Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gun Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House fails to recall high‑capacity‑magazine ban after emotional floor debate
Summary
A motion to recall House File 3402, a proposed ban on high‑capacity magazines (10‑round threshold), fell short after hours of floor debate that featured testimony from families affected by the Annunciation shooting; the motion did not pass on narrow margins reported during roll calls.
A recall motion to move House File 3402 — a bill that would ban magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds — to the General Register was defeated after a prolonged, floor‑long debate on March 25, 2026.
Representative Tabke, the motion’s sponsor, framed the measure as a life‑saving, incremental change, urging colleagues to "give people time" during mass‑shooting pauses and noting that similar laws exist in other states. "The pauses matter," Tabke said, describing an account in which 116 rounds were fired during a two‑minute mass shooting and arguing magazine capacity affects survivability.
Supporters across the House, including legislators who represent communities affected by the Annunciation church shooting, said the bill would reduce casualties in future mass shootings. "These families believe in us. They believe in the work we're doing here," Representative Greenman told members, reading letters from survivors and urging a green vote.
Opponents argued a ban would not stop determined criminals, could create significant unintended consequences for lawful owners, and raise constitutional questions. Representative Roach said the shooter had already broken numerous laws and that additional restrictions would not have prevented the tragedy; Representative Davis and others warned that the ban could criminalize many law‑abiding gun owners.
The House held a roll call under the call of the House for the motion; multiple roll calls during the evening produced narrow margins (including a 66‑68 and later a 67‑67 tally reported on separate motions), and ultimately the motion did not prevail.
Why it matters: The debate centered on different approaches to reducing mass‑shooting lethality — regulating magazine capacity versus focusing on school safety funding, reporting systems and mental‑health interventions.
What’s next: Sponsors said they remain committed to working on amendments and other proposals that could gain broader support.
Sources: Floor debate and roll calls recorded in the House transcript on March 25, 2026. Quotes attributed to Representatives Tabke, Greenman and Roach as spoken on the floor.
