E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSVice President Joe Biden told a group of House Democrats Monday that the White House could use the Obama for America campaign infrastructure built during the presidential campaigns to push for the gun control policies that the White House intends to introduce on Wednesday.
According to Rep Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., who attended the meeting, Biden told the group "that they were going to use their campaign mold" to pursue gun control policies.
"What he needs to do is like he ran the campaign, same as President Clinton did, to get out to the American people," McCarthy said, "And that's what we need."
McCarthy, who is on the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, says their group of House Democrats will meet with Chris Cox of the NRA next week to discuss their strategy for gun control legislation.
Their recommendations, which will be separate from the president's, will likely be released the first week of February, McCarthy said.
But the political realities of passing an outright assault weapons ban, which McCarthy supports, are becoming clear to members in the House.
Even McCarthy herself admitted "We're not going to get an outright ban."
"Senator Reid has said he doesn't know whether he has the votes (for an assault weapons ban)," she said. "There's heavy lifting, so are we going to waste time on heavy lifting? Or are we going to try to work on doing something that could actually get passed?"
McCarthy added that there is a growing sense that a ban on high-capacity clips is something that could garner enough votes in both the House and Senate. She also said she's hoping the Senate passes a package of gun control measures first, in an effort to put pressure on the Republican-controlled House.
"I think (Senator Reid) could pass a package without the (assault weapons) ban, and I think he probably thinks that too," McCarthy said, "But let's play it out. We'll see what the President offers tomorrow and we'll go from there."
Leave a Comment:
Obama needs to fire up the public.
Or the NRA will win.
We need to have a "well regulated militia." If Congress won't get this done, then the President needs to use his executive powers to order such actions.
All guns need to be registered. A background check on everyone owning a gun and national data base has to be set up.
I agree,
We have to register our cars,
Why not our guns?
Another great suggestion I heard is to get the corporate sector involved in having gun owners get liablity insurance.
The cost alone would weed out some irresponsible gun owners.
Salud
McCarthy, who is on the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, says their group of House Democrats will meet with Chris Cox of the NRA next week to discuss their strategy for gun control legislation.
Their recommendations, which will be separate from the president's, will likely be released the first week of February, McCarthy said.
=============
I'm assuming I am missing something here. Is this Task Force the same as the one Chaired by the VP or something different? If it is the same, why in the heck are there are separate set of recommendations from the Presidents....and if the Task Force is not what the VP chaired, what in the hell has this been doing to date?
I see no reason for any gun not to be registered and the private selling of it not to be registered and if there is a failure to do so, that the original owner has some liability for the crime it may be used in.
Let's be REAL careful with "executive orders" when it comes to dealing with constitutional issues...
The President needs to protect the constitution from over zealous nut jobs who want to take away our freedom to bear arms!!
Don't over step your constitutional duties as chief executive and don't forget your oath to protect and defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic.
I'm for sensible regulations but creating an emotional plea for gun control with children will do nothing but create "mob rule" mentality and thus bad legislation will result!!
TomasGrande: So you are saying that poor people are less responsible than rich people? Most of the recent mass shooters have come from affluent families.
People can't afford licenses to vote but you're going to make them insure their guns they use to protect their homes?
It's a great idea since they are about 20 times more likely to result in an emergency room visit than those of us who choose to live without guns in the house.
ozzieyo1-7277359
Gee ozzy, if they can afford to buy them and the ammo, then they can afford a little more.
Allen, Omaha, before she became a representative, McCarthy's husband was murdered in a commuter train shooting, her son was badly injured. She ran for Congress to try getting sensible gun laws passed. Her task force would be the House one. She and her group have written and pushed legislation limiting the size of magazine clips, tried to get the assault weapon ban reinstated for years but there has never been enough votes, even from democrats, to get bills passed. The NRA for too long has held too much power over elected leaders of both parties. That power is as mythical as the notion that democrats believed they lost the midterm election after they and President Clinton passed the assault weapons bad in the 90's. It was as much a misbelief as that of republicans thinking George H. W. Bush lost reelection because he raised taxes. It was more coincidence more than anything along with the voters' tendency to not have one party hold both the legislative and executive branches of government. Or in the case of Bush 41, voters felt twelve years of GOPers was too many.
After every mass shooting, Carolyn McCarthy has tried to introduce gun legislation. Maybe this time, something will finally be done. Sometimes it takes years to get things done. We have only to look at the health care bill to realize that.
You are aware, that Executive Powers are in the Constitution, right?
You are also aware, that all Presidents use this power from time to time.
You are also aware that this President is a Constitutional Scholar and knows more about the Constitution than you.
And, you are also aware that the Executive Power is very limited.
Congress is the one that makes the laws.
This President is no different than past Presidents.
Salud
Sandy, cars arent a RIGHT see the difference...besides you can own one and not register it.
Parker, whoops I meant Johnny Storm, can you drive it on a public thoroughfare?
Ikarus i have no idea what you are talking about. besides i cant trust someone that would lie about bacon. but keep comparing cars to guns. libs did the same with cars and health too.
Parker, the question is quite simple ... can you legally drive an unregistered car on a public road?
Now who would lie about bacon? Certainly not a Brit nor a Canajun.
Caesar
Guess your Second Amendment right is more sacred than a human life.
Voting is a right, too. Funny how republicans have no problem trying to deny that right to certain groups. Under the Constitution, Congress has a right to make laws to protect the public; regulating guns and ammunition would fall in that category. No one is talking about taking away all guns and all ammunition. No one has a right to own a tank, a rocket launcher or a grenade, all things likely needed for our "well regulated militia" which is now known as our military but that doesn't mean John Q. Public has a right to own those military weapons as part of the 2nd amendment's "well regulated mililtia".
I guess one can say the same for the First and third and fourth etc. I wonder if those that fought in the revolutionary war contemplated that. Many sacrafices have been made in the name of freedom, no paper will guarantee it. An ever watchful eye and a means to secure said freedom will allow it to endure.
no but on to your point.
show me the amendment that guarantees you the right to vote in fact
bcwc - since "parker" appears to have fallen silent, I'll answer for you - NO, you may not drive an unregistered car on a public road and most states also require you to have insurance to drive it at all!
so are we seeing the fundamental difference between a privledge and a right? perhaps we can adopt the premise of citizen vs civilian like in starship troopers? Wouldnt that be a novel idea.
Parker ... ugh bugs! Chicks were hot.
Caesar Augustus
I pray you have the FREEDOM to hug your child tonight.
Unbelievable what this country is coming to...can't defend yourself with a gun, but its ok to kill a human embryo.
"It's a great idea since they are about 20 times more likely to result in an emergency room visit than those of us who choose to live without guns in the house."
Opinion Chucky b or fact?
Ahhhhh yes. Campaign "mold". Lying about the position and demonizing the opponents to his tyrannical, ignorant point of view. It is all the propagandist-in-chief knows how to do. appeal to the ignorant, brain dead flock seeking a mocha-colored messiah. Not too black and not too white and he don't mind killing babies. Regardless of how compassionate his handlers tell him to be.
So, when he stands at the dias tomorrow surrounded by the unaborted being used as props, no one but his deluded sycophants will take him seriously and he will be frightened now that there is pushback and the threat of impeachment has finally been said.
Paul - the difference is you don't KILL an embryo since it is not living. And, how many adopted children are in your home????
Simple Theory - stupid post. There is nothing to impeach this wonderful President for and you know it. Just kills you that he is successful, good for the country and ten times smarter than all the Republican candidates combined doesn't it?
And if you want to talk ignorant and brain dead - you're definitely talking the low information voters who are Republicans. Not a speck of sanity to be found in the entire dim-witted party. You've proved that!
Seeking sanity
pull the wine bottle out of your ass and give your brain some air.
Did you miss the part in my post where I mentioned the deluded sycophants? That would be you.
Uninformed, uneducated, indoctrinated drone. You are the low information voter.
Let's test your idiocy:
The wannabe tyrant-in-chief is proposing an expanded database of law abiding citizens who own firearms.
How would this measure have helped in preventing what occurred in Newtown?
BTW retard, an embryo is alive. You are Obama's drone.
Since, all life is Sacred
shouldn't we protect some from guns?
How sacred the life of the left is a matter of debate.
Guns save lives everyday. Guns provide protection from people who wish you harm. If Obama wanted to protect lives the first thing he would do is suggest getting rid of gun free zones.
It is not left or right.
It is about saving lives.
Let's do nothing...................
We can all sit around and pray our loved... is not next.
"Guns provide protection from people who wish to do you harm."
If you want to protect your kids, do you suggest they pack a gun in their backpack?
It is not right or left .....
It is looking for common solutions.
My right to defend myself by whatever means I deem necessary is not for some thug idiot politician from Chicago to decide.
But lets look at some facts. Perhaps it will enlighten you.
In Venezuela, civilians are not allowed to possess machine guns, sub-machine guns, carbines, pistols and revolvers, be they automatic or semi-automatic. Civilians are only authorized to hold .22 rifles and shotguns
United States murder rate: 5.22 per 100,000
Venezuelan murder rate: 47.21 per 100,000
In Colombia, the law requires that a record of the acquisition, posession, and transfer of each privately held firearm be retained in an official register.
Colombia murder rate: 40 per 100,000
In Mexico, only licensed gun owners may lawfully acquire, possess or transfer a firearm or ammunition.
Mexico murder rate: 11.59 per 100,000
The solution is to follow the Constitution and wannabe tyrants like Obama can go to hell and stop trying to infringe on my inalienable rights.
It's that simple
As I thought. The "we want them because of our loved ones" crowd always have nothing to say when slapped with the facts.
It is not a left or right issue
It is about looking for solutions to save lives.
Remember, Sarah Palin liked to say "common sense solutions."
Guess some are not looking for them anymore!
There is no solution in stripping our rights from us.
The information I gave you demonstrates that.
No right or left? The only viewpoint you approach this subject with is from the left. All emotion and no facts. Your ilk avoids the facts like a plague because they are not in your favor. You choose to exploit the murder of children to further your cause.
Much more transparent than the idiot-in-chief.
I am not from the left.
My only viewpoint is "How does a mother feel to be LEFT without her child?"
The 12 who died in the movie in Colorado where someones child.
Those that died in the temple where some ones child.
All that die at the hands of guns are someones child.
I choose to exploit the murder of all God's children.
Murder is not a left or right issue.
Name calling is demeaning only to the one doing it.......... simple theory
If children dying are your concern...have you protested over your lord and savior firing missiles at children? Of course you haven't. It is Obama doing so, he is the chosen one.
People kill people. Inanimate objects don't.
I reserve the right to have adequate protection for me and my family. My Constitution guarantees me that right. You may be a victim if you wish
BTW sandy
I checked out your comments on your page. You're about as left as they come. I would say "be proud of it" but it's nothing to be proud of. Just another brain dead leftist loon.
Good for you
The Brady Gun Violence Prevention Act
was passed after the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan.
He got to live to see it signed into law.
The NRA spent millions to defeat it.
Good old President Reagan supported it.
I was a young adult when that history happened.
And I voted for Reagan twice.
The issue is not left or right.
...
The Brady gun bill should never have been signed. It didn't end gun violence now did it? A subtle rip of our rights. The issue is liberty or tyranny.
You're choosing tyranny. There is no such animal as a benevolent government. Wise up.
I had the liberty to vote for Reagan.
I voted for Bush after him.
I voted for his son in George W. Bush in 2000 and in 2004
This day I am choosing to .... vote to save killings from guns.
I wised up. I have had enough of murder.
It is not a right or left Issue.
I will say good night with this.
Someone lost a brother, someone lost a sister.
George W. Bush said, "No child should be left behind."
Sounds benevolent to me.
... and keep the machine well oiled for 2014. Too many people fell asleep during 2010.
Oh, BCWC, you can bet your ass that we will not fall asleep at the wheel again come 2014! I think now more than ever, our base is fired up!
Breaking news: NY passed their gun legislation! YAY!!!!
The NRA has become a very far right wing organization and any normal and responsible person that owns a gun should find another organization that is actually for you because the NRA serves only one entity: Gun manufacturers and bullet makers.
Unfortunately the NRA leadership is not voted into office by its members. It is appointed by the directors ... folks such as the infamous Grover Norquist and Ted Nugent and good old Ollie North of Iran Contra fame.
It's not about the NRA, it is about Obama using a tragedy in Connecticut to further his political agenda. It is about Obama sidestepping existing law and the second amendment. This will wind up in the Supreme Court because language in the Second Amendment is quite specific.
jim-1455434
I am sure that this will end up in the Supreme Court, but as to Obama's agenda, maybe some time spent at-
http://www.sandyhookpromise.org/
What about the tragedy in Colorado 71 shot, 12 dead.
What about Arizona how many dead.
What about the mall shooting.
The temple shooting.
What if it was your loved one?
How can the Second Amendment be more sacred than a life?
blackcatwhitecat - the NRA leadership (what an oxymoron) is appointed by it's diretors and totally supported by the gun manufacturers. They will NEVER support anything that doesn't further gun sales no matter what. As far as children dying - too bad but hey look at the gun sales that event spurred. They're all for it. There is no decency left in the NRA "leadership."
sandy - great question and no one with a conscience can possibly consider their guns more important than a life.
OPINION- The problem as I see is that we have the Federal Government telling the states that the FEDS are responsible for Gun Control, just like what they said last year about Immigration on SB1070. But some states have gone beyond what the feds have done and enacted tougher regulations without being sued like Arizona on SB1070.
So, here is my dilemma, either the FEDS have the Authority or the STATES have the choice, you don’t get to choose which ones you want to enforce! Personally I want the FEDS out of most all of it and let the states make a choice. I don’t want ANY POTUStrying to circumvent the Constitution Period, I don’t want ANY AG to go after what a State deems to be within their rights either. I just think we as a Union have gone too far with how much control we have “GIVEN” to our Federal government today and it needs to be reigned back in.
Jim, take it to the SCOTUS and you will lose. Nowhere does it allow assault weapons specifically in the Constitution. It actually doesn't say anything specifically about your right to own a firearm except where needed as part of a well regulated militia. When that was written we had no standing army and firearms were muzzle loading muskets. No one but rwnj and the NRA are claiming that Obama or anyone else is going to take away your guns. No where does it say in the Constitution that firearms are to be registered or not be registered. That which is not in the Constitution is up to the legislative branch to create.
Amendmet 2 of the US Constitution states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".
Arms could be pointed sticks, spears, swords, knives or firearms. As long as you can have some form of arms your right is not being infringed. Nothing in this Amendment prohibits registering firearms nor does it say how many or how few you can have.
Just like libel and slander are not allowed under the first Amendment so certain high capacity rapid fire firearms should not be allowed under the second Amendment.
jim-1455434
STILL listening to Glen Beck I see.
(sigh)
Salud
kend-california
So you are cool with the status quo. If I can't but a gun in New York, all I have to do is go to a Virginia gun show and buy a truckload. And we wonder how criminals get their hands on guns.
Adler
I agree.
Those muzzle loading muskets could only fire one shot at a time.
kend-california-
I'm sure you are well aware there are many instances, well within our Constitution, where the Federal Government supersedes the State Governments.
Afterall, we are the UNITED States.
If we had 50 different laws on everything, then we should just become 50 different countries.
Salud
jim #'s, well, then it is obvious George W. Bush used 9/11 to further his agenda to start a second war in Iraq or have you forgotten that? Get real, twenty 6 and 7 year old babies were slaughtered in their classroom; six adults were slaughtered trying to protect them. Only a hardened heart yelling gun rights could take such as attitude.
In case you have not noticed, Sandy Hook Elementary can be compared to the last straw on the camel's back--a lengthy list of massacres topped by the unthinkable horror of murdering first grade children at school, innocent 6 and 7 yr old children who probably still had most of their baby teeth. That's not a political agenda, that is a level of horror that demands action; a level of horror that finally sank into the de-sensitized psyche of Americans who now expect something be done.
It's statistically insignificant, right Jim? More kids die in cars, right Jim? More people die from cancer, right Jim? Jim, look away when you see the parents of the victims, it will help you sleep at night.
Jim
I pray you have the freedom to hug your child tonight.
Can it be so true that all of you have finally been able to silence such a blow hard as jim-numbers? Wow!
I applaud each and every one of you! Your comments were rational and beautifully demonstrated. Especially, yours Adler and Jody!
"What about the mall shooting"
Sandy, that mall shooting stopped because there was a guy who had a CCL and drew down on him. It would had been worse if he wasn't there.
Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 97th Cong., 2d Sess., The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, 83-109 (1982) concludes that:
“The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution Guarantees an Individual Right To Keep and Bear Arms”
The data from history shows the
BEAR ARMS was a musket
that could only shoot once without re-loading.
Paul
How many were murdered
isn't that worse, ENOUGH?
"Senator Reid has said he doesn't know whether he has the votes (for an assault weapons ban)," she said. "There's heavy lifting, so are we going to waste time on heavy lifting? Or are we going to try to work on doing something that could actually get passed?"
===========
Really have a distaste for comments like these. Irrespective of what the Party needs, it is outright saddening that that courage to put a banning bill on the Floor for an up or down vote won't happen.
Our political discourse and attitudes have become so warped that the right thing to do easily gives way to what is only able to get done.
Put the ban on the Floor and the let the Votes fall where they may. Then follow up right up with what you think can get passed and let those votes fall where they may.
Screw "counting" votes. Write a piece of friggin legislation, get it out of Committee, debate it on the Floor, Vote it up or down.
All do respect ma'am...please take your arse down to the Newtown Cemetary, look at those 26 graves and tell me once again about 'if you really want to waste time doing heavy lifting'.
Don't you every compare your effort to 'heavy lift' something to a Parent who has to put their 6 year old in the ground with 10 bullet holes in them.
I agree.
Put it on the floor.
Up or down vote.
Call or write your Senator.
AMEN, Allen! Amen.
Did any of you guys watch the interview lastnight with Rachel Maddow and the wonderful couple who lost their son Ben in Sandy Hook? OMG. I thought I had moved past crying, but that couple, so brave and courageous, just broke my heart all over again. I sat there listening to their story and talking about Ben and I had tears just streaming down my face. I would like to say that if I was ever in their position(no parent ever should be) I would hope to have the integrity that they showed. When the mother stated that she and her father always thought Ben would do amazing things, but she didn't realize until now, that it would be in death that he would do amazing things. Boy, that caused sobbing.
R.I.P Ben Wheeler. We shall do our very best to make sure that you and your 19 friends are never forgotten.
I was watching Anderson Cooper and had a similar reaction learning about the folks opening up the thousands of condolences letters coming in from around the world. You know every fringe hater that crashes the conversation over here would change their tune in a second if it was their kid underground.
Oh, I saw a little bit of an interview that Anderson had with the couple who's little red-haired girl, such a darling little girl, was murdered at Sandy Hook. Another amazing couple. I really and truthfully think that if it had been my child, I would be in a mental ward. My hat is truly off to these people.
chucky, I don't hold out any hope for those who oppose any gun safety legislation whatsoever. That to me says they don't care about anyone else but themselves. Thankfully, there are more of us than there are of them. We just have to keep having the conversation just as Ben Wheeler's father said last night.
My sentiments exactly, Allen. When I read "But the political realities of passing an outright assault weapons ban, which McCarthy supports, are becoming clear to members in the House. ", what I HEAR is that Congress is still made up a bunch of cowardly weenies who are terrified of being attacked - not by a crazed gunman, but by the advertising money behind the NRA.
There's "political reality" and then there's the reality of life outside the halls of Congress. The reality of small towns in Connecticut as well as big cities like Philadelphia and Chicago and Detroit.The reality our representatives rarely venture out to confront.
In 2014, we MUST demand better.
It is alarming how thin the margin is between us and them, really. You've got to give credit to the NRA. While they seem idiotic, lunatic, tone-deaf and swine-like to me, they really have suckered alot of Americans.
chucky b - they "own" a lot of Americans and pull out the boogeyman card to scare the totally ignorant.
I really love the survivalist crowd that's stocking up so they can protect themselves from the big bad US govt that's coming out to get them. You know it is the same drunks chanting "USA, USA" at the Romney/Ryan rallies and basically wrapping themselves in the US flag. Pathetic and un-American.
Alaska Girl----I had the same reaction to that brave couple. How they have the strength to get up each day, let alone try to make something good come out of such a tragic situation, is beyond me. In between my tears all I could think was---how can we as a nation not address this problem.
chucky b
The Second Amendment is in their BIBLE.
Right next to how sacred life should be.
The Constitution was written by men who were surely smart enough to realize that permitting citizens to be well-armed would, sadly, permit a madman to murder innocents by the handful. But they also realized that forbidding citizens from being well-armed would permit a madman to murder innocents by the millions.
They wisely chose to protect our country from the far greater evil.
"You know it is the same drunks chanting "USA, USA" at the Romney/Ryan rallies and basically wrapping themselves in the US flag. Pathetic and un-American."
Really Chucky d? What do you mean drunks? Give examples? So it's safe to say it's the same for crackheads that chant Obama, Obama, and stepping on the US flag, like that liberal teacher did in NC in front of his class. Kind of like that? Do you realize how stupid that sounds to make comparisons
I'm proud of the American flag and served 20 years to protect it, but I guess that makes me un-American right? Doesn't matter what political party people belong to, if you wrap yourself in the American flag and chant USA, USA, please explain to me how that is un-American? Do you even think before write?
That's right. Up and down vote. Even if it does not pass, we will know who sides with law enforcement and common sense, and who sides with Murder Inc.
The up and down vote has to go through the states for ratification... requiring 75% for passage.
"Murder Inc."
What's Murder Inc.? So what would happen if someone didn't vote your way? Would the crazy Left go to his house? Threaten his family? What?
The United States Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness"
It's sad that the children and teachers from Sandy Hook have been denied, Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness!
None of these executive orders will hold up in court. They can be challenged under constitutional law, and will only drive up the sales of all guns of all types while tied up in court. Even if they can be done, how do we pay for the new regulatory agencies and fund the data base creation? How do you protect patient rights to privacy if treated for mental illness? Does depression or anxiety remove peoples 2nd amendment rights, or only violent episodes? Who gets to decide? How much will taxes have to go up to pay for these programs? Illegal aliens are not allowed to possess firearms, does that make deportation mandatory for possession? This is bad legislation at best.
simple answer - tax guns and ammo like cigs and liquor.
Sane, since we do not even know what executive orders or what specific ideas are being considered under executive order, it is premature to claim that the court will not uphold them. Incidentally, to the best of my knowledge the Court only reviews laws passed by legislatures either state or federal. Executive orders are merely actions of a president to do some functions relating to the departments which report to him/her and which do not violate the rights of Congress; they are also only temporary measures which can be easily revoked or superseded by the next president.
chucky b
And they have to buy liability insurance.
Hmmm. If a gun owner DOESN'T do that, then I guess they aren't a "Law Abiding Citizen".
Salud
chucky b, Tomas, that's exactly how we fund it.
Already being done, but you could increase that of course. I doubt you could generate enough revenue to fund the programs proposed without taxing everyone. But if people are willing to pay for what they think makes them feel safe, it should be a willing tax increase. Besides, those who have the guns have that right. So those who want the data bases and regulations should fund it. Lets do this as a tax donation by those who want to fund these programs instead of a tax increase. Then you will really know how many people support it. I think the POTUS needs to be mindful that when he makes clear his intent to bypass the political process and congress to push his agenda. He sends a message to those who oppose his view that it is okay to bypass inconvient regulations if you feel stronly about your cause. Also remembr what drives these actions. The taxes on booze did not lower deaths by drunk drivers, and prohibition was a disaster.
Sane - nope - the database and regulations should be run by huge taxes on guns and ammo - let the nut cases who just have to have their guns fund their stupidity and it will hopefully protect the rest of us from them!
Seeking, You are always passionate in your comments, but not always realistic. While I don't think all people who disagree with me are "Nut cases" I don't think gun owners are being subsidized now. They are paying for ownership themselves. That really is a RIGHT. Funding data bases and demanding medical records be public access is not. I know those who want those things will not be the ones to fund them, that is not realistic. But it is not realistic to beleive they will stop or decrease killings that are already against several laws. When did any nut case put down a weapon because they remembered it was not legal?
Wow, it didn't take long the liberals to jump on the taxing issue. Tax weapons and ammo make it impossible for those of limited means to own a weapon for hunting or target shooting. Have you liberals ever seen anything, except yourselves, that you didn't want to TAX?
BTW, I see Senator Boxer of California now wants the Federal Government to pay for armed guards at school, what BS. Maybe Boxer don't realize that hundreds of schools in CA already have armed guards in the schools and have for quite a few years. Some School Districts have their own police departments, and other school districts contract with the City Police and Sheriff's Departments to provide armed security during school hours and sports events.
And they have to buy liability insurance.
Hmmm. If a gun owner DOESN'T do that, then I guess they aren't a "Law Abiding Citizen".
According you you right? So what you're saying is that I have to pay more for obeying the law? So again why should I have to pay more for doing the right thing?
Do you have liability insurance on your car?
Isn't this kind of like the quarterback of the San Francisco 49ers meeting with the Atlanta Falcon's head coach to review the playbook?
While i understand that most people on newsvine don't like guns that doesn't mean you can take away other people's rights. Most gun owners are responsible law-abiding citizens.
lisa - please try to keep up. No one is talking about taking guns away from legitimate owners. We are talking about banning assault weapons and large capacity magazines - not a word in the Constitution gives anyone the ight to own them!
Seeking sanity, I do keep up. I just don't agree with outright ban. I think we can agree to disagree on this issue.
Lisa
We had 4 children die in K.C. in the last month from guns in the home.
Responsible law-abiding gun owners?
Two more were shot in a drive by last night.
Is your Second Admendment more sacred than human life?
I do not want to take away anyone's gun.
Sandy, Please try to be a little more tolerant of people who don't share your opinions. I still have the right to free speech.
I pray you have the freedom to to hug your child tonight.
Sandy, I hope you a have a good night.
Sandy - your post is nothing but liberal BS. Why was the 4 killed in the home, how old were they and it appears the parents were not very responsible parents. The two killed in a drive by, I am sure the people with the weapons did not possess them legally, sounds more like gang members.
Now how about the woman that hid her children in a closet and when the person who broke into her house was shot by the lady who was protecting her children and herself. What might have happened had she not had a gun? Maybe her and her children would be dead now, so I would say her 2d Amendment rights were more sacred than the life of the robber.
Do you liberals actually know what an "assault weapon" is? After reading a bunch of posts, it appears that the liberals only want to BAN ALL FIRE ARMS. Because you and other liberals posting don't like guns, it does not give you or the Federal Government or state governments that right to deny me the right to my weapons.
"ASSAULT WEAPON" carried by my husband in the military.
Want one join up.
I DO NOT WANT TO TAKE ANYONE'S GUNS AWAY.
My son-in-law say it only takes him one bullet to kill a deer.
Sandy, My husband spent 25yrs in the military. Defending the right's of the American people.
My husband spent 25 years in the Military, also.
Since, he was medical he got to see the damages a gun can do to a human.
I DO NOT WANT TO TAKE ANYONE'S GUNS AWAY.
Sandy, I spent 20 years in the military and retired. You might want to ask your hubby, to explain the difference between a MILITARY ASSAULT WEAPON (Which are banned by law) and a semi-automatic weapons which might look like military weapons but in fact or not.
How many bullets can a semi-automatic weapon put into a human body.
I do not want to take your gun away.
Hug you child good night.
Sandy, two questions for you:
"What level of public harm justifies expensive or draconian measures by the government that affect the entire population?" And the corollary: “What level of proof should the government offer that the measures proposed would actually eliminate that harm?”
Sandy - So now you want to BAN all semi-automatic weapons. As for your question, which I find really stupid, It depends on how many bullets I have with me and how many times I want to reload.
My Children are grown up as are most of my grandchildren. BTW, I have taught them all to fire several different weapons and how to secure them properly.
Let's do nothing ..............
The proof may come in the form of more of the population, being DEAD.
sfcret
The Colorado shooter has 6,300 bullets.
Some 12 parents lost a child that day.
You have the FREEDOM to still hold your children and grandchildren.
I pray they go to the movies or the mall or school safe.
I have a grandchild on a college campus.
Let's do noting.................
While we all just sit around and pray our loved one ...... is not next.
Sfcret,
I wouldn't even argue with this. They only know what is told to them. A little research goes a long way.
The pain of going to a funeral goes a long way, also.
Sandy - Statistically there is one chance in 28 thousand that you will be a victim of a firearm homicide this year. How much money and freedom would you personally give up to lower that risk by, say, 10%?
Similarly, there is one chance in 7 thousand that you will die from poisoning. Would you, therefore, give up four times as much money and freedom to lower that risk by 10%?
You can if you wish to,........... put human life statistically into data.
FOR me life is Priceless.
It is not a right or left issue.
It is looking for common solutions to save lives.
Sandy ("FOR me life is Priceless") In 1994, Jennifer Jones, a 15-year-old student, died at her Palm Beach, Florida home after attempting to inhale freon gas from the air-conditioning unit. By your logic, we should be willing to ban all air conditioning to prevent a recurrence of such an accident.
Logic
Let's do nothing..............
Give me Liberty or give me death.
We can sit around count the dead.
IT IS NOT A RIGHT OR LEFT ISSUE.
It is about saving lives ............... maybe yours.
Looking for common solutions.
The data from history show the right to
BEAR ARMS was a musket
that could only shoot once without reloading.
In the days of muskets, a musket-armed citizenry could defend themselves against a similarly-armed tyrannical government. The principle is the same today. The people have a right to weapons equivalent to those used by the government.
Sarah Palins said, we should look for "common sense solutions."
I am looking for "common sense solutions" to save lives.
The principle is the same today.
Jody, you have a good point when you say lets see the proposal and then discuss it. But he has outlined 19 of the changes he wants to make, and does not see a need to discuss them. That is the point of bypassing congress. Those are the changes I refered to. But it does seem odd that you call for restraint in reacting to those so early, but you support rapid reaction in making them. You want people to support urgency as more important than caution or effectiveness in adding laws and regulations. But it is to soon to question them?
I should hope so. The President built a hell of a machine in 2008 and 2012, if they want to maintain their advantages they'd better keep it well maintained and up to date.
"....the White House could use the Obama for America campaign infrastructure"
Wake up, state run media NBC, your boss Obama is calling you back to duty! Pour on the gun control propaganda...Chuck Todd, if you play ball, maybe the President will give you an interview so you can shill your "book"....
Biden tells Obama to go into campaign 'mode'! Has he ever stopped campaigning? Someone should tell the man that he won and it is now time to govern.
All the "angry black man" (feisty quote) does is continue to divide the nation with his words. The latest fear of words, or is it another self-concocked war, that unless he doesn't get his way, the older folks on SS won't receive their checks. Drive fear into the hearts of those most unfortunate.
Everyone should change their name to a Latin sounding name and collect the benefits that illegals receive thanks to Big Government. Why should the older folks suffer when those not citizens benefit?
The Campaigner in Chief!
Pathetic.
How about some substance enough with the useless do nothing Ideological Rhetoric.
People don't pay much attention unless bombarded like a campaign. It can be considered a campaign like another to get support for a candidate or an issue. It would seem that getting support for something has changed these days. Out of necessity he has to be campaigner in chief. I'd rather he use the bully pulpit than just sit and let others handle an important issue such as this.
It is not a right or left issue.
It is looking for common solutions to save lives.
The 2nd amendment was written to insure that the citizenry could defend itself against the gov't. Registration is the first step of confiscation, be wary.
The basic problem with gun control is that law-abiding citizens don't need gun control laws. Criminals and those persons that are mentally unstable aren't going to live by the laws anyway. Guns don't kill people anymore than pencils mis-spell words, spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat, and cars make people drive drunk. "sick" people kill people, and if they can't find a gun, they will use a knife, baseball ball or whatever "weapon" they can use.....almost Every nation that has bought into gun control laws has ended up being run by a dictator who kills more innocent civilians than guns ever could. wonder how the German people felt when they wanted to defend themselves against Hilter and realized they had given up their guns....
Our guns are a right under the second amendment to protect ourselfs from corrupt, dangerous out of control goverment. With Obozo out of control, its not looking good for true Americans. This socialist muslim Obozo is destroying America from the inside. This dictator want to be is cancer for America, too bad liberals are too stupid to see the damage this poser is doing. Long live the NRA to protect the rights of the true Americans. Liberal sheep go drink your Obozo kool-aid.
Too many gun nuts on this page who wish to force their views on everyone else. I say bay ALL guns except police and military. Guns are made to kill. Why does a average person need to kill. And don't give me that to protect me an mine bulls$$$. All you gun nuts take up a new hobby