Providing for Consideration of H.R. Restoring Access to Medication Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to vote against this rule so we can bring up an amendment that will keep our constituents safe; a bill that would say if you are on the terrorist watch list, you can't buy a gun; and an amendment that says that if you buy a gun, you should have a background check.

Federal law says that if you buy a gun at a licensed dealer, you have to get a background check. So about 60 percent of the guns that are purchased are purchased in a situation where a licensed dealer is involved, and they go through a background check. The reason for this is to make sure that criminals, the dangerously mentally ill, domestic abusers, and terrorists can't get their hands on firearms. It makes it more difficult for them to get their hands on firearms, so it is our first line of defense.

The problem is about 40 percent of the guns that are purchased are able to go around that requirement for a background check. Now, the irony is the places where they buy them. They buy them online. They buy them at gun shows. And if you go to a gun show or if you go online, there are licensed dealers that sell guns there. And if you go to the table that the licensed dealer has and try and buy a gun, you have to get a background check.

Well, if you can't pass a background check, you can go to the next table, you can find an individual selling guns at a gun show, and you can buy the same gun without going through a background check.

Thirty-four States allow guns to be sold through commercial sales without the benefit of a background check. This is tragic. Even if you are from one of the 16 States that don't allow it, all you have to do is, all a terrorist, a criminal, or a domestic abuser, all they have to do is just drive to the State next door that doesn't require background checks, buy the gun, and bring it back to your neighborhood.

Now we know this happens. We know this. I have a friend, Elvin Daniels, from Wisconsin, whose sister was threatened by her husband. She got a restraining order. The husband went to the gun store to try and buy a gun, and because there was a restraining order, he was prohibited from buying that gun. So he went online, he bought the same gun he was prohibited from buying in the gun store, killed Elvin's sister and two other people.

Background checks work. We know that in the licensed dealers arena, where you have to have a background check, 170 felons a day are prohibited from buying guns. Fifty domestic abusers a day are stopped from buying guns. Yet we allow an avenue for domestic abusers, the dangerously mentally ill, criminals, and terrorists to go straight down the road and buy a gun without the benefit of a background check.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of California. Now, I want to emphasize there is nothing about either one of our measures--as a matter of fact, they are Republican bills that we are trying to bring to the floor--there is nothing about either one of them that is against the Second Amendment.

I am a gun owner. I believe strongly in the Second Amendment. And the Supreme Court spelled out specifically in the Heller decision that individuals have a right to own firearms. But they also said that there can be certain restrictions, restrictions such as criminals, terrorists, domestic abusers, dangerously mentally ill; they can't have guns. Well, you can't do that unless you have a background check.

Now, 70 of my friends across the aisle voted to augment the funding for the background check system, $20 million they voted to add to the system.

How can you vote to fund a system, spend 20 million taxpayer dollars to fund a system that you won't require people to use? It is absurd.

What are you afraid of? What are you afraid of that you won't bring this bill to the floor for a vote?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

When I spoke earlier, I asked: What are you afraid of? Why won't you bring these bills to the floor?

I think back to when I met with the parents of some of the children who were killed in one of the most horrific incidents in our country, the terrible, terrible incident at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and listening to the parents and hearing their stories, and I can't help but think to myself: Are you more afraid to bring this bill to the floor for a vote than those kids were hiding for their lives in those classrooms? Are you more afraid than those movie-goers in Aurora, Colorado, who were hiding, trying not to be killed? Are the people who were praying in Charleston when they were gunned down, are you more afraid; is this more frightening than what they experienced or San Bernardino or Orlando? What is stopping you from bringing commonsense, pro-Second Amendment gun violence prevention legislation to the floor for a vote?

Gun owners are for this. I am a gun owner. I have told you that before. As a matter of fact, I am proud to say I am one of the 26 Democrats who were labeled by the rightwing media for being hypocrites because we owned guns and we want to pass gun violence prevention legislation.

As a matter of fact, I bought a gun. I bought it before the break but picked it up during the break because, in California, not only are you required to get a background check, but there is a cooling-off period that they require. You have to wait 10 days.

So before the break, I bought a gun from a very close friend of mine, someone whom I have known for over 25, 30 years, yet the law says background check. It wasn't a problem. I took it in, left the gun. My friend signed the paper. I signed the paper. Ten days later, over this last break, I came and picked it up. It is no big deal.

Why would you want to sell a gun to someone who may be a criminal, dangerously mentally ill, a domestic abuser, or a terrorist?

These bills make sense. Bring them to the floor, and let's vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source