Welcome to 'Beyond Thoughts & Prayers'

We picked a good week to launch...

Nov 07, 2023

All eyes on the Supreme Court

Welcome to Beyond Thoughts & Prayers, the official Substack of 97Percent. With our mission to reduce gun deaths by including gun owners in the solutions, we picked the perfect week to launch — the Supreme Court is hearing arguments today in U.S. v. Rahimi. If you’re not familiar with it, it’s a pivotal firearms case with the potential to produce a watershed ruling in American gun law.

At issue is whether people who are accused of domestic violence and subject to a protection order (DVPO) should lose access to their guns. A lower court has ruled that such laws are unconstitutional because there was no precedent at the nation’s founding. We disagree. As 97Percent Executive Director Olivia Troye and Advisory Board member (and former NRA lobbyist) Abra Belke wrote in USA TODAY this morning:

We call on the Supreme Court to reverse the Rahimi decision. Failure to do so will have far-reaching implications, including in cases like that of Robert Card. Lives are hanging in the balance, and SCOTUS’ backward-looking test is threatening the chance to save them.

Card, as you know, was the shooter in Lewiston, Maine. He did not have a DVPO in place against him, as Zackey Rahimi did, but he and his family members had reported his declining mental condition to authorities. Clearly, there was a failure of enforcement of Maine's yellow flag law, which acts like a DVPO by removing access to firearms to those deemed a threat to themselves or others. But if the Rahimi decision is allowed to stand and is broadly applied, there may be nothing to enforce next time.

That would be a huge mistake, with potentially deadly consequences. Our research shows that 70% of gun owners wish “we would enact some kind of gun reform.” And a recent study out of Princeton shows that gun laws passed to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them work. Stricter regulations — such as background checks and waiting periods — passed in 40 states between 1991 and 2016 reduced gun deaths by nearly 4,300 in 2016, or about 10 percent of the nationwide total.

Guns aren’t going away. Firearm sales are increasing, and the Second Amendment protects that right. The data shows that both gun owners and non-gun owners share plenty of common ground from which to build policies that protect public safety. Let’s hope the SCOTUS ensures we don’t lose any of that ground going forward.

On the Hill

The Senate is currently voting on amendments to its spending minibus for fiscal 2024, which includes funding for veterans programs. Last Wednesday, several Democrats joined Republicans in a 53-45 vote to adopt an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kennedy that could impact U.S. veterans — roughly half of whom are also gun owners. The amendment overturns a Department of Veterans Affairs requirement to send a veteran’s name to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System if a financial professional has been appointed to help them manage their VA benefits. The amendment would preserve gun rights for such veterans, unless a judge rules that they are a danger to themselves or others. —RollCall

We say: We applaud the bipartisan work to protect veterans’ rights and due process.

In the Courts

On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on bump stocks — specifically, whether a ban of the controversial accessories, which allow semi-automatic rifles to fire more quickly, is lawful. The justices were asked by both the Biden administration and gun rights activists to take up the issue, with lower courts reaching differing conclusions on it. The Trump administration imposed the ban after the mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017, when Stephen Paddock used bump stocks to open fire on a country music festival, killing 58 people. The policy went into effect in 2019 after the Supreme Court previously declined to block it. —NBC News

In the States

Maine’s gun laws are more lax than in most of New England and among the least restrictive in the country. But until the mass shooting in Lewiston on Oct. 25, which killed 18 people and was the deadliest shooting this year, Maine had never experienced such a tragedy. While federal legislation has mostly stalled, a number of states have reformed their gun laws in response to the wave of mass shootings in the U.S. over the past 25 years. States such as Connecticut, Nevada, and Florida passed stronger gun laws in the wake of mass shootings. Whether Maine is next remains to be seen. —Portland Press Herald

We say: It shouldn’t take another mass shooting for states to take a second look at their gun laws, but enforcement is key to their effectiveness, as the failures in Maine highlight. Laws can only make a difference if they are actively and uniformly enforced.

What's the difference between yellow flag and red flag gun laws?

Generally speaking, under red flag laws, any relative or roommate who suspects a gun owner is an immediate violent threat can apply for an emergency court order. If a judge approves that order, the gun owner must temporarily surrender their gun license and their guns. They can then appeal the order to get their guns back.

Maine has what is known as a “yellow flag law,” the only one of its kind in the nation. Someone who suspects a gun owner is an imminent threat, whether that be a close relative or a police officer, can report them to the police. Then it's up to local law enforcement to take that person into protective custody, order a mental health evaluation from a medical expert, and if the doctor and police deem necessary, apply for a court order to get guns temporarily taken away. Then, and only then, can a court order temporarily suspend a gun license or remove guns. The law has been used 82 times since it was enacted in 2020. (Source: CBS News)

After Maine…

“We have had a very responsible approach to guns [in Maine]. Fathers would train their kids. Farmers depended as much on game and forage as they did their crops to survive. It was just a way of life.” —Richard Judd, Maine historian

“If the word ‘arms’ in the Second Amendment is going to expand over time, then there needs to be a proportional change in the capacity of society to regulate that gun. Otherwise, it’s a one-way ratchet in favor of more and more powerful guns in more and more people’s hands – and a sort of parallel hamstringing of society’s ability to protect itself through laws.” —Joseph Blocher, Duke University School of Law professor

“It’s about what you think our society should look like. What do you want in terms of a community living together peacefully?” —Margaret Groban, Maine resident and former assistant U.S. attorney

“This is an incredibly fraught and emotionally trying issue. You’re balancing between individual rights and the common good. What sorts of individual sacrifices do we make as fellow citizens in order to try to achieve some greater public safety?” —David Yamane, Wake Forest University sociology professor and gun owner

Do you have a comment about any of these critical issues? Do you have a story to share? We’d love to hear from you. Please include your first name and state, and we may publish it in a future issue. Thank you for reading!

SHARE YOUR FEEDBACK

For more information about 97Percent, please visit our website at 97Percent.us.

Join our growing community of gun owners and non-gun owners united to reduce gun deaths in America.