Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 10:10 PM Dec 2015

Missouri State Rep Files Bill to Put Gun Sales Under Exact Same Restrictions as Abortions

Missouri State Representative Stacey Newman is deeply concerned about the state’s gun violence, and figures perhaps it might help matters to make guns a little harder to buy. Luckily, she’s got a perfect model right in front of her: Missouri’s abortion restrictions, some of the most onerous in the country.

As St. Louis magazine reports, Newman has pre-filed a bill for the upcoming legislative session that would subject gun buyers to the exact same restrictions currently faced by people seeking abortions.

You can read the full text of House Bill 1397 here; it sweetly proposes that gun buyers have a 72-hour waiting period imposed upon them, and have to “confer and discuss with a licensed physician” and risk factors that might arise “from the proposed firearm purchase:”

Prior to any firearm purchase in this state, a prospective firearm purchaser shall, at least seventy-two hours prior to the initial request to purchase a firearm from a licensed firearm dealer located at least one hundred twenty miles from such purchaser’s legal residence, confer and discuss with a licensed physician the indicators and contraindicators and risk factors, including any physical, psychological, or situational factors, that may arise with the proposed firearm purchase. Such physician shall then evaluate the prospective firearm purchaser for such indicators and contraindicators and risk factors and determine if such firearm purchase would increase such purchaser’s risk of experiencing an adverse physical, emotional, or other health reaction.


Gun buyers would also have to watch a 30-minute video “on fatal firearm injuries” and verify in writing that he or she viewed the entire video “in the presence of a licensed firearm dealer.” There’s more:

Verify in writing by a licensed physician that the purchaser has toured an emergency trauma center in the nearest qualified urban hospital on a weekend between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. when gun violence victims are present.

Within seventy-two hours of a firearm purchase, the prospective firearm purchaser shall meet with at least two families who have been victims of violence involving a firearm and two local faith leaders who have officiated, within the past year, a funeral of a victim of violence involving a firearm who was under the age of eighteen


http://theslot.jezebel.com/missouri-state-rep-files-bill-to-put-gun-sales-under-ex-1746030454?utm_expid=66866090-71.ZDl_b8uGQgG7HBI5sxDRgQ.0


It's a start.

42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Missouri State Rep Files Bill to Put Gun Sales Under Exact Same Restrictions as Abortions (Original Post) justiceischeap Dec 2015 OP
Nothing has ever been achieved without a start somewhere. It all started when they "gave" women libdem4life Dec 2015 #1
Do women in Missouri TeddyR Dec 2015 #2
I think it was proposed in the original legislation justiceischeap Dec 2015 #4
That's ridiculous TeddyR Dec 2015 #11
Now that's PRO-LIFE ! nt eppur_se_muova Dec 2015 #3
I love this irony librechik Dec 2015 #5
I LOVE IT!!!!! Politicalboi Dec 2015 #6
Gun dysfunction! Hepburn Dec 2015 #12
K&R. nt DLevine Dec 2015 #7
Brilliant. blackspade Dec 2015 #8
Don't forget the mandatory Freddie Dec 2015 #9
A rifle barrel would do nicely...IMO Hepburn Dec 2015 #13
Prostate exam! catrose Dec 2015 #33
And the obvious inverse proportionality of gun size to.....well you know Augiedog Dec 2015 #10
good for her!!! niyad Dec 2015 #14
Add in an anal ultrasound. Cassiopeia Dec 2015 #15
Put semi-automatic weapons in the same category Doc_Technical Dec 2015 #16
This needs to be spread far and wide DebbieCDC Dec 2015 #17
Your subject line in the same thread with anal u/s suggestions... Pacifist Patriot Dec 2015 #27
Stacey... Dont call me Shirley Dec 2015 #18
Such a good idea... Thespian2 Dec 2015 #19
Ok, legal teams at pp, Naral, etc..get going and this done in every state Gloria Dec 2015 #20
I agree. Use an every state strategy and get it going! Pacifist Patriot Dec 2015 #26
OMFG I love her! marym625 Dec 2015 #21
And it doesn't deny the right to bear the arm! Beartracks Dec 2015 #22
The faster weapons are sold justiceischeap Dec 2015 #24
Like a movie: the bad guys sell mind control devices as harmless consumer goods!! Beartracks Dec 2015 #36
They should add a privision requiring a rectal examination with... Nitram Dec 2015 #23
"Now just sit back, sir... Gumboot Dec 2015 #25
To be fair, this proposed legislation should apply only to men, with an exemption for trans-gender NCjack Dec 2015 #28
It should apply to everyone daybranch Dec 2015 #29
The comparison is to treat men as they treat women. Men don't get abortions. /nt NCjack Dec 2015 #31
If men homegirl Dec 2015 #34
Good stuff ronbison Dec 2015 #40
We need to sweep the national elections and get this passed nationally . . . another_liberal Dec 2015 #30
While we're at it, let's throw in a transanal ultrasound for good measure. southerncrone Dec 2015 #32
I love smart people world wide wally Dec 2015 #35
Two additional gun purchaser requirements to consider: Praek3 Dec 2015 #37
More than fair. N/t tooeyeten Dec 2015 #39
Stacey Newman tooeyeten Dec 2015 #38
This would be much more important to pass. Thinkingabout Dec 2015 #41
I disagree Elmergantry Dec 2015 #42
 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
1. Nothing has ever been achieved without a start somewhere. It all started when they "gave" women
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 10:17 PM
Dec 2015

the vote.

just in case. Go, Rep Newman !!!

 

TeddyR

(2,493 posts)
2. Do women in Missouri
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 10:22 PM
Dec 2015

Have to tour an abortion clinic during a time when abortions are being performed and meet with at least two women who have had abortions before they are allowed to have one themselves? That seems pretty draconian/illegal.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
4. I think it was proposed in the original legislation
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 10:27 PM
Dec 2015

The MO law is the most drastic in the country, I know that much.

 

Politicalboi

(15,189 posts)
6. I LOVE IT!!!!!
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 10:30 PM
Dec 2015

Gun owners are mostly men. Let's have women who don't even own guns make future laws for men and their gun dysfunction.

Doc_Technical

(3,526 posts)
16. Put semi-automatic weapons in the same category
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 11:13 PM
Dec 2015

as fully automatic weapons.
It appears that most mass murders are committed by
people using semi-automatic handguns and long guns.

Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
19. Such a good idea...
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 11:39 PM
Dec 2015

Hope she succeeds in making people pay attention to the idiocy of gun-nuts...or is that lack of nuts?...



Gloria

(17,663 posts)
20. Ok, legal teams at pp, Naral, etc..get going and this done in every state
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 12:04 AM
Dec 2015

Keeping the same hoops to jump through...

I mean, why the hell not???? The Rethugs seem to have no issue shoving crap legislation....why not something good like this, Demmies????

It would also make a great ad!!!

Beartracks

(12,814 posts)
22. And it doesn't deny the right to bear the arm!
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 02:36 PM
Dec 2015

I've never understood the pooh-poohing about waiting periods. The 2nd Amendment doesn't say "the right to bear arms right away," so I think the (mis)interpretation that waiting periods somehow infringe one's right to bear arms may be... what.... revisionist?

==============

Beartracks

(12,814 posts)
36. Like a movie: the bad guys sell mind control devices as harmless consumer goods!!
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 04:03 PM
Dec 2015

They must think owning a gun makes someone more amenable to their control.



But, really, their raison d'être is to represent gun manufacturers anyway, not gun owners. The whole point pushed by the NRA (and your gun show sellers and your local gun shop) when they foment fears about the gubmint coming to take your guns or about how it would be a safer world if everyone had a gun, they are not overly concerned with your safety and security or reducing crime -- they just want to make money by selling guns.

===========================

Nitram

(22,803 posts)
23. They should add a privision requiring a rectal examination with...
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 03:02 PM
Dec 2015

...an ultar-sound wand to insure they have no dangerous contraband on their person (or is that "in&quot .

Gumboot

(531 posts)
25. "Now just sit back, sir...
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 03:39 PM
Dec 2015

... put your feet in these stirrups, relax, and tell us why you need a weapon of mass destruction...

Oh, and your family can click a link to watch your rectal ultrasound live on Periscope."

Good work, Rep. Newman!

NCjack

(10,279 posts)
28. To be fair, this proposed legislation should apply only to men, with an exemption for trans-gender
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 04:35 PM
Dec 2015

people choosing to live as women. I know that some men who are not TG will take advantage of this loophole and declare to be TG to avoid the restrictions on their guns, but there really isn't a perfect way to draw this line.

daybranch

(1,309 posts)
29. It should apply to everyone
Fri Dec 4, 2015, 06:03 PM
Dec 2015

get over the feminist supporter jollies, two wrongs do not make a right or make it fair. Apply to everyone seeking to buy a gun.

Praek3

(149 posts)
37. Two additional gun purchaser requirements to consider:
Sat Dec 5, 2015, 04:59 PM
Dec 2015

1. No health insurance coverage for any/all gun injuries for gun owners unless they pay an extra and specific premium for insurance coverage. Just like many feel is appropriate for women to have birth control coverage within their health insurance policies.

2. No federal funds permitted to be used to cover gun owner related gun injuries or deaths. If you want a gun and are injured by your gun, pay for any negative results by yourself. Just as no federal funds can be used to pay for abortion services.

Fair is fair.

 

Elmergantry

(884 posts)
42. I disagree
Sun Dec 6, 2015, 02:13 PM
Dec 2015

There should be NO restrictions to the constitutional right to have an abortion.

Same with firearms.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Missouri State Rep Files ...