Obama urges Americans to keep up pressure for tighter gun control

Comments (40)
richinnc wrote:

Congress and the rest of government need to think about the budget and their spending and how they fund it first. We cannot let them continue to destroy our future. Think about how our economy is today, compared to the past, it needs to improve. The economy is our life blood, and we know what happens without blood. While many in government want control over us, they need keep the balance that our Constitution provides.

Dec 21, 2012 7:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
idonthinkso wrote:

Criminals refrain from committing crime mostly because of the fear of getting caught and punished, or the risk to themselves. In other words if you have the choice to break into an empty house or a house with a 120 pound raging pit bull you’ll choose the empty house.

Here are tsome stats for Kennesaw Georgia where every head of household must own a gun. Compare that to Detroit or DC which have very anti-gun laws.

“The city violent crime rate for Kennesaw in 2010 was lower than the national violent crime rate average by 85.16% and the city property crime rate in Kennesaw was lower than the national property crime rate average by 46.46%.

In 2010 the city violent crime rate in Kennesaw was lower than the violent crime rate in Georgia by 85.15% and the city property crime rate in Kennesaw was lower than the property crime rate in Georgia by 56.74%.”

Dec 21, 2012 7:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

I suspected a government (or a group in the US) was behind these shootings. I thought maybe some kind of brainwashing (possibly using video games) or drugs. Now, not only do I know who is causing these mass shootings, I know why.
China’s official news agency came out yesterday with an article that said it is time for Americans to have their guns taken. What a coincidence.
12/20/2012 “Communist Chinese Government Calls For Americans to be Disarmed”
Add that to the massive buildup and expansion of the Chinese military, aircraft carriers, stealth aircraft, troop ships, transport planes, nuclear submarines, Chinese in South America, and you don’t have to be a genius to see who is behind the killings. The Chinese are also funding anti gun groups.
The only thing that holds back China is the 100,000,000 Americans with guns, take those away, and our little army could never stand up to China’s three million man army. One of China’s known plans is to invade South America by putting huge numbers of troops hidden on ships with shipping containers, using the Panama canal they now control, (the Chinese military know has a huge port in the Bahamas) and move up into the US from the South. The US has intercepted large numbers of Chinese ships in US ports with automatic weapons, ammunition, military equipment, explosives, and grenades. Our government said they were to be sold to gangs. (??????. There are also reports of large numbers of Chinese in Mexico, some coming across the border illegally. Top Chinese generals have openly stated they plan to conquer America.
And remember, the Chinese are in bed with the wealthy in America and Wall Street, and those people control our Congress.
“Germany ivade Europe? That’s crazy talk! Japan attack the US? That’s crazy talk! Iraq invade Kuwait? That’s crazy talk.”
So I guess I am crazy this time like others were in the past.

Dec 21, 2012 7:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
mosahlah wrote:

This worked out really great for Clinton. And support for gun rights are actually much higher now than in the 90s.

Dec 21, 2012 8:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
mosahlah wrote:

This worked out really great for Clinton. And support for gun rights are actually much higher now than in the 90s.

Dec 21, 2012 8:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
VultureTX wrote:

none of the DEM proposed changes would have prevented the NewTown shooting. yet they trot out the same stuff that failed thanks to their own legislative efforts.
Assault weapons ban reenacted (it sunsetted in 2004)
Large magazine ban (same)
Supposed gun show loophole (individuals are not allowed to use the instant check system that dealers use. why?)

Add mental illness info to the background check system. (oh wait DEMs won’t touch this one seriously. they would lose their base)

So a bunch of proposals that would not have stopped Adam in Newtown, would not have stopped Nidal Hassan at Ft. Hood. and likely won’t stop the next mass murderer.

/to a person fixated on death the gun is only a tool and there must be 50 ways to off that mutha’

Dec 21, 2012 8:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
Johan-Doh wrote:

All Gun Control laws do is disarm law abiding citizens. Criminals don’t pay attention to the laws (they are criminals), and will get a gun from an illegal source.

I think there should be better enforcement of current laws, background checks, etc.

Dec 21, 2012 8:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
lawgone wrote:

Obama never saw a gun control bill he didn’t like especially when he was an Illinois Senator. The “assault” gun and hi cap mag bans did absolutely nothing in regards to lowering any statistic. Let the gun grabbers try this ban again and see what happens come election time. History will indeed repeat itself.

Dec 21, 2012 8:33am EST  --  Report as abuse

Hope soon Obama will think about large number of children\civilians that are killed by the US Drones and campaigns for “Drone abandon” with respect to targetted killings

Dec 21, 2012 9:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
smeagol wrote:

We are actually missing a chance to have a serious discussion on the root cause/causes of these tragedies. Everyone on both sides of this debate agrees that this was horrible, but passing an “assault weapons” ban will fix absolutely nothing. The causes are a lot deeper than that. The rate of violent crime has been going down since 1994 and has continued to go down even after the assault weapons ban expired. We need to start listening to people with real answers instead of just hysterical people who want to flail at windmills. Would it surprise anyone to learn for instance that CT is one of only six states that doesn’t have a law that provides for some type of involuntary commitment for the mentally ill? I’m not saying that this is the solution either, we just need to start a dialogue other than “ban the assault rifles”. Actually I don’t think anyone outside of the military has died at the hands of an assault rifle since they were classified as class 3 weapons back in the mid thirties

Dec 21, 2012 9:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
ConradU812 wrote:

Yes, gun control worked so wonderfully for Mexico and Norway.

Dec 21, 2012 9:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
bobber1956 wrote:

Yes, well king george kept the pressure up too. The true American Spirit is still alive obama.

Dec 21, 2012 9:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
BillDexter wrote:

The effort to remove semi-automatic weapons from the hands of the public always includes the “you don’t need that much firepower” argument. Well, I would agree that in my lifetime that no situation has warranted such weapons. Well, almost no situation. I recall the L.A. riots when business owners stood on the roofs of their businesses with semi-automatic weapons to escape the lootings, beatings and killings that erupted that day. They survived a war zone on the streets of America. But I know, it would be much easier to convince middle America that it’s best to give all your money to the government so THEY can keep everybody safe once you can’t defend yourself. So, let’s count the lost lives of those poor kids in Connecticut but NOT count the many, many people who have saved their own lives thru the second amendment and pass legislation quickly while the moment is fresh. Our government could always use more power over the citizens.

Dec 21, 2012 9:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
r.u.crazy wrote:

Of course the Obama administration wants your guns. They have been waiting for this tragedy to do exactly that. Everyone was expecting this to happen which is exactly why gun sales have gone through the roof under this administration. Why do you think they jumped on this in a matter of days when they haven’t submitted a budget in years? It was their plan all along. Don’t be fooled by the Democrats. There is a reason they want to disarm the citizens of the U.S. and it doesn’t have one thing to do with public safety. Never trust a poitician, they are known liars and never, ever trust a Democrat; they will enslave you as they are of the mind that you aren’t smart enough to live without their guidance. Don’t ever give up one inch in your right to keep and bear arms because if you do, the rest of your rights will fall like dominoes soon after. History always repeats itself so look to those people that have surrendered their firearms to so-called gun control. Dictators love gun control and so do wannabe dictators. That’s why the 2nd amendment is a balance of power and only 2nd in importance behind free speech. Without it, free speech will end as both are required to exist.

Dec 21, 2012 9:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
forzapista wrote:

All of the recent mass shootings and killings were done with legally purchased and owned weapson. Therefore, until gun owners can demonstrate responsible behavior with their weapon, they should be taken away. Act like adults and you will be treated like adults.

Dec 21, 2012 10:01am EST  --  Report as abuse
gitmojo wrote:

Gun control should start with the gov’t by not buying and allowing weapons to cross the Mexican border and kill innocent people.
He and his Attorney General are hypocrites and political opportunists.

Dec 21, 2012 10:09am EST  --  Report as abuse

Conservative judge: “I don’t care whether it’s called gun control or a gun ban. I’m for it.”
Congress must reinstate and toughen the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-burns-assault-weapons-ban-20121220,0,6774314.story

Dec 21, 2012 10:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
MetalHead8 wrote:

A country that (probably by accident) has killed over 170 kids with drones internationaly, wants to take away guns from law abiding citizens to protect children?

Obama is a fool. Banning weapons will not stop the voilence. Why isn’t Obama Urging Parents to be more responable? Nancy Lanza’s son went at her with a knife, Under law, your supposed to lock up your weapons in that situation, not Buy your mentally-ill son 500+ .223 hollowpoints. Parents need to stop acting irresponable. I really want to know how young this kid was giving M rated video games and access to the online games.

Dec 21, 2012 10:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

forzapista – Not true. Adam Lanza stole the guns from his mother.

Dec 21, 2012 10:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
USA4 wrote:

Connecticut has some of the tightest gun control laws in the country. So, it doesn’t look like gun regulations are the answer. Seems we need to be much better at getting crazy people off the streets, give crazy people less of the publicity that they so desperately crave when they massacre others, and change a culture of violence that permeates our society. All of those things are much harder to do (and take real leadership that our president doesn’t seem to be capable of) than passing more laws that will simply make law abiding citizens less safe.

Dec 21, 2012 10:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
forzapista wrote:

@Jemeson4Lunch. Not true. Adam Lanza did not “steal” the guns. The guns where available, unsecured in the house where he lived. They were obviously not secured properly, even though Nancy Lanza was aware she had a mentally unstable son in her house. The guns were not stolen. This is exactly my point. All the legal guns owned by idiots. It’s time to protect society from gun owners. There are many more examples.

Dec 21, 2012 11:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
Donnatello wrote:

Maybe it’s time to start thinking about ammunition and reloading supplies purchase restrictions. Ammunition is a consumable and has shelf life issues if stored improperly. It must be replenished in order to use a firearm. Therefore, it can be controlled. If the government can limit how much nitrogen based fertilizers and cold medicines I can purchase, they can limit how much ammunition can be purchased. Also, ban all internet sales of ammuntion, body armor and reloading supplies. Right now you can purchase thousands of rounds of ammo online with no requirement for any background check. This in fact is what the Colorado shooter was able to do. Finally ban the sale of devices that turn semiautomatic weapons into automatic weapons (eg. slide/bump stocks). These devices are legally getting around the automatic modification ban, only because they do not directly fire the weapon. Yet, they allow the weapon to put forth 700-900 rounds per minute. I know that many of you gun nuts claim that this is not an automatic weapon, but the difference is just semantics.

Dec 21, 2012 11:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
sidevalve56 wrote:

Obama should urge americans to keep up pressure for tighter psycho control…

Dec 21, 2012 11:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

Well it’s not “Mayberry” anymore!

All that has been mentioned in this article is an attempt to stop the continued sales of military type weapons to the general public. It said nothing about confiscation. Rejoice yahoos of the country. If the Administration succeeds, it means your pet weapons could go up in price and might become “limited editions”. You may have a collector’s item but you may not be able to sell it legally. That shouldn’t stop you if you and your paranoia can ever part with it.

BTW – were any of the LA shop owners standing on their roofs (interesting place to stand as I recall so many of those stores in Watts were burned out after they were looted) actually shooting anyone? It doesn’t sound like having weapons was the least bit effective actually. It might actually make the shooter more of a target of mob rage. They will, no doubt, now have weapons of military grade too. Think Syria, not Watts, for future battles. And let’s not forget car bombs. Fires have a mind of their own and will bypass party walls, if the very thick smoke from burning asphalt roofing and building contents doesn’t get you first. Remember smoke kills because it is very hot. Why aren’t some of you guys complaining about laws that prevent you from getting explosives? They are the 21st century insurgent’s weapons of choice.

What was more effective were economic and social policies that made it less likely that areas like Watts would become so frustrated they became violent. “Redlining” of black neighborhoods was one of the practices that were outlawed shortly after the riots. Improved welfare and social services also helped too. If those fail, forget the rest. .

Even poor people have their priorities. Fair access to gainful employment is the best defense against civil upheaval.

This country is going to be the nightmare I thought it would be over 15 years ago. It’s “armed and ready” according to these comments.

Dec 21, 2012 11:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

forzapista – Two adults shared a house. That does not make all property within the house communal, regardless of familial relationship. Agreed, Nancy should have secured her guns. My understanding is that her failure to secure her guns, knowing her son was mentally ill, is already a crime in the state.

In the end, if Nancy had a feasible route to have her son committed after showing violent tendencies, 28 lives would have been saved. That’s the societal failing no one is addressing properly. Taking a style of gun off the market will do absolutely nothing to keep mentally ill people from posing a danger to others.

Dec 21, 2012 11:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
Donnatello wrote:

Well if we need to take care of the mentally ill, bring on Obamacare. This will help bring help to those persons who need it. Also, we need to have a universal full background check to ensure that guns are not being purchased by someone who is mentally ill, since over half of the mass killings recently are committed by someone who has shown past signs of mental illness. We also need to ensure that if you have a mentally ill person at home that you aren’t allowed to purchase weapons.

Dec 21, 2012 11:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

The Connecticut shootings are horrific and my heart goes out to the victims and their families. Unfortunately banning guns aren’t the answer, any type of gun for that matter, including the .50 caliber.

The only intelligent words in this article from obama’s lips are “…responsible gun owners”.

The answer to all these questions in regards to the case that prompted a surge in people and gun control is NO.

Were the guns locked in a gun cabinet?
Did the guns have trigger locks on them?
Were the keys for the cabinet and trigger locks hidden?
Was the ammo in a separate area of the house hidden?

If yes was the response to all questions in this tragedy and any tragedy that occurred with gun violence in America were the “owner” of the guns wasn’t the shooter the amount of murders and the mass murders that occur would never have occurred. That is what a responsible gun owner does as to prevent the gun from being used by anyone whether for recreational use or otherwise.

Also 900,000 petitioners aren’t even a tenth of the population, not even close.

Dec 21, 2012 11:30am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

“ORLANDO, Fla. 12/21/2012 – A woman carrying a 2-foot-long sword is on suicide watch on Thursday after she was arrested.
Dominique Vianneyte Eloi, 47, was arrested on charges of possession of a weapon on school grounds, disrupting a school function and aggravated assault with a weapon. Her first appearance has been rescheduled for Friday morning.”

Yep, for sure, the problem is guns.

Dec 21, 2012 11:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

Donnatello – How many people have been killed by assailants using bump stocks? Honestly, if someone tried to pull a mass shooting with one, it would likely reduce the number of casualties, just due to inaccuracy and wasted ammo.

Dec 21, 2012 11:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
sidevalve56 wrote:

45 people die a day from gun violence…the majority being from handguns…so going after assault rifles a pretty logical thing to do…nice big waste of everyones time…i bet there is further violence while everyone is arguing about assault rifles…shame on you

Dec 21, 2012 11:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

“NRA ready to talk, promises to produce 20% fewer school shooters in 2013.”

Dec 21, 2012 11:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

Here is a sensible proposal for amending the Constitution….

It is FAR past the time to amend the 2nd amendment, here is the basis of my proposal, the goal is to preserve the spirit of the 2nd amendment , but update to modern weaponry….

1. All assault weapons(military style semi-auto/can be converted to automatic rifles), subject to VERY STRINGENT background checks, see point 4 for details.

2. Hand guns subject to same background checks as assault weapons, see point 4.

3. None or simple database check on purchase of shotgun or bolt action rifle.

4. Stringent background check consists of; minimum 6 month waiting period, a substantial fee that consists of a base fee + a percentage of the sale price, plus a visit by 2 FBI like (probably end up being ATF agents) that is very professional and assures that the person(and their home)buying the weapon is fit for ownership. This is the hardest part to get right because it has to be written in a way to preserve the persons rights, for example the agents do not have to come to the persons home unless their is some sort of reason and the applicant can refuse without further investigation at ANY time, but then they do not get their gun.

This will of course not be an instant ‘cure’, but a step in the right direction in my opinion. Also it shall preserve the right to own a weapon if you are a responsible gun owner.

Dec 21, 2012 1:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@alkaline said: “NRA ready to talk, promises to produce 20% fewer school shooters in 2013.”

“Obama ready to talk, promises to give 20% fewer assault weapons to Mexican cartels in 2013.”

Dec 21, 2012 1:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

Mr. Obama, I am willing to support your push for more stringent gun control if you would first demonstrate how limiting magazine size or banning assault rifles would have kept loony Lanza from entering this school with a glock and sig sauer to murder and maim the innocent?

Dec 21, 2012 1:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@Pragmatist…assuming a school teacher (Lanza’s mom) could pass a background test (hopefully you can’t be a teacher in that case), how would your proposed gun controls have thwarted this tragedy?

Dec 21, 2012 1:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Randy549 wrote:

@USA, good luck with getting 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of state legislatures to approve. Changing the Constitution basically requires OVERWHELMING support of the entire country, and the US is nowhere near that.

Dec 21, 2012 1:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

I seriously doubt Obama can get the grass roots support that he would need to get the political capital to make a change (i hope). I also doubt the republicans and the NRA will arm teachers and janitors, well except in few red (neck) states. The best thing that can happen is that everyone vents and then nothing happens. It certainly was appalling and hideous.

We are now at this point in time where we could destroy ourselves as a whole to protect a few people. We need more freedom and more education, not less freedom and more dictation. Not just on guns, but on many things that people consider dangerous (drugs as an example). We cannot prevent the self destructive and criminal from both destroying themselves and some others, and the desire to do so will decrease our effective productivity. Bad things happen some times. Some are preventable, but at what cost. In the end we are all on the escallator to death. I don’t think decreasing freedom and thus providing a slaves life, no matter how long it is, is better than a fulfilling life of freedom and accomplishment, no matter how random death might be. Certainly we can apply statistics and see where certain changes in laws and or habits might improve life quality, but at some point there is a level of diminishing returns where the expense does not justify the improvement.

In my opinion, the gun laws, drug laws, tobacco laws and alcohol laws should all be repealed and peopled allowed to learn for themselves the lessons they need to know.

Or, I suppose we could make the country into on huge rubber room where no one ever has to worry about their own decisions. They can be totally ignorant of reality. Well, yes, many are already there.

Dec 21, 2012 1:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
pilgrimson wrote:

If you consider all the violent content that the video media puke out every day, and the movies on top of that and the so-called video games, it’s a wonder that there isn’t more acted-out violence. I have yet to see the media accept any responsibility for the consequences of their filthy violent programming and movie promos and video game ads. And, as to be expected, the politicians are afraid to say anything, since they fear the wrath of the media. It’s all about money, bottom line.

Dec 21, 2012 2:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

“It’s time to protect society from gun owners”

But then – who will protect citizens from tyrannical governments? Or will that never happen…?

Dec 21, 2012 8:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BraveNewWrld wrote:

Percentile of gun ownership is noticeably lower among those with higher educational credentials. Just an observation. Suggests to me that gun is the way its owner beefs up self-confidence and self-importance in the absence of those other credentials.
It seems that this prolm has a imple fix, short of outlawing, or imposing strict, British-type regulation on handling the guns.
Let them have their guns. But let us require these guns to be registered and insured in a way similar to how automobiles are. Let every gun owner pay and renew registration per gun, as they do per car, and pay the gun insurance. The cost of this insurancewill be determined by the insurance companies, at a market rate. Such ,that it would allow to treat all gun-wounded and compensate for all who were gun-shot. My rule-of-thumb estimate suggests that insurance would be about 1k$/year.
Finally, Registration must require current certificatre of psychiatric evaluation, stting that person is fit to own a gun.

Note, all of the above is actually good for the business in this country – insurance companies, medical doctors (psychiatrists) would make money. It is also good for the general public. Just do it!

Dec 24, 2012 4:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.