It looks like a new gun control bill will actually make its way through the Senate with approval from several Republicans. That means that once it gets to the House, it should pass as well unless they just don’t want to pass it because it’s not restrictive enough. You would think that they would just take the win and have something to brag about when November comes around, but who knows.

Among these Senate Republicans who decided to vote in favor of the bill were,

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO), Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA), Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. Todd Young (R-IN), Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME).

According to the AP,

Nine days after Senate bargainers agreed to a framework proposal — and 29 years after Congress last enacted a major measure curbing firearms — Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told reporters that a final agreement on the proposal’s details was at hand.

The legislation lawmakers have been working toward would toughen background checks for the youngest firearms buyers, require more sellers to conduct background checks and beef up penalties on gun traffickers. It also would disburse money to states and communities aimed at improving school safety and mental health initiatives.

“I think we’ve reached agreement,” Murphy said. “And just we’re dotting the I’s and crossing the T’s right now. I think we’re in good shape.”

The senators did not initially say how they’d resolved the two major stumbling blocks that had delayed agreement on the plan’s legislative language.

One was how to make abusive romantic partners subject to the existing ban that violent spouses face to obtaining guns. The other was providing federal aid to states that have “red flag” laws that make it easier to temporarily take firearms away from people deemed dangerous or to states that have violence intervention programs.

I’m not against some sort of legislation such as background checks. I think that’s perfectly reasonable to be honest. Some of you may disagree and that’s perfectly fine, this is America. However, when it comes to red flag laws…I’m not a fan, but I don’t know what to do otherwise in the instance that we have someone who really seems mentally unstable and could potentially kill someone. For instance, let’s say that it was well aware that a potential gunman posted photos of himself holding a weapon on Instagram and said something like “Can’t wait for school to start back up.” Should we not stop this guy somehow? While he didn’t really make a direct threat, it could be implied that he did make one and might be mentally unstable. So, then the question is, should we take away his weapons temporarily (and possibly permanently) or not? If I knew that red flag laws would absolutely not be abused, I could be more on board with them.