Sen. Pat Toomey believes some lawmakers might be changing their minds about increased gun control measures after a devastating school shooting in Florida.
Toomey, R-Pa., and Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, of West Virginia, have proposed a bill to require a background check on all commercial gun sales. That bill has stagnated in Congress for months, but Toomey said some members might be changing their minds after 17 people were killed and many others were injured Feb. 14 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla.
“There are some members who were not supportive in the past who are reconsidering. Haven’t got anyone that said ‘Yes, sign me up, Pat,’ but there are definitely members that are reconsidering,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday.
“The president’s expression of support for strengthening the background check system is constructive. The president can play a huge and in fact decisive role in this. I intend to give this another shot.”
Toomey said he wants law enforcement to be empowered to take away guns temporarily from people who are exhibiting warnings signs of a potential mass shooting.
Toomey that law enforcement couldn’t really do anything to take away the guns belonging to Nikolas Cruz, who’s charged in the shooting.
Law enforcement officials were notified at least two dozen times about Cruz in the months leading up to the shooting, and did nothing. Local police and the FBI have been criticized for not doing more to stop the shooting from happening, but it’s not clear what they could do under current law, Toomey said.
“One of the challenges we face is what to do about someone that’s clearly mentally deranged but haven’t acted out in a way that allows you to adjudicate them as dangerously mentally ill or haven’t committed a crime,” he said.
“Clearly in this case, there were all kinds of warning signs that were advertised, right? They were communicated and nothing was done. That’s a problem. I think there’s an important discussion to be had about a temporary restraining order on somebody that’s evidencing some serious dangerous behavior, there would have to be due process so it couldn’t be used as a weapon against someone inappropriately.”
