Rep. Mast supports universal background checks for gun sales — and so do we | Our view

On Tuesday, exactly eight years after U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords was shot in the head while meeting with constituents in Arizona, members of Congress introduced a bill to require background checks for almost every gun sale in the United States. 

National headlines have characterized the bill — the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019 — as an effort driven by Democrats, but that's not entirely accurate. Five of the bill's 10 original co-authors are Republicans, and one of those Republicans is local: U.S. Rep. Brian Mast of Palm City. 

“We’re proponents of responsible gun ownership. It’s a Second Amendment right," Mast said Wednesday, "but we should be wise about who we sell firearms to based on what their record is, what their history is.”

The bill would close what's commonly referred to as the "gun-show loophole," which allows private citizens to sell guns without performing a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Such sales are common, and can happen at actual gun shows or via other private exchanges. 

“I talk to gun owners all the time, people who are collectors, who are hunters, who are hugely supportive of this,” said Mast, a gun owner and combat-wounded Army veteran.

A former resident of Parkland, Mast drew national attention last year after he called for a pause on sales of the AR-15 and similar tactical firearms in the aftermath of the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. That proposal didn't gain traction — but the background check proposal is lower-hanging fruit.  

More: GOP Rep. Brian Mast pushing for 60-day 'pause' on sales of AR-15

More: 'Assault' weapons ban? Let voters decide 

If passed, the background check bill would require anyone who transfers a gun to be a licensed firearm dealer, importer or manufacturer — with some significant exemptions. It would not apply to:

• Law enforcement agencies or officers, armed private security professionals, members of the armed forces who are obtaining firearms for their official employment duties.
• Gifts between spouses, domestic partners, parents and children, siblings, aunts or uncles and their nieces or nephews, or between grandparents and their grandchildren. 
• Temporary firearm transfers that are necessary to "prevent imminent death or great bodily harm."
• Temporary transfers of firearms for use exclusively at a shooting range or while "reasonably necessary" while hunting, trapping or fishing. 

Gun transfers that don't fall into those categories would be illegal for unlicensed sellers. 

“It shouldn’t be provocative to say listen, as law-abiding citizens, we want to know if citizens have gone through the appropriate channels,” Mast said. 

Of course, we know it will be provocative in some circles. That's the case with any legislation that enhances gun control in the United States.  

Opponents will argue this bill makes gun sales more costly for buyers and sellers by requiring them to get licensed or use a third-party dealer to sell firearms. 

They will argue it's ineffective because it only applies to law-abiding citizens. 

We believe the potential downsides are outweighed by the benefits of a more thorough vetting system. 

The American College of Physicians came out Wednesday in support of the bill, citing the "urgent public health crisis" of gun violence in the United States. 

In a letter to the bill's chief sponsor, U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson, D-California, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the group's president wrote:

"Deaths and injuries from firearms are not just a result of mass shootings, they are a
daily occurrence; in 2016, more than 38,000 Americans lost their lives to firearms, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; another 81,000 each year on average suffer non-fatal (yet often devastating) injuries from firearms."

Background check legislation has repeatedly failed in Congress, most notably after the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. 

With backing from top Democrats, the new bill faces strong odds in the U.S. House.

The Senate is a different story. Though a companion bill exists, it will be up to Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky whether to bring it up for a vote.

Mast said he had no concerns about standing with Democrats on the issue.

“You look at it and say, 'Is this good legislation?' Not, 'Does it have a D or an R in front of it?' " he said.

Like Mast, we see this common-sense measure as a step in the right direction. 

More than that, it's a rare display of tangible bipartisan action. And that's something we need more of from our nation's leaders.

Editorials of Treasure Coast Newspapers/TCPalm are decided collectively by its Editorial Board. To respond to this editorial in a letter to the editor, email up to 300 words to TCNLetters@TCPalm.com.