino or other places that have been the scene of a gun massacre. Most of the guns used in recent mass shootings, including the one that killed 26 at Sandy Hook Elementary School, were bought legally. Like the Newtown gunman, many of the attackers had criminal histories or mental health problems that did not prevent them from obtaining a weapon. Even so, gun control advocates promote universal background checks as a first step in preventing gun violence. During the often passionate debate on the bill, Hudson and other Republicans repeated the NRA argument that it would make criminals out of those who loan guns to family members and friends. “If you loan your gun to a friend under this bill, and they may be thinking of buying a similar gun to protect themselves, and they go to a range ... you may become a felon, subject to a year in jail,” said Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., who is the victim of a shooting. He was severely injured during a shooting at a congressional baseball practice in Virginia in 2017. However, there are a number of exceptions in the background check bill, including one for a family member giving a firearm as a gift, or lending a gun to someone to practice at a gun range or who is in imminent danger. The House plans to vote on a second gun bill on Thursday.