Legislation Vote Tabulation Spreadsheet

[groundgrid]

I have started a new thread for updates to the spreadsheet that I began in reference to HB-58.

Just added the vote results for HB-35 (Background Checks)

Link:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12508970/DE%20Gun%20Bill%20Positions.xlsx

Please try to get your Representative & Senator to give you a definitive answer on each bill and post them in this thread.

I will also list educated guesses based on your familiarity with the specific politician and their history. For example, if they are bill's sponsor.
If you don't have an official position from them, please give me an idea of how you got your information.
Also, let me know if there are any mistakes. (This is often a late night project)

I'll update the spreadsheet every few days.

All of this information will be saved for use in the next election.

[woofguy]

Just emailed the entire gang of folks again... lets see if I get canned emails again or an actual reply!?!?!?!?

[Obleo]

Great spreadsheet!  Thanks groundgrid!

[poster formerly know as Silverbullet]

Thanks man nice. Nice tool.

Now if our leaders in this state were not tools we would have it made 

[Moosie]

Thank you, Groundgrid! 

What a great tool!! 

Moosie

[groundgrid]

SB-16 & HB-88 vote results have been added.

Fortunately, it appears that HB-88 has been amended to offer more protection to those that may be accused.
Personally, I don't see a problem with the temporary removal of firearms from someone who is having a legitimate mental health crisis.
The most important change is the requirement that any actions be taken by an educated & licensed professional.
I would expect that his/her family & friend take care of doing this but see the point of having a law for those situations that are serious enough to warrant action.

I think that we should all try to identify any other flaws with this bill so that they can be addressed when it gets to the senate.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12508970/DE%20Gun%20Bill%20Positions.xlsx

[poster formerly know as Silverbullet]

I have issues with hb88 in general. Unless someone gets their day in court I believe its very dangerous being able to take firearms away.

Hell it could be argued anyone who is mugged, raped or something goes through a period of mental illness or depression and I cant see a state or federal government taking away a person's right to protect themselves.

I could also see this being manipulated by the government as a way to confiscate.

[groundgrid]

As amended, HB-88 does require a confidential hearing at which the defendant would be entitled to present evidence in their behalf.

"FURTHER AMEND House Bill No. 88 by striking line 129 in its entirety and substituting in lieu thereof the following:
(b) The Department shall have the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is...

FURTHER AMEND House Bill No. 88 by striking line 130 in its entirety and substituting in lieu thereof the following:
dangerous to others or self as defined in Section 5122 of Title 16. Any proceedings pursuant to this section shall be in a closed and confidential hearing. The respondent shall have the right to present evidence"

Mental illnesses are actually very strictly defined in a very large book referred to as "DSM-IV"
A licensed professional would need to provide clear and convincing evidence that the accused person was affected by a specific mental illness that included symptoms that would make that person a danger to themselves or others as specified in the DSM-IV.

The check against abuse of this process is the defendant's ability to sue the accusing practitioner for malpractice. If a diagnosis of mental illness is made & that diagnosis does not conform to the published guidelines you will soon have a line of lawyers at your disposal to file claim against that practitioner's malpractice insurance. 

Someone who does meet the required conditions would also meet the requirements for involuntary commitment to a mental hospital.

I could be wrong, but I don't see much room for abuse here. The government would need to have influence over both the accusing practitioner (possible) AND both your doctor & your lawyer (extremely unlikely). However, I would like to see a statement that says that simply receiving treatment for a condition or being on meds such as anti-depressants does not, in & of itself, trigger the need for a hearing under the law.

Someone need to get this bill reviewed by a knowledgeable attorney who can pick out potential issues so that we can get changes made in the senate.

[poster formerly know as Silverbullet]

We are talking about the government. They can find a way to abuse ANYTHING.

[derunner]

I could be wrong, but I don't see much room for abuse here.

Here is the part I don't like.  Look at full text.


The Department of Justice, the Courts, the Delaware State Police, DELJIS, the Delaware State Bureau of Identification, the Department of Health and Social Services and any other necessary agency as may be determined by the Governor, may develop appropriate regulations to carry out the purposes of this Act.


It gives the Governor the ability to appoint any agency he wants to initiate this process and create regulations.  Given our current Governor's anti-gun approach this could be bad.  He could require schools to report paper guns, pop tart guns etc for investigation.  I like first part of the bill, but this should be limited to mental health professions who can initiate the process.  I don't see those safeguards.  Lots of people can initiate action and hopefully the courts would protect people, but only after much aggravation and expense.  Lots of room for abuse I think.

[groundgrid]

The part that you have quoted is actually current law.
These bills are very confusing to read, especially with amendments.

The bill is an amendment to the current law while any amendment to the bill is a further amendment to the original amendment.
(Just stocked up on Excedrin, maybe the headache will go away once the legislative session ends)

Note the first line:

Section 1.  Amend § 1448, Title 11 of the Delaware Code by making insertions as shown by underlining and deletions as shown by strike through as follows:

The proposed bill is only the underlined and stricken parts. The rest of the section is already law.

Maybe we can get this line changed as part of another amendment?

[Clarence]

This is a great tool.  Nice work

[Trapper]

Received an email from Trey Paradee's office..
He is voting NO to HB 58 & HB 67.

[Cbmarine]

@groundgrid.  A suggestion to improve your already excellent spreadsheet.  Add a vote prediction based on the bill's listed supporters, e.g.,

HB 67
Primary Sponsor:   Scott          
Additional Sponsor(s):    Sen. Sokola
CoSponsors:   Reps. Baumbach, Heffernan, Jaques; Sen. Peterson

Add a note: ** vote prediction based on sponsorship

[groundgrid]

Updates have been made with information supplied by forum members.

I have already included the bill's sponsors as supporting them.

Please let me know if there are any mistakes.

Please keep posting reports from your communications with the Reps & Senators.

3 more weeks to go!!

Link to spreadsheet:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12508970/DE%20Gun%20Bill%20Positions.xlsx

Please note that the file name does not change when I make updates.