Obama extends presidential power in bypassing Congress on gun control

Comments (85)
flashrooster wrote:

This dysfunctional Republican Congress leaves Obama no choice but to use executive orders whenever applicable. If he didn’t nothing would ever get done. This is the worst Congress in our history. Republicans are well-paid by the people and do nothing but sit on their butts and raise money from lobbyists for their next campaign cycles. Pathetic.

Jan 17, 2013 1:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
ReutersCheck wrote:

Did we elect this guy President or King? Do your job and learn how to function within our system of government. Obama’s ineptitude in governing is a joke. He has zero ability to negotiate, has no respect or influence across the aisle so he resorts to executive orders. Here is a newsflash for the Obama Administration – we also elected the legislators from the other side of the aisle and we did so for a reason. Quit disrespecting and eroding our system of government. Learn how to govern and do your job for once.

All Hail King Obama!

Jan 17, 2013 1:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
Aldo1887 wrote:

That’s right Flushrooster, cause Democrats NEVER take money from lobbyists…

Jan 17, 2013 2:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
tbliberal wrote:

flashrooster I believe it is the Democrat controlled Senate that is dysfunctional. We have yet to see the Senate vote on a budget. In fact we could not get a budget out of the Senate even when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.

Jan 17, 2013 2:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
Republican1 wrote:

Mr. Rooster, Republicans do not just sit on the laurels and nothing about the situation. They are trying to keep everything constitutional. We are not saying that the president does not have a rough time with the current congressional divide. All we want is to make sure that our rights are not stripped away “just because”. Liberal’s like to take away rights just for the sake of so called “safety”, however the downside to that is to do it just because is ignorant. Liberals fail to see that just because guns are “outlawed” or “banned” does not mean that the crooks that want to get them cant. Just because you lock your car door does not mean a crook will not get in it. We as people understand that president’s have to act and sometimes take matters into their own hands. This issue however is not something for one person to decide. It is for the people to decide, and we the people voted for the congress that we have therefore we need to sit back and wait for a decision to be made. It may not be the “instant gratification” that the current generation is accustomed too, but this system is in place so that certain things do not happen without the people’s consent.

Jan 17, 2013 2:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
Rima68 wrote:

It’s unfortunate that Obama is leaving such a legacy of ineptitude for himself.

Jan 17, 2013 2:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
SteveMANN2K wrote:

I cant believe how much racism is still in USA Obama is getting tough time with everything because he is black …. Seriously people time to wake up when 2nd amendment was written they didn’t have advanced weapons and we didn’t have enough crazy kids with an itchy trigger finger and mental issues….Ban Assault weapons

Jan 17, 2013 2:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
ReutersCheck wrote:

No wonder Chavez would vote for him. This so called President is a dictator in disguise. If you can’t do the job you were elected to do within the intended framework of our government then step aside for someone whom can. This guy thinks he is accountable to no one. Our media is shameful for letting this go down. What you need to understand is that Obama is paving the way for a complete breakdown of our checks and balances. Just because you happen to agree with what he is trying to do with gun control does not make his actions right or beneficial. His trying to twist the constitution to justify his expansion of power is chilling as well. What are you going to do when the President uses this precedent for something you don’t want? You people blaming congress for Obama’s inability to lead and govern and going along with his justifications for his continued expansion of power are idiots. This isn’t about gun control.

Jan 17, 2013 2:17am EST  --  Report as abuse

Bravo, Mr. President! If Congress wants to sit on their hands, then you’ll have to get things done yourself.

Jan 17, 2013 2:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
sandman839 wrote:

ReutersCheck wrote:

Did we elect this guy President or King? Do your job and learn how to function within our system of government. Obama’s ineptitude in governing is a joke. He has zero ability to negotiate, has no respect or influence across the aisle so he resorts to executive orders. Here is a newsflash for the Obama Administration – we also elected the legislators from the other side of the aisle and we did so for a reason. Quit disrespecting and eroding our system of government. Learn how to govern and do your job for once.

In the last 4 years he negotiated the farm away. If the Greedy Old Party would actually care about the people and not the corporation’s President Obama would not have to us other means given to him by the constitution to get things done. One question, why is it when the right does something it is ok, but if Obama does it it is illegal?

Jan 17, 2013 2:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
eddievest wrote:

“”Where they won’t act, I will,” he said in October 2011″ Is that 2011? Again, the media is trying to manipulate the public.

Jan 17, 2013 2:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
chris87654 wrote:

Right on!

Jan 17, 2013 2:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
jhankl wrote:

Sandman839, ReutersCheck, Rima68, did you actually read this article? Go back to the first comment; flashrooster provides a very good and accurate synopsis. At first I was upset, because the headline is completely misleading — President Obama has not extended his powers, he is actually operating within them in much the same way and to a much lesser degree than all previous presidents since and including Regan. The article should point out that as it quotes so called experts, their statements are not in line with the facts. This article clearly provides the rationale for President Obama’s actions, based on a “do nothing dysfunctional congress” and the inept leadership guiding it. In case you’re unsure of whom I speak, that’s John Boehner and the gang of obstructionists always behind him. Whether you agree with me on these points or not, the case is clear, they are doing nothing and it’s costing US more and more every day that they don’t do their jobs with expediency. President Obama is the appropriate way to speak of him, he’s our president and I’m glad he’s taking actions to get things done!

Jan 17, 2013 2:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
AndrewBinga wrote:

Obama is overstepping his authority. Do tell us what other Presidents have tried to attack the bill of rights recently…

Jan 17, 2013 3:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
peetee wrote:

To understand what’s happening here, watch the movie Blazing Saddle again. It’s all there in black and white.

Jan 17, 2013 3:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
marty70 wrote:

Hang on..is this article telling me Obamas administration is now literally and “officially” confirmed as a dictatorship! This cannot be correct! If he is bypassing the law and the constitution continually and creasting dictatorial laws as a precedence he has to be impeached NOW! Arrested and locked up! He will enact the second amendment and create a civil war! WHAT IS GOING ON HERE! The U.S will not stand for a dictator in office! Hammers kill more than guns in the U.S, the world will go to hell if the U.S turns! I see U.S citizens either standing now or its nation lost forever!

Jan 17, 2013 3:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@AndrewBinga, How about Bush against the First Amendment with “free speech zones” and controlling news and pictures from Iraq including pictures of caskets of Americans he sent to die in a non-war he started and rationalized by lies. How about the “patriot Act” against Amendment 4, and Amendment 5. How about Guantanamo Bay and Amendment 6? Where were Bush and the GOP majority when the first ‘assault’ ban needed repealing? So, now there’s Amendment 2 as well.

That recent enough?

The Executive Branch has been overreaching power since the late 50′s early 60′s, and has it has been steadily expanding with every new President and every new term.

Jan 17, 2013 4:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jeepgirl wrote:

At least several states are opting to not follow the queens rules and are protecting the 2nd amendment for what it is designed for.

Jan 17, 2013 4:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jeepgirl wrote:

peetee, my television shows the dvd movie “Blazing Saddles” in color. Really like the big guy that is strong as an ox. An excellent movie, but has nothing to do with reality. I don’t judge by skin color. I judge by actions. Living in the present does not let people judge by skin color. That ended many years ago, thank goodness.

Jan 17, 2013 4:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
zenthrop2 wrote:

Barak HUSSEIN Obama scares me to death!!!!

Every single day this man grabs power in direct violation of his oath to protect and preserve the Constitution. This makes him a liar and a thief. A liar because he took a solemn oath tor protect it, and a thief because he is stealing our MOST PRECIOUS LIBERTIES bought and preserved with patriot blood.

This man is a TYRANT above the law!!!!

Jan 17, 2013 4:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
PCScipio wrote:

Sandman839, ReutersCheck, Rima68: You guys are tools of the rich, unless you are rich, then you’re just tools.

Jan 17, 2013 5:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
PCScipio wrote:

zenthrop2: Don’t worry, you’ll be okay when you grow up. All children are afraid of the boogeyman under the bed.

Jan 17, 2013 5:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

When you have a group of Republican traitors, who put “Das Party” ahead of the Country and block EVERYTHING the democratically elected President tries to do, ANY President has no choice but to try and find any way to save our country in spite of their treason and save our democracy.
The Republicans are stuck in Orwell’s book “1984″ where the rule was there is no country, there is no God, there is only the Party.

Jan 17, 2013 7:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
Carmi wrote:

ReutersCheck: Seriously? Really? You have a problem with Obama trying to do something to keep weapons out of the hands of crazy people?

Jan 17, 2013 7:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
Fairness101 wrote:

The most important thing is that the NRA does not get a foot in the door. There should not be any political negotiation with a terrorist organization.

Jan 17, 2013 7:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
DougAnderson wrote:

Haha. So much Republican huttburt.

Jan 17, 2013 7:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
moetheshmo wrote:

An alert has been put out for the angry young man; he has been responsible for slaughtering dozens of the innocent and defenseless. If you see him do not remain silent, report the loony to the nearest cop. No growling youngster must be allowed to hide beneath the radar of concerned parents and a God loving nation.

Jan 17, 2013 7:58am EST  --  Report as abuse
ErnestPayne wrote:

No surprise. The president has tried compromise for years. The Republicans brought it on themselves. Another Rubicon has been crossed, and like Rome, the Republic is dead and the Empire is on its last legs.

Jan 17, 2013 8:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
deerecub1977 wrote:

Any child is important. The Presidents children have 8 armed guards at their school.

Jan 17, 2013 8:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
deerecub1977 wrote:

Any child is important. The Presidents children have 8 armed guards at their school.

Jan 17, 2013 8:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
Marla wrote:

To those here asserting that the President is overstepping his authority, or “acting like a dictator/king,” I have to ask, did you read the article? Because it clearly states that he has done no such thing. And as for the calls to let the public decide this issue, I say bring it on! Every single survey shows that the majority polled are completely on board with a ban on semi-automatic, automatic weapons, and the implementation of tighter gun control laws.

Jan 17, 2013 8:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
Sensibility wrote:

The biggest gun control push in decades? I guess, but that’s not really saying much.

The only substantive things here are an assault weapons ban that was already law before 1994, a magazine capacity limit that is a complete no brainer, and mental health checks that no one in their right mind would oppose.

The fact that these miniscule measures are being heralded as “sweeping” reforms, even though they won’t pass either the GOP House or the Democratic Senate, is evidence that the NRA and other gun control opponents have already won.

Next issue.

Jan 17, 2013 8:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
Rich_F wrote:

we’re being further conditioned to accept a monarch type government. it was only a matter of time.

Jan 17, 2013 8:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
Randy549 wrote:

I’m no fan of Obama, but the administrative actions he took yesterday seemed, to me, to fall within historically-typical executive powers. The “mini-DREAM act” mentioned in the article, however, did overstep his powers because it is against laws specifically passed by Congress. If Obama had used executive orders to implement the proposals he did make to Congress, that would have been a gross abuse of his powers and I think he knew what the consequences of that would have been — the filing of articles of impeachment by the House.

Jan 17, 2013 8:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

Executive Orders:

George W. Bush 291
Barack Obama 144

So much for that “Obama dictator” foolishness.
And it is totally FALSE to claim that the majority of people are on board with banning semi-automatic weapons.
“Sixty-two percent of the 620 Americans polled between Monday and Tuesday support banning semi-automatic assault guns”.
They favor the RETURN of the REAGAN era ban on ASSAULT WEAPONS, not a ban on all semi-automatic weapons.
But to expect someone who is afraid to own a gun to defend themselves, to understand anything about guns, is expecting too much.

Jan 17, 2013 8:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

deerecub1977 wrote: “Any child is important. The Presidents children have 8 armed guards at their school.”

Obama pays $35k per year per child for his children to go to that school. I have yet to hear how the party of cutting spending, cutting spending and then cutting spending proposes to pay for all of these armed guards they want stationed in all of our schools. If the Republicans get their way there won’t be any books left in schools, but there will be plenty of guns…

Jan 17, 2013 8:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
Wassup wrote:

Perhaps the absurd non representative Executive Branch of government should consider that perhaps the huge stocking up on firearms may be a direct result of executive mandates for political expediency by Obama and Biden on this issue as well as the implied loss of freedoms in our nation. It’s pure idiocy to pass more restrictive gun laws directed at the law abiding citizens of a nation when previous laws are not enforced or are impotent. At the risk of redundancy, criminals, the Cartel, insane, the mentally deficient and the nations Attorney General’s office don’t give one iota about gun laws. Who is being penalized here? Why doesn’t government or Congress have the respect of American citizens when they are unable to make even a little “common sense” on issues?

Jan 17, 2013 8:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
pbgd wrote:

Horrors! The GOP accuses the President of leading the country. What next?

Jan 17, 2013 9:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
corynoone wrote:

While I disagree with the ban on assault weapons and feel that this is merely treating a symptom of these rash of violence rather than the cause, it has been well established in the past and I doubt I can do much to change it. My bigger issue is with the fact that Obama resorted to an executive order. Things like this that are divisive, split pretty evenly, and prone to people on both sides having very strong opinions probably shouldn’t be dealt with through an executive order. If it had gone through Congress, more than just one person would have been in control of where it went. This prevents people from feeling like their opinion on the subject was completely ignored and is kind of the point of a representative republic. It might not have produced a solution that everyone was happy with, but neither did this and I think allowing Congress to handle it would have been more fair. Also, I tend to think that presidents tend to abuse the executive order anyways in order ot push things that they know wouldn’t make it through Congress. I don’t think that’s right.

Jan 17, 2013 9:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

He’ll use his executive orders to strip your rights as an American away, but he won’t use an executive order to start rebuilding the economy. Instead he makes a chinzy deal to prevent the big bad “Fiscal Cliff” that is going to cost the poor and middle class a lot more in the long run. He IS the worst president in the history of the United States, bush was a different kind of monster. Obama is pure evil and it stems from his Holy education in Kenya. “He will leave the United States in Ruins before his last day as president.” All you racist black folk out there that have never voted before, BUT 95% of you came out of the wood works for Obama have ruined this country and yourselves more than you will ever know, comprehend, or understand. Say Hi and Bye to the first and last black president. I would vote a communist china man into the white house before another African American.

Jan 17, 2013 9:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

or African muslim.

Jan 17, 2013 9:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
Rollo2 wrote:

Obamas lack of concern and ability to work with Congress as much the real issue. He would prefer to be King because he doesn’t have to negotiate or listen to other opinions. It is amazing how liberals justify this clear violation of our constitutional system. If someday the conservatives regain the WH they should stand ready to abide by the same rules! Unfortunately for the citizens we will have to live under the very oppressive government our founders fought against. Do we really want to live or die under the rule of elitists “rulers” whether we agree or disagree with their opinions?

Jan 17, 2013 9:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

Hopefully this blatant abuse of power will bring the legality of the executive order outside of wartime into question. If it doesn’t, and the American people quietly accept this lack of balance in our federalist government, we face a bleak future.

Jan 17, 2013 9:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

My 1 law will protect the rights of Americans and it will curve the murders in the country.

The Gun Owner MUST have their guns locked in a gun case, each gun MUST have a trigger lock, the keys and ammunition MUST be kept in a locked safe. The Gun Owner will be held responsible and accountable for any person(s) actions using their firearms.

In other words when down syndrome Tommy wants to go on a gun rampage through America, the Gun Owner is charged with all the murders Tommy commits as well as Tommy if he’s still alive.

Jan 17, 2013 9:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
Gesar wrote:

I don’t have a problem w/ background checks but a ban on semi-auto rifles like the AR-15 (which is NOT an assault rifle) & the ban on magazines larger than 10 rounds are problematic and probably unconstitutional. In DC v. Heller the US Supreme Court held the 2nd Amend protects an individual right to keep & bear arms in common use of the day and AR-15s and the like are commonly used in shooting competitions and recreational shooting by millions of Americans. Semi-auto rifles like the AR-15 account for less than 1% of all guns used in crimes and gun crimes have been on the decline since 1993 according to the DOJ. In fact, studies show guns are used in self-defense by 300,000 to 1 million Americans every year, usuall w/o firing a shot. Obama-Biden want to ban all guns but they are starting w/ so-called “assault weapons” b/c of their appearance, not b/c it will prevent or reduce gun violence. I urge all gun owners to write today their Congressman & Senator & tell them you oppose Obama’s proposed gun control measures.

Jan 17, 2013 9:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
TimoB wrote:

Thank you President Obama for doing what you can to protect our children from senseless gun violence. I pray that the republicans will wake up and bend to the will of the American people to pass sensible gun safety and crime prevention bills to prevent the mass slaughter of innocent people.

Jan 17, 2013 9:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

@Marla – You’re delusional if you think a semi-auto ban would be acceptable to the American people (most every hunting rifle and handgun made, except revolvers). And automatics are already banned.

Jan 17, 2013 9:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
UrbanDK wrote:

Let’s face reality, the laws and regulations that Obama wants to pass would not have stopped Sandy Hook, Aurora, etc…

So why even bother with any of this. Watching CBS news they interviewed an anti-gun proponent that was asked if the Presidents proposels would stop mass murders. Their response – if it makes me feel better it should be passed. Are you kidding me!!! We should give up our freeedoms protected by the Constitution just to make people feel good.

Are nation is lost if feelings rule the masses. Everyone needs to put their feelings aside and work with sound judgement and critcal thinking.

Jan 17, 2013 10:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
jertho wrote:

this should make it harder for Republicans to have an armed insurrection when they lose again in 2016. their inflexible pig-headed ideology has crippled this country enough.

Jan 17, 2013 10:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

This should work as well as the ‘war on drugs’…

Jan 17, 2013 10:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

“Did we elect this guy President or King?”

He thinks he’s ‘king’ – he has to be the MOST arrogant president we’ve ever had – by far.

Jan 17, 2013 10:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
ccharles wrote:

a “dysfunctional” Congress comes from it always being his way only, he attempts no middle ground. Our country is suppose to be built on a combining of our ideas. Not this.
I dont see much good done. Only a destroying of the “white man” as Rev. Wright would put it.

Jan 17, 2013 10:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
Concernedcitz wrote:

THE GOP are not only dysfunctional but subversive to what Americans want and need. Their tacktics are sick, hypocritical, and subversive, their rational is delusional and twisted, their agenda is evil, and their rhetoric has been hateful and elitist for decades. Whether they want to hear it or not – people are leaving the GOP because they are so ashamed of how they have behaved.

Jan 17, 2013 10:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Obama can keep on toying with Congress, he will have a long, unproductive, 4 years if he keeps it up. Power of the Purse starts in the House. The side story that Democrats supporting Obama don’t want to hear, is this sets presidence for the next Republican to completely undo Obama’s executive orders without the support of Congress. Do you really want an all powerful executive office when the next GW is elected?

Jan 17, 2013 11:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@AndrewBinga

“Obama is overstepping his authority. Do tell us what other Presidents have tried to attack the bill of rights recently…”

GW. Bush. Patriot Act…

Jan 17, 2013 11:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
COindependent wrote:

@SteveMann “Because he is black?” The guy just was elected (twice)with the support of non-black people. My issue is that the guy is incapable, and unwilling to to do the heavy lifting that comes with the job, and that his politics run counter to what I believe is best for this country. None of which has anything to do with the color of his skin (besides, he is 50% white). Your need to categorize any disagreement as racism is, at best, extremely shallow and demonstrates that your emotions take priority over reasoning. Stop “feeling” and start “thinking”.

So, what do you call it when a black person disagrees with the policies of the President? Surely, you have some code word (Uncle Tom, maybe?) because a person does not fit some predefined category or behavior pattern…. BTW, approach either Alan West or Thomas Sowell and categorize them accordingly. I trust each would take exception to your position.

This is America man! Not some tin-horn dictatorship. Disagreement is part of the agenda. There are few absolutes. And I refuse to embrace a policy defined by some political elitist without question just because a guy has a title.

Jan 17, 2013 11:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

This reaction is about as worthless and emotion filled as all of the legislation Bush passed after 9/11. The Patriot Act was a serious offense against the Bill of Rights. We have to deal with the TSA, a new Homeland Security Department, and violations of our rights because of Republicans emotionally wanting to write up new legislation right now. Maybe this is pay back for the Right Wings attacks on our civil liberties. In my opinion 2 wrongs doesn’t make a right, but the irony is not lost on me. Both parties are anti-liberty.

Jan 17, 2013 11:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
nhirsch wrote:

I have multiple handguns and a 3″ magnum shotgun. I support ALL of what the President has proposed. I will contribute to that support. I will oppose any GOP or DEM opposed to what I consider common sense control for unnecessary weapons and big magazines.

Jan 17, 2013 11:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
nhirsch wrote:

I have multiple handguns and a 3″ magnum shotgun. I support ALL of what the President has proposed. I will contribute to that support. I will oppose any GOP or DEM opposed to what I consider common sense control for unnecessary weapons and big magazines.

Jan 17, 2013 11:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

TheNewWorld – Spot on. Both the major political parties seem to have contempt for our constitutional form of government. If Americans would start electing our representatives based on individual merit instead of party affiliation, we might actually have a representative government.

Jan 17, 2013 11:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

Waste of time to try and help black hating racists, they are mentally ill.

Jan 17, 2013 11:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

If you republicans don’t like this, you should have run someone better than yacht-club Romney. It matters who is President, and you folks dropped the ball. You apparently learned nothing after attempting to run Sarah Palin and her grandpa from Arizona. Keep running morons and douche bags for President, and you’ll keep losing like a bunch of morons and douche bags. No offense, but it’s not that mysterious.

Jan 17, 2013 11:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
usa.wi.vet.4q wrote:

All of Washington is dysfunctional. No one in Washington is doing their job. Now our President is using politics to crap on the people killed by a lunatic? ? If Washington is our hope, then god help us!!

Jan 17, 2013 11:35am EST  --  Report as abuse
tomb8569 wrote:

So the POTUS issues an E.O. telling medical examiners they must violate the Doctor / Patient confidentially agreement. Let’s see where that ends up.

Jan 17, 2013 11:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
Whipsplash wrote:

“Obama is not relying on executive orders themselves any more than other recent presidents. His 147 orders through four years is roughly the same pace as former President George W. Bush, who issued 294 in two full terms and Bill Clinton, who issued 308 in two terms.”

Oh, and by the way, the majority of Americans agree with how Obama is doing his job which is why he was elected to run the country for another four years.

But, whine on children…..

Jan 17, 2013 11:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
tomb8569 wrote:

The 2nd Amendment stipulates ‘a well regulated Militia’ as being necessary to the security of a free state. That very simply means that citizens have the right to own arms equal, or as close as possible, to those any tyrannical or opposing enemy force may bring against them.
At the time of the writing of this amendment the state-of -the-art weaponry were muzzle loaders. Today it is AR-15’s and AK-47’s.

Jan 17, 2013 11:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

Just a little food for thought. Britain has nearly 5 times the violent crime per capita as the US does. We do have more gun violence by a significant margin, but that’s largely attributable to gang violence. Gang violence in Chicago alone accounts for nearly 5% of the nations gun homicides.

Everyone out there is a little bit safer because a few of us law abiding citizens carry guns, and criminals know this. Self-preservation is a powerful instinctual motivator. We might have 2 times the number of people die in the US because of our access to guns, but we also have around 80% less violent crime overall because of it. Fewer rapes, fewer robberies, fewer kidnappings.

Events like Sandy Hook and Aurora are tragic, but they’re nothing new, and their occurrence is actually going down, contrary to what the media might have you believe. Usually in a given year, we lose about 100 people to the crazies deciding to mass murder. That’s not too bad, when you consider there are around 2.5 million deaths each year in the US. Of those 2.5 million, around 30,000 are gun realated. Of those 30,000, 19,000 are suicides. Of the 11,000 homicides, around 10,000 were gang related. Let’s keep things in perspective.

Jan 17, 2013 11:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

Actually haters, if the Greedy Old Party actually cared about the country and not there industrial masters, Obama would never have been elected. So look in the mirror nut jobs, because this is the fruit your efforts have achieved. You have no one but yourselves to blame for where we are. Try this, when you say you like freedom and fiscal responsibility, don’t decrease our freedom and act fiscally irresponsibly. And when you say you like freedom, don’t insist that everyone join your religion, and don’t try to meddle in everyone elses private affairs, that’s not freedom dummies. That’s called facism.

By the way lefties, thanks for digging up an issue (gun control) that could revive and invigorate the dying GOPers. The one thing that both parties have in common is that they both think that getting elected means everyone agrees with them, it has never occured to these braniacs that many just vote against the people who are the most obnoxious and stupid. Well, lefties, you are now the most obnoxious and stupid again. Thanks for taking that back from the GOPers.

Jan 17, 2013 12:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Tomb8569 writes: “…State of the art today is AR-15’s and AK-47’s.”

Yeah ok. If today is 1949. And we’re hanging out in Stalingrad. Wake up. An AK-47, state of the art? State of the art arms today is the stuff we sell to Saudi Arabia and Yemen. XM-25′s, F-16′s, FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft rockets, Patriot missiles, etc. And the government doesn’t let you have those things. The ‘tyrannical government’ these teabaggers worry so much about is eating cake while the NRA feeds them the handgun crumbs and tells them to shut and be happy. It’s a scam job. The Second Amendment died long ago. You people don’t get real arms.

Jan 17, 2013 12:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Alpha_Blogger wrote:

The Republicans need to get organized and stop the Democratic vote buying machine. Every bill introduced by the house is loaded with vote buying pork in the Democratic senate. Obama has manged to spend every cent taken in plus an additional 7 Trillion plus another 4 Trillion has simply been printed in the QE programs. The Senate has not passed a budget in 4 years.

Jan 17, 2013 12:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CalGal wrote:

If the Legislature were functional, Obama would not have to resort to alternatives. We really have to get moving on important issues in this country. If it takes creative ways to circumvent Congress, fine. They bought this.

Jan 17, 2013 1:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

well-regulated.

Jan 17, 2013 3:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Bagehot wrote:

Every president after Coolidge has sought to expand the power of his office. Newtown makes the case better for the gun grabbers than any Beltway pol, including BHO, ever could. If Republicans can’t keep it together in Congress, the next stop’s the courts. Maybe 5 justices won’t be distracted by the fun-sized coffins.

Jan 17, 2013 3:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Moonhill writes: “A real leader would know how to lead even with a dysfunctional congress.”

I think that’s what we’re seeing here. Use executive powers that need to be used.

Jan 17, 2013 4:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

NRA declares war on government, then realizes that rifles and handguns don’t actually work very well against F-16′s and Tomahawk missiles. “We would humbly request that the government disregard our initial statements regarding war against a tyrannical government and provide us time to assess alternatives.”

Good times.

Jan 17, 2013 4:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

well-regulated.

Jan 17, 2013 5:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SSINTENSE wrote:

There are 10′s of millions of guns already out on the street. Get ready for another War on Drugs or Prohibition if this thing passes. The only way that gun control could possibly be effective in this country is by appealing the 4th ammendment. I’m sure Dems wouldn’t really mind doing this either. It seems to me that most Dems would like to be shackled, caged, and fed for any perceived feeling of “safety.” This law will do nothing to disarm people who are actually criminals and have bad intentions.

So after the next massacre, what are we going to ban next? Gasoline and fertilizer? Perhaps the descent into police state will finally be complete when the NRA’s suggestion of having armed guards everywhere is ultimately put into place after the next round of safety measures.

This country’s political climate stinks of rotten eggs and I frankly don’t buy it.

Jan 17, 2013 8:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SSINTENSE wrote:

I don’t understand why libs use “the children” to advance this agenda. This logic assumes that the presence of such legislation will prevent such things from ever happening. This assumption is false which makes the logic faulty.

And Obama surrounding himself with kids as he crossed the Rubicon is probably the creepiest and most Orwellian action I have ever seen a U.S politician take in my 25 year life on Earth.

Jan 17, 2013 9:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@brotherkenny4, Thank you, my sentiments as well.

Jan 17, 2013 10:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Saristas wrote:

ChangeWhat wrote:

My 1 law will protect the rights of Americans and it will curve the murders in the country.

The Gun Owner MUST have their guns locked in a gun case, each gun MUST have a trigger lock, the keys and ammunition MUST be kept in a locked safe. The Gun Owner will be held responsible and accountable for any person(s) actions using their firearms.

In other words when down syndrome Tommy wants to go on a gun rampage through America, the Gun Owner is charged with all the murders Tommy commits as well as Tommy if he’s still alive.

I agree, though it seems redundant. You just need 1 part of this law, either have your gun locked up or bare responsibility for what is done with your gun, either way, people would be more careful.

Jan 18, 2013 5:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

Jameson4Lunch wrote:
“Just a little food for thought. Britain has nearly 5 times the violent crime per capita as the US does.”

and

“We might have 2 times the number of people die in the US because of our access to guns, but we also have around 80% less violent crime overall because of it. Fewer rapes, fewer robberies, fewer kidnappings.”

None of that is true. You right-wingers just make figures up on the spot. Do you never check?

The US and the UK measure violent crime differently. In simple terms, the US collects data from the police on reported crime, while the UK does an annual survey, and hence collects data *not* reported to the police.

The only source that compares apples with apples is the OECD, and they reveal how untrue your comments are.

*Homicide per 100,000:
USA 5.0
UK 1.1

So US homicide is not twice the UK rate as you say, but 4.54 times the UK rate. A big difference.

*Rapes per 100,00:
USA 28.6
UK 27,7

So, your claim that rapes in the USA are fewer because of guns is completely false.

*Robberies per 100,000:
USA 133
UK 137

The UK has slightly – a fraction of a percent – more robberies. It looks as though all those ‘home protection’ guns in the USA are not making any significant difference at all.

*Assault per 100,000:
USA 262
UK 730

Here, the USA does have less assaults, but nowhere near the “80% less violent crime” that you claim.

The reason, of course, is shown clearly by the 454% higher homicide rate in the USA – an assault in the UK becomes – due to the easy access to guns – a murder in the USA.

I don’t know about you, but I think a member of my family being assaulted in the UK and living to tell me about it is a much better deal than them being shot dead in the USA.

Which option would rather have?

Jan 18, 2013 8:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

Abulafiah – The figures I’ve read reported that Britain has a little over 2,100 incidents of violent crime per 100,000 people, whereas the US has an average of around 450 incidents. Cities like Chicago, some of the more violent places in the US, have a violent crime rate that’s about equal with all of Britain. Yes, Britain has very substandard reporting. One reason our crime statistics look so bad is because of how comprehensive our reporting is.

As to your question, many of my family members would likely shoot dead an attacker, since about half have c&c licenses. That would be one less criminal. I don’t want anyone to have to take a life, but the elimination of scum is a win for society as a whole.

Jan 18, 2013 9:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

Jameson4Lunch

You should find better figures…

You have it the wrong way around – the BCS is far more comprehensive than the US system, as by directly surveying the population it picks up unreported crime, which the US system does not, so it over-reports compared to the USA. On top of that, ‘violent’ in the UK has a different definition to ‘violent’ in the USA.

As I already explained, the only consistent survey is the OECD, which shows that you are factually wrong on just about every statement.

As for my question, pointing to your trigger-happy family does not answer it. It evades it.

Jan 18, 2013 12:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Jameson4Lunch wrote:

Those surveys show that crime is under reported by likely over 60% in the UK. Those aren’t included in the official police statistics.

I’m really not to familiar with OECD, but poking around their website, I noticed they say there’s a 90% voter turnout in the US, which was actually 57.5% this last election, and generally averages around 60%. If they’re that far off on attainable hard figures, I have to question just how accurate their surveys are.

As to my family being trigger happy, you have it all wrong. They’re very responsible about their firearms. They just don’t have a victim mentality or a need for a nanny. As they say, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Jan 18, 2013 2:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

Jameson4Lunch wrote:
Those surveys show that crime is under reported by likely over 60% in the UK. Those aren’t included in the official police statistics.

It is a good job they use the BCS instead of official police statistics then.

This is more accurate than the USA, where nobody has a clue about the extent to which crime is under-reported. It could easily be 60%. This is precisely why it is better to use OECD figure which are measured consistently across all member countries.

Jameson4Lunch wrote:
“I’m really not to familiar with OECD”

Yeah… I can see how an international organisation with 34 member countries that has been around since 1961 could be easy to miss.

Jameson4Lunch wrote:
“I noticed they say there’s a 90% voter turnout in the US, which was actually 57.5% this last election, and generally averages around 60%. If they’re that far off on attainable hard figures, I have to question just how accurate their surveys are.”

No… they are not wrong. It is you that is unfamiliar with how figures work.

Let me educate you: there are two ways to measure voter participation depending on what you want to observe. One is the percentage of the voter-age population which you say is 57.5%. This is used to gauge how much of the population has a political voice. The other is the percentage of registered voters who actually vote, which is the 90% figure, and is used to gauge how much interest (or trust) the registered voters have in the political system.

Jan 18, 2013 10:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.