Providing for Consideration of H.R. 2130, Red River Private Property Protection Act, and Providing for Consideration of Motions to Suspend the Rulesby Representative Mark E. Amodei
Posted on 2015-12-09
AMODEI. Mr. Speaker, I don't usually show up unannounced or
uninvited. But I have listened to the debate on this, and I find
absolutely amazing the outpouring of abhorrence for potential gun
violence from a body that failed to have a moment of silence for Kate
Steinle, that failed to do anything to recognize that instance of gun
violence in the Bay Area.
[[Page H9102]] So, as I sit here and listen to all of the deplorable, junior varsity theater on the message, I wonder: Why aren't we doing something about that instance, which was put in the rearview mirror instantly and accelerate it away at the speed of light? America, the junior varsity theater is in session on this issue. I encourage you to skip the show.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself my remaining time.
I am sorry that the previous speaker doesn't see the importance of this issue and thinks that this is theater. I assure you that the vast majority of Americans--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike-- think this is a very serious issue.
Right now, according to the ATF, the people who cannot own a gun in this country are criminals, unlawful users of controlled substances, people who are mentally ill, people who have renounced their citizenship, and people who have been convicted of domestic violence.
Our laws are clear on that. These people can't go out and buy guns. Yet, when it comes to people who are suspected of terrorism, for some reason, we can't apply the law to them. For some reason, there is a reluctance by some on the other side of the aisle--not all, but some-- to do something about this.
This is fairly easy. Congressman King, a Republican from New York, has a bill that I think is fairly straightforward. It basically says that people who are suspected of being terrorists, who right now can't fly on airplanes, should not be able to go out and purchase a gun, should not be able to purchase a weapon of war.
That concept is controversial in this House of Representatives. It is hard to fathom. People can't quite understand what the problem is.
Now, maybe my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are going to introduce bills to allow us to be able to sell weapons to people who are convicted of domestic violence or to people who are felons or to people who have renounced their citizenship. Maybe that is going to mysteriously come to the House floor. Maybe that is what the plan is, but I hope not.
I don't hear them saying that. I don't hear people on the other side of the aisle saying we should do away with the no-fly list and allow suspected terrorists to be able to fly on airplanes with the American people. I don't hear people asking to do that. So what is the problem? We are making a big deal of this. I am sorry the gentleman from Nevada doesn't appreciate the importance of this issue, but we are making a big deal of this because it is a big deal. We need to do a lot of different things to protect the American people, and this is one of them. No one is up here saying this will solve all of our problems, but we are saying this is an important piece that we ought to get done.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to defeat the previous question. Allow us to have the opportunity to bring this up because we have tried every which way--we even have a discharge petition going to try to force a vote on this issue--and all we have encountered is resistance, resistance, resistance. Give us the opportunity to deliberate. Let the people's House do the people's business.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and to then vote ``no'' on the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.