Wednesday, Trump met with a bipartisan group of legislators to discuss yet-to-be-drafted legislation meant to address the ongoing scourge of school shootings.

Hoping to hash out which policies and current legislation could be lumped into one, comprehensive, passable bill, discussion ensued, some in front of the media.

Several sound-bites from the meeting have been plucked out as though they’re indicative of some greater scheme.

Namely, this one:

Before anyone sets their hair on fire and cracks open their prepper seed kits, it’s worth noting that gun-violence restraining orders (GVRO) or the principle of GVROs were being discussed broadly. David French spelled out how GVROs work in fabulous detail here:

What if, however, there was an evidence-based process for temporarily denying a troubled person access to guns? What if this process empowered family members and others close to a potential shooter, allowing them to “do something” after they “see something” and “say something”? I’ve written that the best line of defense against mass shootings is an empowered, vigilant citizenry. There is a method that has the potential to empower citizens even more, when it’s carefully and properly implemented.

It’s called a gun-violence restraining order, or GVRO.

While there are various versions of these laws working their way through the states (California passed a GVRO statute in 2014, and it went into effect in 2016), broadly speaking they permit a spouse, parent, sibling, or person living with a troubled individual to petition a court for an order enabling law enforcement to temporarily take that individual’s guns right away.

Yes, I understand that if any Democrat said “take the guns first and deal with due process later”, the whole right-leaning world would be up in arms, sparking the next great Civil War. But it’s exceedingly silly to ignore the fact that for better or worse, this is Trump being Trump — throwing out a handful of ideas and seeing which ones stick.

Nevertheless, we see this reaction every.single.time.

Pull quotes out of context. Pretend ideas produced in discussion are super cereal. OUTRAGE. ALL THE OUTRAGE. PANIC. Pray for visit from SMOD. Repeat at least 19 times each hour.

It’s tiresome. And annoying. Not to mention the fact that it detracts from any substantive discussion.

But back to the meeting. Trump also advised saving concealed carry reciprocity for a separate bill and out of any comprehensive gun reform legislation, believing its inclusion would tank the bill in the Senate. He did not say, contrary to much I’ve seen, that he doesn’t support concealed carry reciprocity.

In recent talks, concealed carry reciprocity was tied to the House version of the “Fix NICS” bill, which deals with strengthening the background check system.

The Toomey-Manchin Bill, a Senate bill designed to strengthen background checks was mentioned in the discussions, and may end up lumped into the larger bill. Numerous attempts to pass Toomey-Manchin have failed.

As for changes to public access to bump stocks and other rapid-fire modifiers, Trump said he’ll take care of those via Executive Order. Immediately following the Florida school shooting, Trump asked the DOJ to propose regulations on bump stocks and like modifiers.

Last year, the Washington Post reported the Trump administration was quietly loosening a handful of gun regulations:

But, with less public attention, the Trump administration has eased some gun regulations in recent months. Among them: The Army Corps of Engineers has filed notice in a court case that it is reconsidering a ban on carrying firearms on its land; the Justice Department narrowed its definition of fugitives barred from purchasing weapons; and the Interior Department lifted a federal ban on hunting with lead ammunition in national parks.

A White House official denied any deliberate effort to play down the change to the background-checks policy and declined to comment on that change or others related to guns.

…One month into the Trump administration, the Republican-led Congress turned to a rarely used law that allows it to quickly unravel the prior president’s last-minute regulations. The House and Senate revoked the Social Security rule, along with several environmental regulations imposed in the waning days of the Democratic administration. The move was opposed by gun-control advocates and cheered by an unusual coalition that included the NRA, the American Civil Liberties Union and some advocates for the mentally ill.

Some gun-control activists said they were not aware of the Trump bill-signing.

Fox has a handy synopsis of Wednesdays’ discussions here:

Full discussion here:


As I was saying…