WASHINGTON — President Obama said Wednesday his administration will come up with “concrete proposals” by next month to help stem gun violence in the United States and endorsed restrictions on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips.
“Words need to lead to action,” Obama said at the White House, where he announced that he’s putting Vice President Joe Biden in charge of developing a response to the mass shooting at a Connecticut elementary school that killed 20 children and six adults. “The fact that this problem is complex, can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing.”
Obama said there is a growing consensus in the country for restricting high-powered weapons and urged Congress to hold votes on such measures early next year. He said that the administration’s review will include regulating firearms as well as the impact of mental health and cultural issues.
Friday’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown has prompted calls for stricter gun control from Democratic lawmakers and gun-control advocates as representatives of firearms owners argued that banning or limiting weapons won’t provide a solution to violence.
After days of silence since the shooting, the National Rifle Association publicly pledged Tuesday to “offer meaningful contributions” to avoid a repeat of the tragedy. Even so, it signaled to members that it will resist the return of a assault-weapons ban.
As the NRA girds for a legislative confrontation that it has avoided for more than a decade, its allies on Capitol Hill and elsewhere began broadening the discussion to include the issues of mental health and violent movies.
Some members of Congress said they planned hearings or legislation, including a renewal of a ban passed in 1994 on certain military-style assault weapons.
The gunman in the school shooting, Adam Lanza, used a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle with 30-round magazines as his main weapon.
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., whose husband, Dennis, was among six Long Island Railroad commuters killed by a gunman in 1993, said the deaths at the school have changed the terms of the debate since the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire in 2004.
“This time it is different, and we all know it,” she said at a news conference Wednesday at the Capitol. “People are fed up with the gun lobby.”
Obama said the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to own firearms and that most gun owners abide by the law.
“I’m also betting that the majority, the vast majority of responsible law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law- breaking few from buying a weapon of war,” he said.
Biden advocated for stricter gun control restrictions during his years in the Senate before becoming vice president. The new task force would be the Obama administration’s first major effort on guns policy.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a gun control advocate, said Obama shouldn’t wait to take action until after Biden completes his review.
Obama should use his executive powers including making a recess appointment to fill the vacancy atop the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, ordering all federal agencies to send data to the national gun background check database, and directing the Justice Department to step up prosecution of gun traffickers, Bloomberg said.
“There should be no delay in taking these steps,” said Bloomberg, an independent, who said he spoke with Biden before the president’s announcement and was “very encouraged.”
The mayor is founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California announced her own task force, to be led by Rep. Mike Thompson of California.
While your at it, why not ban those blood and guts video games that glorify violence …………………. that parents blindly buy for their kids and they play over and over and over …………………………
What about the bloody movies coming out of Hollywood? Oh wait, those producers and actors got him elected. Can’t ban those.
I agree. Clint Eastwood definitely helped get Obama elected, but not in the way you are probably suggesting.
Does this mean Obama is going to stop selling assault rifles to mexican drug cartels?
What is the VP doing in the photo?
Trying to listen to the voices in his head?
Tell that to the 20 children’s patents…..
Criminals prefer unarmed victims… And DICTATORS prefer unarmed citizens!
A+++ post
More conspiracy theorists here? Listening to too much paranoia from hate groups?
Don’t blame Obama, Blame the MURDERER of TWENTY 6 and 7 YEAR OLD’S…..
True. Though no one is proposing disarmament. Try again Reg. ;)
Muslim Brotherhood-led Egypt is implementing Shariah Law. Now Obama plans to give them 20 new American-made F-16 fighter jets & 200 tanks.
They don’t stand a chance against Israel. Israel will just use them for target practice for their new pilots.
Your right they would, but why would we arm the enemy of the only friend we have in the middle east?
The Saudi’s have perhaps the most restrictive Islamic laws on the planet and does not recognize Israel, yet no one argues against arming them with nearly every weapon’s system imaginable.
We recently spent trillions in Iraq (and thousands of lives) to what end? Secular democracy and freedom? Peace in the middle east? Riiiiight. We went there to confiscate the WMD’s we “knew” they had, because Ronnie and Bush’s pops gave WMD’s to Saddam to use against Iran (among other goodies.)
Pakistan has received how many billions in aid, despite being perhaps the epicenter of Islamic extremism?
I don’t approve of Obama following precedent and giving unstable leaders and countries military aid, though I don’t imagine Reg here is doing anything but trying to score partisan points.
Our entire foreign policy needs to be reevaluated.
Ban liquor because it has a high alcohol content
ban automobiles because they can be dangerous
Screw it, let’s just ban everything and cower in bubbles. ;)
I have to ask. Who needs 60 round magazines for self protection? If you can’t hit your target with 5 rounds, who is going to protect us from you? I’m all for gun ownership, but lets get real.
As an American no one should decide what I need except me. That is freedom and that is what our country was founded upon.
So, do you think your freedom extends to owning a mortar, or an RPG? How would you feel if I used my “freedom” to decide that what I needed was a drone and some Hellfire missiles. Would that be okay with you?
Yes, provided you get the proper tax stamps from the ATF. I do not fear law abiding citizens that follow the laws. If you can find a person willing to sell you an RPG legally and you pay the tax stamps with the ATF to legally own it (all of which is possible) then I am certain you wouldn’t be using it for nefarious purposes.
OMG, so in your mind? It’s ok that “a law abiding” citizen have an RPG, or other missiles? Now, how do we know who is law abiding and which one of those “law abiding” citizens are just going to snap, or got through the system, or were undiagnosed and were just “creepy”? Let’s all of us “law abiding citizens” get our stamps and order our small nuclear devices, for our protection, of course.
That is the price of freedom. You must accept that there is bad people in this world and they will do bad things. If you want freedom, this is the price. If you want security and safety there is no freedom. You can have one. Choose wisely.
Tax stamps through the ATF are a real thing and have been for 80 years. You have to get local law enforcement approval and submit to fingerprinting and an atf/fbi background check
“Peri,” I think it’s very interesting that you take the opinion that if it’s OK with ATF, then everything was OK with you. Which suggests that you think that ATF is a competent and aboveboard agency that always gets it right.
ATF is a worthless organization that should be absorbed into the FBI. However the system established offers excellent protection from wrongful buyers. It could be stream lined and better staffed but the system ensures that there is the absolute bare minimum of bad people to pass through it.
It ATF is a “worthless organization” then how can its system offer “excellent protection.” ? Many people have a strong opinion that they are responsible for multiple homicides as part of their “Fast and Furious” operation. Do you agree with them? If not, how can you support the ATF? If so, how can you call them a “worthless organization”?
The system to purchase SBRs, SBSs, Machine Guns, Destructive Devices (grenades, RPGS, big bore rifles and shotguns), Suppressors, and AOWs have been in place since the National Firearms Act in 1934.
The ATF has only in recent years expanded their coverage to doing work that should be covered by the FBI. They have had over two decades of failures for operations and a long list of bad leadership. Their current state as an organization doesn’t affect the effectiveness of the protocols put in place nearly a century ago.
The protocols require the person to go to their local chief law enforcement officer and request a signature. This predates NICS but is essentially the same thing. The CLEO will run the person through local/state files and NCIC to make sure they are not a felon and have a clean and respectable criminal and driving history. Then the application goes to the ATF where they cash your 200 dollar check, send your two finger print cards to the FBI, and process your application, making sure it violates no restrictions in your state and local areas. Right now the turn around time for this is about a year from the check getting cashed.
It is a sound system however it could be stream lined.
If that’s the case why did it take almost a hundred years, a civil war, and then another 100 years to make it right for the black Americans. The 2nd Amendment is just one of 27. It was written in relation to the 3rd Amendment and both address the need for a “common defense” of our country. The 2nd Amendment is not cast in stone, it must grow, as has all of the others, along with us. The Declaration of Independence states that we have the right to “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”…….those 20 children’s born rights were violated, according to you, by the 2nd amendment. It’s time to decide, are assault weapons really necessary and guarded by the 2nd amendment? If a 5 shot clip can’t put down an intruder, then you are probably in a war. As with all of the amendments, the needs of society comes first. Assault weapons are not what society needs.
When you and alike thinkers take away the 2nd. amendment, you will then be free to take away the 1st. amendment.
Well the first amendment has certainly grown along with us hasn’t it? You can’t go into the movie theater and yell “fire” and call it free speech. You can’t belong to a violent military organization and plan to or produce weapons of mass destruction without being punished now can you? You can’t be a news reporter involved with a police investigation and not divulge your sources for information you have without being scrutinized? But the 2nd amendment isn’t really part of that same constitution……or is it? The 2nd Amendment needs to grow along with the rest of the document that is described as a “living, breathing testimony of a nation’s values”. A country’s values change, just as do people. I have a right to send my kid to school without having to worry about the teacher having a gun, or some other person coming in with an assault rifle and murdering ….anyone.
The 2nd Amendment has also grown. Before buying a weapon one needs to pass a back round check. You can not own a full automatic weapons without a special lic. If your convicted of domestic violent or a convicted felon you can not possess a firearm. You can not own weapons larger then a certain caliper and the list does go on. We have always possess firearm in this country. What has happened to society in the last thirty or so years that has cause such tragic crimes to keep occurring? This goes a lot deeper then a gun issue. More gun restrictions are just feel good laws. The real problems go much deeper and are not so easily solved.
In US V. Miller, a pivotal case, the US Supreme Court determined that the 2nd Amendment’s right is related to and regarding the right to those weapons that serve a “militia purpose” A sawed off shot gun was not protected by the 2nd Amendment, in this case, because of the tendency of them to be used for non militia, illegal purposes. The citizen’s assault weapon falls into that category. The weapons are designed to hold larger numbers of low caliber bullets, it is not considered a defensive weapon, but the NRA got it protected because of this very fact. The military, continues to train using semi automatic settings. These are weapons that are demonstrably being used in criminal, non defensive manners. There is also a difference between a clip and a magazine. A clip, typically has no more than 10 bullets, and cannot, with very few exceptions, be fired automatically in assault weapons. Magazines, obviously can hold many more than 10 bullets and can be fired either way.
Mans best friend has to be licensed. Every legal American has a government number. so what’s the big deal with a gun?
Ask the presidents Secret Service detail.
You need as many rounds as it take to stop the threat(s). Fact is 5 rounds in a self defense scenario may be too few? Few people without significant comabt experience remain calm enough to shoot as accurately as they do on the range with no stress. look as the FBI’s stats on police involved handgun shooitnings, their hitpercentages are quite low, targeet shooting and shooting in self defense are wildly different.
I agree with the last part of your comment–target shooting and self-defense shooting are wildly different. The core problem, though, is not how many rounds you’d need. You would indeed not shoot accurately, lacking combat experience. More rounds would just let you spray bullets over lots more innocent bystanders. That’s assuming you managed to draw your weapon at all, and weren’t overwhelmed by the body’s automatic flight-vs-freeze-vs-fight response–just long enough to be killed.
Police in Pennsylvania collaborated on a video that illustrates this problem: “If I Only Had a Gun.” It really takes the starch out of rescue fantasies.
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/defend-gun-7312540
So your saying it is much better to be totally defenseless and cower on the floor soiling your pants, begging for mercy while the gunman shoots you anyway?
I’d rather have the opprotunity to defend myself, this is a free country, you can choose to be defensless if you want.
I’ve seen this sham of reporting before, I love how they have the gun holstered in the wrong carry position, covered by an extra long tee shirt and have the guy wearing gloves and face protection gear anything they can to slow him down and make him fumble. I really wish they would do an honest piece and pull average CCW people to do this.
In your fantasy, I suspect, you’re combat-ready at all times. Not unwinding yourself from the bedclothes or leaping out of the shower onto a slippery floor. There’s nothing behind the gunman but a bullet-absorbing wall or open field… no ricochets flying every which way, none of your bullets going through the wall to slaughter your own kids in their beds or the people in the next apartment.
As someone that has experienced being shot at and shooting back, I prefer to be armed and have the ability to defend myself as often as possible. It is far better to die fighting than to die defenseless because you thought the police would protect you
Additional comment: You speak of over penetration through walls. .223 out of an AR actually penetrates less, MUCH LESS, than pistol and shotgun rounds. It is actually safer to use an AR in a home than anything else due to a lack of over penetration.
Perhaps you acknowledge my other points… Are you prepared every moment of every day to draw that gun to defend you and your family against armed men kicking in your door and blazing away at you? Do you keep a loaded gun right by the shower, and mentally rehearse how you’ll grab it and race out of the bathroom? Is there one in the pocket of your parka, so you won’t have to fumble for it in case someone shoots at you in the grocery store?
If not, you’re in the same boat as the people in the video link I posted earlier–who knew perfectly well that they were wearing long shirts and face guards, and would be attacked at some point in the day, and even practiced reaching for the gun before the shooter came… but fumbled when he arrived.
If you do focus constantly on preparedness… that must really have a sad psychological effect on you and your approach to the rest of the world.
No fantasies on my end, but I do practice for such and event so that I can react instictivly, but when God forbid someone breaks into my house they will be meet with the sound of a 12 gauge pump shotgun being charged. That in and of itself will most likely give them second thoughts. The same scenario played out in your residence would probably sound like someone screaming, fumbling for the phone to dial 911 (or let the security system dial it.) How long does it take for the police to show up at your place? It’s about 15 minutes on a good day here.
http://townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/2012/07/26/yes_guns_kill_but_how_often_are_they_used_in_selfdefense/page/full/
From the article;
For a guaranteed blank stare, ask gun-control proponents how often Americans use guns to defend themselves. They can’t tell you, because they don’t ask.
Suppose a guy goes to a baseball game. “Honey,” his wife asks afterward, “who won the game?” The husband says, “The Dodgers scored four runs.” What’s missing? Obviously, the wife still knows nothing about the outcome because she knows only one-half of the equation. Well, how can one responsibly discuss “how many people die because of guns” without discussing the other half of the equation — how many people would not be alive without their defensive use of a gun?
So, how often do Americans use firearms for self-defense?
Criminologist Gary Kleck estimates that 2.5 million Americans use guns to defend themselves each year. Out of that number, 400,000 believe that but for their firearms, they would have been dead.
Professor Emeritus James Q. Wilson, the UCLA public policy expert, says: “We know from Census Bureau surveys that something beyond 100,000 uses of guns for self-defense occur every year. We know from smaller surveys of a commercial nature that the number may be as high as 2 1/2 or 3 million. We don’t know what the right number is, but whatever the right number is, it’s not a trivial number.”
But like I said before, you have the right to be unarmed if you so choose.
The Self-defense myth is epitomized in stand-your-ground laws. Sadly, these laws turn out to “laws increase total homicides by 7 to 9 percent. Put differently, the laws induce an additional 500 to 700 homicides per year across the 23 states in our sample that enacted [SYG] laws.” [http://www.winningprogressive.org/texas-am-study-finds-stand-your-ground-means-more-homicides]
Now… how many people commit suicide on the spur of the moment, thanks to the ready availability of guns?
“Although most gun owners reportedly keep a firearm in their home for “protection” or “self defense,” 83 percent of gun-related deaths in these homes are the result of a suicide, often by someone other than the gun owner… Firearms account for 50 percent of all suicides.” [http://www.afsp.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewpage&page_id=050fea9f-b064-4092-b1135c3a70de1fda]
Someone overdoses, they feel ill & change their mind, they call 911. Someone pulls a trigger… “Guns are more lethal than other suicide means. They’re quick. And they’re irreversible. About 85% of attempts with a firearm are fatal: that’s a much higher case fatality rate than for nearly every other method. Many of the most widely used suicide attempt methods have case fatality rates below 5%. Attempters who take pills or inhale car exhaust or use razors have some time to reconsider mid-attempt and summon help or be rescued. The method itself often fails, even in the absence of a rescue. Even many of those who use hanging can stop mid-attempt as about half of hanging suicides are partial-suspension (meaning the person can release the pressure if they change their mind). With a firearm, once the trigger is pulled, there’s no turning back.” [http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/risk/index.html#What is it]
I’d be very curious to see a third-party review of these conclusion. The NRA is a rich organization, and can afford lots of “research.”
If you have read even one book on firearm defense of your home you would discover that NO ONE recommends or suggests “unwinding yourself from the bedclothes or leaping out of the shower onto a slippery floor”. The recommend and suggest that you take time to get dressed. Why? To clear your head of sleep and to listen and become aware of your surroundings.
In your fantasy you believe that every person that owns a firearm is just waiting to kill people and that is simply not true. You also believe that every person that is willing to defend their home from a person intending them harm hasn’t studied and learned from some of the best instructors available. Both assumptions on your part are incorrect.
Cops shouldn’t have guns. Remember the shooting in New York where the cops shot all 9 injured bystanders?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/25/empire-state-building-shooting-nypd-bullets-shot-all-nine_n_1830007.html
And since it’s obvious that even highly trained law enforcement officers can make deadly mistakes with guns, it’s even more obvious that we need to keep guns out of the hands of people who may have fantasies of saving the day but would only get themselves killed while slaughtering other innocent bystanders.
What makes you think cops are highly trained? A semi proficient concealed weapon carrier will shoot 10x the amount of ammo training each year than you average cop. A cop in Maine is required to shoot 100 rounds a year. I will shoot 500 rounds a range trip about 6 times a year.
A few years ago I had a job that included working with sheriff’s deputies of one or our counties. A couple of the young men invited me out to join them at the shooting range a few times. I should say the following things: 1) I had my first rifle at age 6 2) My first pistol at 13, 3) When I was eight yo I made quite a bit of money trick-shooting in gravel pits.
All that said, those garden variety cops shot better than I did. Which isn’t to say that these well-trained young men would not do dumb things. The criminal killing of Katheryn Haggerty:
http://www.pressherald.com/news/projects/Shoot-Arrest-at-remote-cabin-turns-deadly-angers-public.html
Is a good example.
But they did know how to shoot real good.
I was taught by the Mass State Police to fire until you needed to reload and continue to fire until the threat was neutralized. At the time that was 6 shots + 2 speed loads of six each + 2 speed strips of six each.
So why does my small town police department need weaponry like this? Surely these highly trained individuals can hit their target with 5 rounds. I live close the the Canandian border not the Mexican border. To my knowledge there has never been any major shootout in Maine.
For those that worry about 30 round magazines (the most common capacity for AR-15’s) the 10 round ones that were legal under the AWB are very quick and easy to change out, not much difference in the rate of fire. I have seen people that are very fast reloading single shot shotguns.
During the AWB that Clinton imposed on us anyone could still buy an AR-15. The difference between then and now, no flash surpressor, no adjustable stock, and the magazine couldn’t hold more than 10 rounds. Made no difference whatsoever, almost all cosmetic changes.
One of the many differences between an assault rifle and a shotgun is the amount of recoil. A gas-operated AR-15 type can fire thirty rounds a minute until the barrel melts down without battering the shooter at all. Try firing thirty rapid rounds out of a 12 ga. some day. Even with perfect technique, your shoulder and eardrums will be telling you about it.
Been there done that
Me too!
The guns most used in homicides are small caliber pistols with low capacity magazines. Regulating or banning semi automatic rifles will do nothing to curb crime since these are not weapons used in crime.
A .223 is on thing, looking down the barrel of a semi auto 12 gauge is another. Close quarters devastation….
I understand the concept, but what does it have to do with a gun ban?
They are trying to ban weapons that they don’t know anything about. An Ar or an AK is no more deadly then a semi auto 30.06. But being slightly ignorant to weapons, and remembering that ol’ uncle Bob used to hunt with a 30.06, thats for game. a .223 or .270 is a fine game ammo. but the looks of them are scary. If they would remember that a semi, heck, even 16 gauge is more deadly in a closed setting, the any center fire, would they ban or restrict shot guns? what of a 10.22? many a red squirell was harvested with a .22. Bad weapon to point at someone.
I own a lot of AR-15s. I use some of them for hunting as only two are in .223. One is a .410, one is a 9mm, one is a 50 beowulf, and one is without an upper currently. I swap the lowers around frequently because they all have different stock and trigger configurations. ARs are so versatile and open ended that if you have a torque wrench, shop vice, 2 specialty tools, a hammer, and punches you can do anything.
All guns are dangerous and can be deadly in the wrong hands. A bolt action rifle causes the shooter to be more deliberate in their shots. Laws won’t stop violence. It might shape violence into certain forms but it will never stop it. If all the guns vanished tomorrow people would be stabbing each other with sharpened sticks.
Agreed. If everyone had that knowledge, they would understand. They know, like us, that they all can be dangerous, but they seem to believe some may be more dangerous then others, and thats just not so. Weapons are no more then tools, to get a job done, just as a chainsaw, or a ratchet. Every single one, in the wrong hands, is a tool of mayhem.
And how many children would have died if Lanza’d come at them with sharpened sticks?
Who knows? What if he built a bomb? What if he used poison gas? What if he did any number of easy to do things that result in a high casualty count?
You cannot stop a dedicated murderer by doing anything short of a full on 1984 style police state. Any laws made soon with be feel good legislation to calm the masses without actually protecting, preventing, discouraging, or eliminating crime or murders. It will be worded to sound mean, get votes, and hurt law abiding citizens.
How many wild-eyed guys suddenly overcome with an urge to slaughter people will rummage through their mother’s stuff and grab a bomb or some poison gas?
Maybe treat the root problem of mental illness before it becomes a homicidal rage?
Definitely treat mental illness. And regulate guns. It’s not an either-or thing.
Why regulate guns? Describe how regulation will do anything and please cite your sources.
’94 ban did nothing to decrease crime. It was a waste of money time and effort and caused wide scale supply problems when the military was gearing up for invasion.
We do regulate guns. Not everybody can purchase one.
Are you privy to some information as to his state of mind or the fact that this was not a premeditated act in any manner?
Even figuring premeditation (by him or others in other slaughters), how often do we see poison gas violence or bomb violence in the US, compared to gun violence? Guns are everywhere, and very effective at slaughtering people wholesale, so they’re the weapon of choice.
If someone wants to kill people they will find a way to kill people. The largest domestic case of terrorism was Oklahoma City.
Bomb making material is more readily available and more common then many people think. The directions are also very easy to obtain. Poison gas is also very easy to make.
Guns are not “everywhere” but I am willing to bet that you have at least some of the materials for making a bomb in your garage, basement or out building. I am even willing to bet that you have at least some of the materials for poison gas under your sink or in a hallway in your home and you didn’t have to complete a Federal Form and pass a background check to purchase them.
The Bath School disaster is the name given to three bombings in Bath Township, MI, on May 18, 1927, which killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, and four other adults; at least 58 people were injured.
The Our Lady of the Angels School Fire broke out shortly before classes were to be dismissed on December 1, 1958, at the foot of a stairway in the Our Lady of the Angels School in Chicago, Illinois. The fire killed 92 students and 3 nuns. Despite a confession to arson no one was ever prosecuted for the blaze.
Liz they are lying to you.. The guy never used the rifle they want to ban, It was found in his car un fired… You might need help in figuring out why they excluded that fact in their new briefs… Why do you think the president want the laws changed before January.. Because the truth will come out that he used 2 pistols. The medical examiner slip and said it.
The ME has identified the .223 as the round used.
heck of a shot in 2.5 minutes, with a rifle in close quarters. I don’t believe it yet.
From the timeline published by FoxNews
10 minute rampage not 2.5 minutes
1. Two adults moving towards him in a hallway.
2. A classroom of children and teachers huddled together.
3. A second classroom where he shoots another teacher and several more students when the emerge from hiding.
4. He kills himself as 1st responders arrive on scene.
Young children will huddle together. It doesn’t take a military expert level marksmen.
He was also trained by his mother (his first victim) and allegedly “practiced” for hours on end by playing violent video games.
I’m veryinterested in this tidbit, you’ve made this claim many times, care to cite a source we can see? This is a huge case of exploitation that i actually find unlikely given the number of different personel on scene that have no reason to perpetuate any lie.
How many if he’ set fire to the building at each exit? What if he used a bomb and left the scene for another school? What if, What if?
Well let’s see….really doesn’t matter since no one is suggesting a total ban on all guns.
The rifle the want to ban was never used in the shootings, it was found unfired in the car..
One of the many mistakes in the early going….it was used.
My guess is that most .22 pistols are revolvers, which don’t have “magazines.” I’d also be very curious to see some attribution of your statistics on handgun homicides, particularly as opposed to handgun “felony homicides” which filter out suicides.
Conneticut already has a ban on assault weapons
It doesn`t work
This is just another way for the idiot in the white house to control the honest americans. a baseball bat can be conscrewed as an assault weapon if it is used that way
below is a link to their law govering assult weapons
http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm
Typical liberal. Blame the gun not the person responsible for pulling the trigger.
Dems want to take my guns away to save lives. Lets start with the 4500 abortions daily in the USA. That would save some lives.
Abortions have been linked to the steady decline in the crime rate since those fetuses aborted were typically from poor single mothers and would have been predisposed to a life of poverty and crime.
Source
Freakanomics
But it would cost a fortune in taxes to educate all those kids. Plus a large percentage of them would qualify for further taxpayer-funded benefits. We’d have to at least double the taxes on every adult to pay for the needs of all those un-aborted babies.
I went hunting last Friday. I had a shotgun and two handguns, all fully loaded with me all day. None of the guns fired by themselves. Even though I was fully armed, I never fired a shot! When I got home and turned on the TV, I heard about the shooting for the first time.
Then the Liberals on TV told me that all those dead kids in Connecticut were MY fault! That it was MY guns that allowed this to happen! That if I didn’t have this sick affection for guns, this would have been avoided!
Then I logged in to this paper’s forum page and was told the same thing by the usual far-left posters that seem to live here because they lack meaningful lives.
Now today, our Beloved Leader proclaims he intends to ban scary guns again, even though he knows it didn’t do anything the first time, and it won’t do anything now!
I guess it just proves the point that Liberalism really is a brain disease! They sure can’t legislate away mental illness – they need that voter base!!!
You make it sound like a gun is a person, it’s so innocent and certainly not responsible for anything. And you are correct, mental illness cannot be controlled, detected completely, legislated away. But the fact of the matter is a probable mentally ill person, once again, used a gun to shoot innocent people. No you cannot legislate mental illness away, but you can do something about the guns that they are using. So take your gun, tuck it night night, kiss it on it’s teeny weeny barrel and tell it a night time story, your guns aren’t those being talked about and you know it. Weapons of war getting into the hands of mentally ill individuals are murdering innocent Americans, something needs to be done. Guns don’t have rights and were originally designed to ………kill people. Get over yourself. If being a democrat is a brain disease, then being a gun toting tea party conservative is brain dead.
“Superior”?? Nothing in your post seems to lead to that conclusion …
Two handguns? What were you hunting that required TWO handguns? If you miss on the first shot, your quarry is gone. If wounded, shoot the poor creature with you rifle, or stab it with your knife. But why would you shoot it with a pistola?
Is a drone considered an assault weapon?
Don’t think for a minute that Americans will be exempt from drone warfare.
They are hiding the fact that the so called assult rifle was found in the car and never used in the shootings.. It is sad that they are playing politics with the deaths of these children..
There were a great many mistakes made in the original reports. This was one of them.
So you can attempt to ban guns in little over a month, yet can’t figure out how to cut any spending at all as we approach a financial disaster? This whole situation is so corrupt and ackwards.. I’m not even into conspiracys but seruosly our goverment is beyond broken.
The financial disaster scenario is being worked up by Republican leaders. They refuse all compromise, determined to give billionaires tax breaks while cutting elderly people’s Social Security and Medicare. The world will not explode, or the US go bankrupt if Obama refuses to play their nasty game.
And Obama’s take it or leave it attitude is compromising? Please, ALL of the politicians in Washington are a bunch of self serving crooks, especially your messiah Obama.
“They refuse all compromise, determined to give billionaires tax breaks while cutting elderly people’s Social Security and Medicare.”
Oh please…Speaker Boehner came out and moved from no tax hikes to tax hikes on those making $1,000.000.00 per year; Presidents Obama’s response…threaten a veto. Your claim that the Republicans “refuse all compromise” is laughable.
And who is talking about cutting Social Security and Medicare?
One Mentally disturbed man with a gun kills 20 Terrorists with boxcutters killed 3000
Boxcutters + several huge aircraft. How often do boxcutter + aircraft slaughters occur, vs. slaughters committed by people with guns?
Well we had the guy that flew his plane into the IRS building in Texas.
Then there was the guy that attempted to crash his plane into the White House (ended up hitting the lawn).
Then there was the guy that planed to pack explosives into model remote controlled airplanes and fly them into target (not sure which ones).
Those are the ones I remember. There may be more.
Why is it if guns are the problem we don’t see gun shows being shot up? I’ve been to some of these shows and there are thousands of guns there. Hmmmm I wonder.
No matter who, where or why a trigger is pulled, more people are going to die if it’s the trigger of a firearm-of-mass-destruction. They aren’t called assault weapons for nothing.
HEY OBAMA…WE’RE CALLING FOR QUICK ACTION FROM YOU!!! GET OUR MARINE RELEASED FROM THAT STINKING MEXICAN PRISON NOW!!! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!! BILL O’REILLY IS CALLING FOR A BOYCOT OF MEXICO. LIKE THIS IF YOU AGREE……
Mr Obama, We are calling for quick ” quick action ” from you. Get our Marine out of that stinking Mexican prison NOW!!! This is an outrage! …
The postings on this thread are a mixture of the usual! Some rational people posting mixed with a few of the usual liberal/progressives spouting about a subject on which they have no real knowledge – just vehement opinions!