Providing for Consideration of H.R. Bipartisan Background Checks Act of and Providing for Consideration of H.R. Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to H.R. 8 and H.R. 1112.

We all share the same goal: to end gun violence. But in the course of this debate, House Democrats say they want to do something to end gun violence and anyone who disagrees with their policies doesn't care.

I believe in my heart that the gentleman from Maryland and the folks on the other side of this debate care about the victims of gun violence and the children in this country, and I know in my heart that my colleagues on this side of the aisle and I care, too.

It is a shame that in their rush to do something, anything, Democrats have made this a partisan show. They won't even allow my bipartisan concealed carry reciprocity bill that passed this House last Congress to be debated on the House floor today.

What about the single mother victim of assault, like Shaneen Allen? Does she not have the right to defend herself?

Instead of working on commonsense solutions that can actually help prevent tragedies--like supporting local law enforcement, ensuring laws and protocols are followed, improving mental health, and implementing my concealed carry reciprocity--they are targeting law-abiding citizens, and they are disregarding existing Federal law.

There is no gun show loophole. Federal law already requires a background check on every commercial gun purchase in America no matter where it takes place. Federal law already prohibits so-called straw purchases.

Let's make one thing clear: H.R. 8 would not have stopped Newtown. H.R. 8 would not have stopped Parkland. It would not have stopped Las Vegas or Sutherland Springs or San Bernardino or the tragic attack on our former colleague, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

But the proponents of gun control don't want you to judge them based on outcomes; they want you to judge them based on intentions. And they say anyone who points out the facts, anyone who dares observe the obvious flaws in their legislation, does so because they don't care.

In their rush to do something, House Democrats ignore that House Republicans have done many things, like strengthening the background check system, which would have prevented Sutherland Springs; improving mental healthcare, which would have prevented many of these shootings such as Newtown and Charleston and Parkland; and giving schools the tools they need to protect students. All these bills received bipartisan support in the last Congress, but we don't get credit for real action because they say our intentions weren't good enough.

We owe it to the American people to look past the intention and the emotion and focus like a laser on outcomes. What can we do to actually end gun violence once and for all?

So what is this bill actually going to do?

It is going to turn a law-abiding American into a criminal when you loan your shotgun to your buddy to go dove hunting.

It is going to make it illegal for a victim of stalking to borrow a gun from a neighbor for protection.

It is going to make the cost of background checks so expensive that the average American can't afford to buy a gun. Meanwhile, criminals are going to continue to get their firearms, whether it is through theft or the black market or on the street.

I applaud President Donald Trump for standing with us against this ineffective legislation, and I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.''

The American people want us to work together to solve this problem and stop gun violence. Can't we come together in a bipartisan way and not just do something, but do something that will actually make a difference?

I am calling on my colleagues to put partisanship aside. Work together on ideas that will actually make a difference. I stand ready to continue this work. I will work with anyone to end gun violence while also protecting the rights of law-abiding citizens, and I reject the false dilemma that we can't do both.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source