E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
As the White House considers proposals to curb gun violence, a potential re-upping of the 1990s ban on assault weapons has emerged as the most politically difficult measure for activists hoping to keep the most dangerous weapons out of criminal hands.
But, after pro-gun groups met with Vice President Joe Biden's task force on violence prevention yesterday, at least one participant came away believing that it's a fight that President Barack Obama is willing to try.
Richard Feldman, the president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association said that Biden left the group with the “clear implication” that the president would pursue an assault weapons ban in addition to other regulatory measures.
In naming possible new regulations this week, Biden mentioned universal background checks and restrictions on high-capacity magazines but did not refer specifically to an assault weapon moratorium. The president and his spokespeople have said repeatedly that the administration is in favor of an assault weapons ban.
White House officials say Vice President Joe Biden has offered to speak with families impacted by the Newtown tragedy for their input as he negotiates solutions to gun violence in the U.S. NBC's Kristen Welker reports.
Feldman told NBC News said the conversation in the closed-door meeting with gun rights groups was “wide ranging."
“We certainly talked rather extensively about civil commitment laws," he said. "The Attorney General was in the meeting. We talked about enforcement procedures against violations.”
Feldman’s take on the session seemed to be different than the National Rifle Association’s, which came out with a fairly combative statement late in the day indicating that the White House was not open to hearing the concerns of Second Amendment proponents.
“I think that it was a conversation and it wasn't a lecture,” Feldman countered.
When asked about the NRA’s characterization of the meeting, Feldman praised NRA advocate Jim Baker for forcefully voicing the concerns of the nation's most powerful gun group.
"I think the vice president, who knows Jim, listened to them," he added. "But you know, we come at this from different positions.”
The NRA has stated that they’re going to take their argument up to Capitol Hill, something that some experts say could be part of a two-path approach for the gun rights group.
“My guess is what we're going to see is a kind of two-layer game," said Don Kettl, dean of the Public Policy School at the University of Maryland. "For the NRA itself, they've made very clear so far that they're just not interested in anything that remotely involves any effort to try to reduce the availability of guns, or ammunition or any of the other pieces or anything that would restrict the ownership of guns. But behind the scenes I suspect they and some of their lobbyists are going to be working very carefully to try to find ways of at least minimizing, from their point of view, the damage.”
Kettl thinks this could be a defining moment for the group, “Deep down this is one of those line-in-the-sand kind of issues that will be the make or break for the NRA's power. And I suspect we are in the middle of a defining debate in the pubic right now about the role of guns in American society.”
Leave a Comment:
Perhaps those who wish to purchase an assault-type weapon might consider signing a permission form for a check of their medical records to be used in conjunction with their background check. At least then it would not violate HIPAA.
What "medical records"? There is no centralized "medical record" system that you can just punch up in a computer and see somebody's medical history. It doesn't exist. At best, they may be in a database of people who have received certain types of mental health treatment.
@ Joe
Don't you get tired of constantly explaining the most basic of things to morons? It gets old really fast.
I do understand that there is no centralized medical record system at this point in time. Telemedicine might make this easier in the future. As part of the permission form, a place to name your doctor and place of care is included. I used to work in an attorney's office and we had these forms for clients to complete in conjunction with a medical law suit. I am guessing you have never seen these type of permission forms. Did you actually see that I mentioned a "signed permission form?" By your comment, I take it that you did not actually read all of what I wrote.
Truly, there is no need to resort to name calling. It shows how low-brow you really are.
The US can't even keep up with voter registration...or enforce the ban on voters that aren't registered...but instead of reforming voter registration and voting laws Obama is running a red herring called a gun ban...why is that do you think...
Clarification: Semiautomatic civilian AR-15's are not assault rifles. For the definitionally-challenged, see Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
If you prefer a brief video demonstration of the difference, see YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8YuPPWuGW8
Be educated.
I agree, just because it looks like a assault weapon doesn't make it a assault weapon. People seem to get all wound up on how something looks not how it operates. The problem is libs don't want to look below the surface. They see something they don't understand and want to ban it.
Honestly, I'm sure there is some who actually do hate the president which is sad really, given the fact that many of those people do not personally Know him. t,b,said
I believe the vast majority of people who disagree with his policies, and apparent attempts at usurpation of the constitution, don't actually hate him as a person. "Hopefully",,,,, this being a general statement only of course.
Hate is a raw emotion that is destructive to the person holding it...
Given the daunting challenges that we face, it's important that president elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one.
................................................................Valerie Jarrett
That's the problem, America does not particularly like to be Ruled ie. King George III types
However, we don't mind following leaders. As long as they don't mind Defending the Constitution...
Say No Too "Infringement"
You gun grabbing, 2nd Amendment hating people are in good company...You must be proud.
Ban assault weapons and high capacity mags.
Thank you, Oneslackr, Bravo & Godspeed!
I for one Agree with you wholeheartedly and, Appreciate your starkly honest candor.
Your heartfelt words along with a illustrative, eloquent delivery of your thoughts. While defending Our heritage and the fore thought of our founding Fathers, is an inspiration to all who hold closely to the tenets espoused within our Great Nations founding documents. You my friend are A true Patriot in my eyes, I would certainly fight and give the ultimate sacrifice directly by your side to defend the truths that we hold self evident.
Freedom to have the Liberty to pursue happiness shall prevail throughout the age. Amen
Sadly, numerous Americans in our several states Are, all too willing to capitulate with the awry failure of derisive portent indulgence for the vice of sloth, along with valetudinarian mediocrity.
Woefully soulless, Most a pity...
The Democrats will probably negotiate everything away just because they think the Republicans will not agree to it, then all that is left is for the Republicans to obstruct anything remaining and we'll end up with nothing as usual.
Gun control is the abolitionist movement of the 21st Century. Ask how these gun bigots can withstand the nonviolent tide of moral outrage. That they propose killing people in armed insurrection already demonstrates they are too mentally deranged to have guns. Out of my cold dead hands will these gun bigots have to pry my pen of opposition to their threat to our freedom of life without fear of their intimidation or violent reprisals. The 2nd Amendment needs to be amended or repealed; and the efforts of the conservative GOP to suppress all voters who are not white evangelical Christians opposed with nonviolent civil disobedience. The 14th Amendment insures that no state has the right to disenfranchise any citizen of their rights under the Constitution. The rise of the conservative states rights is no different than the state's rights issues that formed in the 1830s and led to the civil war. If all gun owners are willing to murder the fellow Americans for the sake of their love of guns, I, and others who believe in a representative democracy shall meet them in non-violent protest. They will have to massacre Americans the way the British massacred Americans in Boston, and then the non-violent revolution to replace the Constitution with a new Constitution dedicated to human rights and respect for planet earth will occur and no gun shall prevent it.
Let's take all the left-lib fruitcakes on this site, match their IP's with their home addresses, and put their names on a Google interactive map and publish it on a website. All their phony agendas would cease in minutes.
Backhouse
When will the N.R.A. admit that assault weapons are built to kill people?
They are extremists. There is nothing reasonable about it - and their 'favorability polling' is dropping.
N.R.A. reps are effectively lobbyists out to make money for the gun corporations. Not at all about saving lives - they're out to maximise profits regardless of the consequences.
#1 - Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:57 AM EST
Backhouse
Every weapon on earth is made to kill people.
Universal checks are something pretty much everyone can agree on. National registries, and the assault weapons ban however, are not. If it actually affected crime, that would be a different story, but murder rates tend to stay the same regardless of the availability of guns, while other types of crime tend to rise.
Speaking of gun crime - 74.9% are from gangs mainly from south of the boarder. The gov continues to keep the boarders open where drugs and firearms come through easily. Solve this problem first.. Citizens don't need gun control of any kind. They don't commit the crimes?
It is suspect that the first thing the gov want is a ban..from citizens - they want more power.. The very same people whom got us into un repayable debt, have sucked the american way of life in their own pocket only - are to be trusted to legislate gun control.
The US kills more woman and children daily through these non declaration of wars in other countries and has the balls to lecture us on gun control. They even have legal insider trading. Keep this in mind any laws they use to take our rights and freedoms, you can guarantee they made them self's immune.
The right wing lunatic fringe cannot comprehend the fact that the American people will not tolerate their children being slaughtered on the altar of the Second Amendment merely to protect the perceived right of selfish, immature wannabe Rambos to acquire pointless arsenals of deadly toys.
Then maybe they should have armed protection. Our High School has had 3 armed on duty cops since Columbine. Not one shoot out has occurred. Think about that for a minute or two.
Sailcat-2064101---How in the hell did you come up with the idea that the right wing arelunatics? When did this turn into a political party match-up? This article is about gun laws and not putting one party up against another. So why did you make this up as a Republican versus Democrat issue? Democrats, Republicans and all of those in between have guns. This is not a political party fight. You really have this screwed up.
Getting back to the real story. I don't think the Federal Government can do anything about gun rights, without changing the Constitution. The ones we have in place are all that is needed.
Now if you like Obama you will think that this is a wonderful move but it is not. No mater how many gun restriction you put out there that will not change the fact that people will do some really crazy stuff. Criminals don't buy guns legally they illegal guns on the streets. Guns are not at the top of the list of the way people are murdered.
slodon: An incredibly moronic --to have armed guards or armed teachers. You think all teachers are emotionally stable and a good shot? You think the guards at Columbine helped in that situation? You think every town and school in this country has the funds to have armed guards? You think the rest of us who hate guns should put us with having them in our kids classrooms just to accommodate YOUR wants and needs for weapons of mass carnage? Just a little SELF ABSORBED?
DiBaSw....
Armed guards are oK for the president's kids,but a bad idea for everybody elses....why?
Dont fit your agenda,right?
The guards at Columbine were not in the building when the assailants entered,they were eating outside....not very effective guard work....I'm sure the presidents kids guards are a little more alert.
Your problem with our president is irrelevant to this situation. I'm betting you're not willing to pay extra taxes for the many MANY billions that it would cost to put armed guard in every school in the country. And if the armed guards at Columbine were incompetent, who is to say how many of the thousands of new guard hires at schools would be competent? Lastly, you are missing the point. Most of us don't want MORE guns in our schools. We don't WANT to have to have armed people guarding our kids. But you and the NRA think we should change our way of life just so YOU can have unlimited access to weapons of mass carnage. The thought is bizarre and you have lost your perspective.
I'll bet you dont even have any kids in school,you phony,if you did you would want protection fo them,how does a piece of paper that only affects people who have no intentions of shooting kids....stop a massacre?
You and your agenda are full of it,you dont care about the kids protection....the kids lives are just pawns for characters like you.....despicable.
well johnboy, I have two kids in school. My small town has no money for armed guards, are you going to pay for it with increased taxes? I'm willing to bet you think we should cut spending and not add taxes, so where do you think the money comes from? You don't seem to understand that most parents do not WANT guards with guns in our classrooms. My town doesn't WANT a lifestyle that requires armed guards in classrooms just because YOU want weapon of mass carnage to be available to one and all.
I'm not your boy.
Maybe we could take some of that 4-6 billion we send Israel to defend their schools with weapons and use a few bucks here...
Or the 2 billion we use to train the Iraqi police force,who then turn around and shoot our troops.
Lets face it mister,you said it yourself,its about the guns,not the kids protection.
People like you need and want these tragedies so you can climb up on the piles of other people's kids bodies and preach your gospel.Without these senseless killings you got nothing to work with.You dont give a fiddlers dam about the kids,its about the guns.
@di
"well johnboy,", what's with condescending names?
john, You should frame a few better arguments. To say I don't give a damn about my kids safety in school or anywhere else makes you lose any cred whatsoever, not to mention sounding about nine years old-- not that my kids were ever that crude at nine.
You dont care and you know it,its only about what you want
You dont have any kids in school or you would want them protected by more than a piece of paper.
You are probably an employee of Bloomberg,Cease fire or Brady....you have an agenda to push and you dont care who gets killed,because your yellow butt wont get hurt.
Updated: January 13, 2013 8:29PM
Three people have been killed and six others wounded in Chicago gun violence since Friday afternoon. Many of the shooting victims, including two of those killed, were teenagers.
In the latest shooting, a 17-year-old boy was shot in the shoulder about 12:30 p.m. Sunday in the alley east of the 11700 block of South Normal Avenue in the West Pullman neighborhood, according to Chicago Police News Affairs Officer Jose Estrada. He was taken to Roseland Community Hospital. The motive for the shooting was not yet known and no one was in custody. Area South detectives are investigating
Chicago Sun Times
How are those strict gun control laws working for ya?
How ironic that NBC is the main sponsor of the world's largest gun show, SHOT 2013.
"We've participated in the SHOT Show for several years as part of our commitment to our outdoor programming block," NBC spokesman Greg Hughes told USA TODAY on Friday.
HopeisGone----The problem we have is not a gun issue it's a criminal issue. We need to fix the people first. We have witnessed the loss of the family unit. In most families we have two parents, having to work to pay their bills. In the process our children, having to live like this, have loss something. Maybe it was the loss of the mother being home when they come home from school. I don't know what they lost but the total disregard for life has gotten into their systems.
BTW the guns do not shoot by themselves, you need someone to pull that trigger.
I agree whole heartedly,Smokie
@Smokie
We know that.
The leftists have made it clear, it's not about fixing the problem or protecting children.
It's about their gun control agenda.
Leftists LOVE piles of dead children and are always looking "FORWARD" to the next mass murder to exploit.
We could protect the children, they won't let us.
An amazing perverted and nasty comment. The obscene proliferation of guns kills about 30,000 people a year in this country. What have you done to "fix" the problem? Were you out there protecting any one of them, Champagnesabre?
An amazing perverted and nasty comment
The truth hurts....right?
@di
It's your side who is creating the gun free zones where ALL of the mass murders are happening.
Your side is preventing us from protecting the school children.
My comment isn't perverted. Liberals LOVE shooting stories. You can't handle the truth.
No, it just means that you lose credibility when you use gutter talk.
You lose more credibility when you use tragedy to push your personal agenda.
Its other people's kids,so who cares as long as you get what you want,right?
Do like Obama,get your picture taken,cry a few tears and go to Hawaii.
@di
"lose credibility when you use gutter talk.", what gutter talk?
You've already lost your credibility with your ignorance and lies.
Champ: "your father traded with a pimp for 10 minutes with your mother"... THAT WT gutter talk.
As for using tragedy JOHN: Tragedies are VERY often a reason to change laws-- from seat belt laws, missing children laws, illegal substances, war crimes, and thousands of others. "Using tragedy to push your agenda" is an NRA talking point and a very weak one. Think for yourself and get off the NRA leash. "Responsible" gun owners would be promoting better gun laws, not fighting every single one.
@di
"What have you done to "fix" the problem?", arm myself so that I'm not number 30,001, my attacker is.
@di
"Think for yourself and get off the NRA leash. "Responsible" gun owners would be promoting better gun laws, not fighting every single one." Every single gun law has not made the problem any better. Another gun law will not fix anything.
Addressing the real problem of psychos with guns who murder children will begin to fix the problem.
Another piece of paper with some ink that says "gun law" will NEVER force an irresponsible owner, a criminal or psycho to comply.
A tragedy can used as an example to address a specific problem,in this case killing zones where no one can be protected.
It can only be addressed by making these areas hostile environments for the crimnal,not by passing your pet legislation thats only about what YOU want.
When somebody starts shooting up your school,are you going to run down and wave a copy of your new laws?That will address the problem?....please dude you are full of it.
Sign this petition on https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/enact-legislation-will-provide-mental-health-assessments-people-currently-owning-guns/ZDmYD9M1
Enact legislation that will provide mental health assessments for people currently owning guns who may have mental health issues. While background checks need to be mandatory for all purchasers we need a mechanism to address the problem of current gun owners or people residing with them who may have slipped into mental illness.
There should be a way for family, law enforcement, neighbors, and other concerned citizens to request an evaluation. If the person is found to be mentally ill by a competent mental health professional, a legal hearing should commence to adjudicate the removal of the guns and that name be placed on the registry to prevent further purchases.
It is unfortunate that a single idea that "guns don't kill, people do" continues to sway decision makers from confronting and resolving the problem, mass murderous episodes of innocent children in venues that are supposed to be safe havens for children.
This over used cliche actually clouds the issue or I should say, issues. Too many guns is one problem but protecting the children is another and the 2nd amendment should not be used to prevent implementing actions to protect the children. If better, more restrictive gun laws are deemed viable towards this goal then I would even go as far as updating the 2nd amendment no matter how long it takes.
I agree with you that a hand gun can kill as many children as an assault machine gun, if the shooter has enough time to do so.
... if the shooter has enough time to do so!
That is the point in banning the assault weapon or any weapon that with rapid fire capability. Take away, from the psychopath, the added advantage of killing more in less time.
Take a good look at the recurring variables these mass killings have; psychopaths, assault weapons, easy access to vulnerable victims in large groups (maximum damage, i.e. vengeance).
1, Banning assault weapons, including easing replaceable magazines.
2. Better screening of individuals with possible psychopathic mindsets.
3. Secured gun-free zones, especially schools, malls, theater, churches and the like.
4. Better registries of gun owners and health records. This is where a big improvement can be made, "connecting the dots" between guns and potential psychopaths. Instead of wasting billions fighting other nations wars, we could be using those resources build a database that can weed out the dangerous combination of psychopaths and guns before the both go off simultaneously. Oh yes, to hell with both the NRA and the ACLU.
These are not problems, as both the NRA and ACLU would have us think. These pieces of the same puzzle and must be considered in detail in order to make any progress in curtailing shooting sprees.
What irritates people, like Mr Obama ( a decent and devoted parent), who wants to implement solutions, now! One of the main obstacles is people like the NRA and ACLU who will compound the problem definition, make the problem very complex by broadening the scope of the problem so that it is legally impossible to right a bill and/or bills that can pass not just through deadbeat Congress but pass through the supreme court. This is a common ploy played by politician since we came out of the caves.
... It must stop!
Congress is responsible to find solutions to problems. Breaking this problem down to a level, a series of issues of which each can be addressed separately and quickly and legally. Again I say, if an amendment to the 2nd amendment to protect our children is necessary then lets get started, now. Don't pass the buck to the next Congress and/or administration.
Deal with the PSYCHOPATHS and the convenient choice of weapon, THE GUN, now. The psychopath by nature will neither have the capacity to create a complex weapon of mass destruction nor the mindset. By that I mean he/she will snap momentarily and will act quickly under state of mass confusion and emotional instability. He/she will reach for the MOST CONVENIENT weapon and exercise his/her fantasies quickly. I believe there was an association between the shooter in Connecticut and the school, yes he did attend that school himself but there must be more to the story for going after those specific children. I hope they can figure it out.
As for the rebel militant, domestic and foreign, I think since 9/11 the Department of Homeland Security and the agency under, in particular the FBI, are doing an excellent job.
Again, when one is confronted with a very complex problem, then you must break it down to pieces which can be handle quickly logically and legally. If we need an amendment to the constitution then we, collectively, should be ashamed of ourselves of showing negligence in our responsibility to our children.
To hell with NRA and ACLU.
To hell with your union?????
Just do it and do it fast before these gun nutjobs buy every assault weapon that's ever been made. They have every excuse in the book to own weapons of mass carnage and none of them make sense. The rest of us have to adjust our lives to accommodate the most selfish people on the planet. Their toy is more important the our society's health and the lives of Americans. You "need" them for target shooting? Get over it. You "need" them for protection? You must be some crappy shot of you need 50 rounds per minute. You "need" them for hunting? You need 50 rounds a minute to kill a deer?
"50 rounds per minute",
you are the perfect example of a progressive, that has no idea what you are talking about!!!
The first amendment give you the right to rant and the second amendment gives me the right to buy the weapon you fear, fear for no reason!!!
Talk to the parents of 20 dead kids. Tell them all about how your "rights" are more important than their children. The 2nd amendment doesn't mean you can own nuclear weapon, surface to air missiles, land mines. The twisting of the 2nd amendment rights is the NRA twisting the constitution to fit their needs to accommodate the gun industry and the minority who think they need weapons of mass carnage.
Your using the tragedy, to make your phony argument, makes you lower than whale sheite???
@di
"50 rounds per minute"???
I can fire hundreds of rounds per minute from my pistol and a stack of full 10 round magazines.
You DO NOT know what you are talking about.
You ought to call your progressive liberal masters and congratulate them on their fine job of brainwashing you. Eric Holder said that he was going to brainwash people about guns. Looks like he did a good job.
"Assault weapons", Your grandfather's lever action hunting rifle that your father traded with a pimp for 10 minutes with your mother is an "assault weapon" if it's used to assault someone.
"The 2nd amendment doesn't mean you can own nuclear weapon, surface to air missiles, land mines", NO sh1t Sherlock. The SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to "dangerous and unusual weapons".
1) ALL weapons are dangerous.
2) AR-15's aren't unusual, millions of Americans have millions of them and we can buy them at WalMart.
"Talk to the parents of 20 dead kids", YOU talk to the parents and explain why you won't allow us to protect the children from a psycho with a gun.
oooo. wow. so impressive that your can fire hundred of rounds per minute and you don't think that's a dangerous and unusual weapon. And DO please go ahead and pay the extra taxes it would take to have armed guards in our schools, playgrounds, fairs, etc.
And by the way, discussion goes a lot further without a gutter mouth.
@di
"extra taxes it would take to have armed guards", your idea, not mine.
"wow. so impressive that your can fire hundred of rounds", not impressing anyone. Just showing your ignorance.
"you don't think that's a dangerous and unusual weapon", the knife in the butcher block on your kitchen counter is a dangerous weapon. And, no, a plain old pistol pistol and some 10 round magazines is not an unusual weapon...... that's a bit of a stretch.
"further without a gutter mouth.", what gutter mouth?
When the new assault weapon laws are passed,it should be mandatory that copies are posted prominently in all the gun free schools,and copies handed out to the teachers and students alike.
That will give them something to wave at the next crazed maniac as he shoots the place up....knowing he will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law will have a profound effect on him before he caps himself.
There should also be portraits of President Obama and Joe Biden hung in the hallways of the schools,as the people run around in terror getting shot at,they can have a good look at the people who could have prevented it.....and didn't.
Can't have any assult rifles? Well people, real assult weapons are already illegal. Look alikes are not illegal, and are not really assult weapons.
But how many of you people posting here know that, but refuse to admit to yourself that there is a difference? How many people realize that with a semi-auto pistol, with a ten shot clip, you can probably empty two or three clips in a minute or less?
But we have to ban the large capacity clips? Why, when you can, in almost the same amount of time, shoot the same amount of rounds with the smaller clips. Banning guns or clips is not the answer, and people with open minds, that are able to THINK clearly know it!
We can sit here all day and all night for months and never solve this problem. No gun owner is going to surrender his weapons, no matter what laws are passed. And if that makes them criminals, hey so be it, because right now, criminals are not suppose to have guns, yet they do have them.
And these people who think guns kill, well do hammers kill, or baseball bats kill, or do auto crashes kill? All of these have two things in common, they all can take lives, and it takes another human to operate or use them. Are you low informed people getting the message now?
A bunch of BS talking points.
You don't need an assault rifle to protect yourself. Getting rid of high capacity magazines makes sense.
Most gun owners want meaningful reforms. If you don't want to follow the laws then that is your right and the consequences are yours. You are not in the majority.
It's funny that in the UK and Japan that criminals don't have guns because their are no guns.
Sure there are a lot of ways to kill, but they aren't using baseball bats and hammers in mass killings are they?
@Eric,
Where do you get that criminals don't have guns in the UK and Japan? That is TOTALLY inacurate.
What do you base the needs of others on? Substantiat why someone doesn't need a auto loading rifle or standard size magazine.
Back it up. Go
eric gets his information from the laws these countries have enacted but does not get there are still lots of guns in these places. It's only the law abiding that don't have them the bad guys still do and the msm doesn't report the facts about guns in these socialist countries
more idiots on the cowboy fantasy trip.
assault rifles have several well defined characteristics that still fall short of fully automatic operation. such weapons could be sensibly restricted to your home and not allowed on the street assembled and ready to load, particularly with high cap magazines.
all that is needed is to insist upon an RFID tag on each such registered weapon. viewed on the grid, if that weapon leaves your home or other location where you claim to need it for defense, then whoever carries that weapon is subject to criminal penalties.
this protects the gun owner from criminal liability after theft of the weapon and protects the soft targets the weapon might be used against — the fact that it is outside its licensed domain is immediately known to law enforcement.
Shortly after the last time we had an "Assault Weapon Ban" there was a revolution in Congress..... and we still have our pistol grip rifles and 30 round magazines.
So, bring it on.
Assault Weapon Bans do nothing but get liberals fired from Congress.
Not this time, do nothing and lose your seat. Times they are a changing.
The NRA got 100,000 new dues paying members in 18 days.
How many did Bloomberg,Brady and Gabby's Gun Grabbers pick up?
They are all top down programs with very little grass roots,funded by billionaires who want to destroy America.
They have the bucks to purchase politicians,but we have the spear carriers to chase them from office.
Obama and his Leftist regime are standing on the graves of the Children of Newtown to further their agenda and draw attention away from the abject failure that his administration is.
Putting more restrictions on law abiding citizens will do nothing.
Pro gunners/NRA and the right regime are standing on the graves of the children of Newtown to further their agenda and draw attention from the horror of mass shootings.
Doing nothing is not the answer. Children's lives are more important than your assault rifle or high capacity magazine.
Eric and Pro Choice backers are standing onthe grave of MILLIONS of children to further their agenda and draw attention from the horrors of legalized murder of inocent children EVERYDAY.
No body is saying do nothing we are saying do something that will have an impact and if you would remove you uncontrolable EMOTIONS from this you would see that. Remeber Emotions are Feelings and feelings aren't FACTS.
eric
the nra is only defending themselves it was the dems that went stupid using the tragedy as a political stance. Not long after i heard about the tragedy the first thing i saw was someone blaming the weapon that was in the back seat and not used in the crime. It's still about the weapon that was sitting there minding its own business and the people that are using him to promote their ideology. Meanwhile the rifle who was not even there is wondering why are people prejudice against me I was just sitting here. Damn sounds like racism to the rifle I bet