Overview
Title
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 396) to regulate bump stocks in the same manner as machineguns.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to treat a kind of gun part called a "bump stock" just like it treats machineguns, which is stricter. The rules also say there will be a planned talk without changes, but some usual rules won't be followed during this talk.
Summary AI
H. RES. 1302 outlines the procedure for the House to consider the bill H.R. 396, which aims to regulate bump stocks like machineguns. The resolution waives all objections against both the consideration and the content of the bill. It mandates that the bill will be considered as read and sets the rules for a one-hour debate controlled by specific members of the Committee on Ways and Means. Additionally, it allows one motion to recommit but removes the requirement generally enforced by Clause 1(c) of rule XIX for this kind of consideration.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The document outlines House Resolution 1302, which sets the procedural rules for considering a related bill, H.R. 396, in the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill seeks to regulate bump stocks, a firearm accessory, in the same manner as machine guns. The resolution ensures that once it is adopted, the House will proceed to consider the bill without delay. During this process, all procedural objections to the bill or its provisions will be waived, allowing for streamlined debate and passage. The resolution prescribes a one-hour debate period, evenly split between leaders of both parties, and permits a single opportunity to send the bill back for further review.
Summary of Significant Issues
One significant issue noted is the lack of transparency in the procedural language, particularly regarding fairness in the debate and amendment process. Terms like "considered as read" and "waived" may be ambiguous for those unfamiliar with legislative jargon, raising concerns about the legislative process's accessibility and clarity. Additionally, the resolution exempts Clause 1(c) of rule XIX without explanation, which could result in confusion and potentially obscure strategic legislative maneuvers.
Impact on the Public Broadly
The bill's objective to regulate bump stocks as machine guns suggests an effort to control certain firearm accessories more strictly. If passed, this could have broad implications for public safety, potentially reducing the availability and ease of access to bump stocks, and addressing concerns about gun violence. However, the lack of detailed procedural transparency might reduce public confidence in legislative processes, making it important for legislators to clarify the bill's implications and procedural exemptions to the broader public.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Gun Owners and Enthusiasts: Those who legally own bump stocks might face new restrictions or legal challenges, leading to resistance from this stakeholder group. The regulation could be perceived as a limitation on gun rights, prompting debates around the Second Amendment.
Public Safety Advocates: This group may view the bill as a positive step toward reducing gun violence. The regulation of bump stocks could be seen as closing a loophole that previously allowed certain firearms to simulate automatic weapon fire, enhancing public safety.
Lawmakers and Policy Experts: For lawmakers, particularly those involved in gun policy reform, the bill represents an opportunity to address firearm regulation comprehensively. However, procedural ambiguities might invite criticism or calls for greater legislative transparency.
In summary, while the bill aims to address public safety concerns through tighter firearms regulation, the procedural opacity of its legislative handling may provoke discussions on the necessity for clearer communication within the legislative framework. The various stakeholders will inevitably experience differing impacts, based on their perspectives and interests related to gun ownership and public safety.
Issues
The resolution's language is procedural and lacks transparency in ensuring fairness during the debate and amendment process, as noted in Section 1. This could raise political and ethical concerns regarding the democratic process.
There is potential ambiguity in terms like 'considered as read' and 'waived,' mentioned in Section 1, which might be confusing and legally significant for individuals not familiar with legislative jargon.
The exemption of Clause 1(c) of rule XIX from applying to H.R. 396, noted in Section 2, is not explained, possibly leading to political and legal concerns about the rationale and implications of this exemption.
Section 1 notes that the text does not specify any spending, indicating there is no financial audit trail for the public to follow, which could lead to concerns about hidden financial implications.
The text references 'Clause 1(c) of rule XIX' in Section 2 without any context or explanation, leading to potential political and legal confusion for those unfamiliar with the specific procedural rules.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The House will begin considering a bill to regulate bump stocks like machine guns after passing this resolution. They will have one hour for debate, split equally between leaders of the Ways and Means Committee, and one chance to send the bill back for more work, with no other interruptions allowed.
2. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Clause 1(c) of rule XIX will not apply when considering the bill H.R. 396.