E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIf the White House gun violence policy announced today had been in effect, would it have changed the outcome of recent mass shootings?
It's impossible to say for certain, but here's a look at what it might have meant.
NEWTOWN -- A tough assault weapons ban might have blocked the sale of the Bushmaster XM-15 that Adam Lanza's mother bought legally and which police say he used to kill all his victims in the school. A ban on high-capacity magazines might also have reduced the killing power of the weapons he brought to the school.
Jason Reed / Reuters
President Barack Obama signs executive orders on gun violence during an event at the White House in Washington, January 16, 2013.
AURORA -- As with Newtown, a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines might have reduced the killing power that James Holmes brought into the movie theater.
TUCSON -- Federal law bars gun sales to anyone who "is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance." When Jared Loughner attempted to enlist in the Army, he admitted he was a drug user. That information was never reported to the FBI for inclusion in the background check database, because a Justice Department policy dating from the Clinton administration directed federal agencies not to report information volunteered by drug users, for fear that it would deter drug users from seeking treatment.
We are waiting to hear from the administration on whether President Obama's executive actions announced today will rescind that Clinton-era policy.
VIRGINIA TECH -- The dealers who sold Seung Hui Cho the guns he used in the Virginia Tech shooting followed the law to the letter, because there was no information in the system indicating that he was not qualified to buy a firearm. Federal law bans gun sales to anyone found by a court to be a danger to himself or others because of mental illness, but under the law then in effect in Virginia, the state entered people like Cho into the gun check computers only if they'd actually been admitted as patients to a hospital. Virginia has since eliminated that loophole to bring its practices in line with federal law.
As for requiring universal background checks, two examples come to mind:
COLUMBINE -- Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were both under age 18, the minimum age under federal law to buy a rifle or shotgun from a licensed gun dealer. They recruited an 18-year-old Columbine High School senior to help them buy several guns used in the killings. The three went to a gun show in Adams County, Colorado and bought a semiautomatic assault rifle and two shotguns with cash. Klebold and Harris also bought an assault pistol from a private seller who had bought it at the gun show. These were the four weapons used in the Columbine attack.
L.A. JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER -- In 1999, Buford Furrow, a white supremacist, shot and killed a letter carrier then entered the LA Jewish Community center and shot five other people, including three children. He bought the gun, without a background check, at a gun show in Washington state. As a convicted felon, he could not have passed a federal background check.
Leave a Comment:
So, I really liked that reality tv show yesterday....nice touch with the kids and all. Good speech, too; but I have to confess to liking Snooki and the NJ gang a little better, with the Kardashians a close second.....they seem so much more "real." Any idiot knows the things Obama and Biden did yesterday are feel-good, no impact of any note, political scammery. Reading this article makes it pretty clear that nothing from yesterday would have made much difference....even the Columbine killers would have eluded the law to obtain their weapons. I give Obama high marks for Theater....low marks for substance. Move along folks, nothing to see here, just a political stunt.
If he really wanted to do something he would have embraced the NRA in a massive, national effort to protect our children (who's against protecting our children?) and challenged the NRA to take the lead across the country to control access to high-powered rifles by having local NRA chapters (or local police agencies working with NRA) establish shooting venues for high-powered weapons, including provisions for the storage of the weapon and its ammunition at the venue. Then seek legislation that prohibits keeping such weapons and/or ammunition anywhere other than the approved venue. Movement of the weapon/ammo from one venue to another to be accomplished by a licensed agent (not the owner). Make the NRA a partner in solving this problem while being sensitive to their members' concerns....and, give them money to implement the new national policy. Now that would be a game changer that would alter this article in a positive way.
So grandfather . Movement of the weapon/ammo from one venue to another to be accomplished by a licensed agent (not the owner)." Quote"
So with this statement you say that I should have to pay a licensed agent to carry my rifle and ammo from my gun safe to my deer stand and back? Are you nuts?
"ASSALT WEAPON" is just a term that the liberals and liberal press has given a SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE to make it sound like a bad thing. Semi-automatic rifles have been used forever in hunting and target practice.
A semi-automatic rifle is not needed to kill numbers of people. Look at the Muslim Fort-hood killer..He shot 50 soldiers with 2 hand guns. And by the way, has never been to trial for the killings. (Work place vilance)? They rushed to try the soldier that shot 16 afghans, but still after years have not tried the muslim for killing American's That shows you were Obama's prioritys are!!!!!!!!!!!! Liberalism is an incurable disease...
Gordanfan. You are so screwed up. The Forthood shooter is being tried in Military Courts, the army isn't done water boarding him yet for Information. And what by the Way do your think the President has do do with that, Or the shooter in Afghanistan. You people give the President way to much power. There are 3 equal branches of Government for those of you that just follow. The President is more of a figure head kinda like the Queen. The President can't spend money, that falls to the Congress. The Congress also makes the laws. If they make a law the President don't think is right he can veto it. So keep misdirecting things. But educated people know better.
The ends never justify the means. And this revisionist history is complete BS. End of story. That said, PW is a great writer. He should stick to facts, it'll be better for everyone than conjecture in the long run.
Trust: Your argument don't hold water. You say where is your tears for all the children the US killed and displaced. Those wars were started by the right, the same people that back the NRA. These are the same people that wouldn't fight during Vietnam. Little Bush, Cheney, the President of the NRA. They all hid so they didn't have to go get blown to hell in Vietnam. Any Coward that refused to fight for his Country has no business sending our People into BS wars like Iraq. When a person has been in the front lines of a war, they are not so fast to put young men in harms way. They will if needed, But they will not just start a war to make there rich friends richer. That is the only thing a war does, is make rich people richer. You can see ,we never start a way where there is no Oil. Take North Korea, No oil no war. Afghanistan is rich in Gold, Copper, and many other minerals. But what does Afghanistan export? Opium.
Now to guns. The great majority of American's own Guns of some sort. The second amendment allows us to own some guns. But not anything we want. You can not own Automatic weapons. A RPG, a Tank. So we know the argument using the 2nd amendment is not a good argument because it allows the Government to decide witch guns or Weapons you may own. When not if, the Government does what the Masses of Americans went done and Ban these AR 15 and anything like them, The 2nd amendment will not stop them. The Court's wont stop them. The NRA has seen its day. They can only use the same old tricks for so long and people are on to them now. There days are numbered. They can't fight 87% of the Country. If they are going to be a part of the solution, they must change. But there only Job is to keep the Gun makers making and selling guns. Look out for the profits of gun makers. They have used the 2nd amendment to hide behind for many years not and have got away with it. Telling people to not trust your government. Well I have to tell you America. We elected these people. Would you vote for someone you didn't trust. NO. Ask Mitt Romney. No one trusted him. The People that Voted for President Obama trust him. Can all the Rep's that voted Romney say the same thing? No that's way so many rep's stayed home and didn't vote. Our Government is only as good as we make it. We need to stand up as a Nation and start to do the right things again. Its not Important to this Country for Gun Makers to be allowed to put these Killing machines on our Streets. Sure they make them for the SS, and Military and things like that, but not for everyday people. We will have a much better country if we start doing the right things. We have allowed Big business to take over our country, Look what it has done for us. We are where we are today because of big Business.
What a bunch of BS.
Ban guns? Then what? Baseball bats, knifes, etc, etc. Violence is violence. You have been programmed to respond in the way you're responding. MSM and politicians lie and mislead you. You lack the knowledge to make an informed opinion. Educate yourself.
Mark Twain said something to the effect. It's easier to fool someone than it is to convince them they've been fooled. You have been fooled.
End gun free zones
Get kids off dangerous psych drugs.
Properly treat the mentally ill.
mytoosenze: We are reaping the rewards of Ron Reagan, and his closing of the State Hospitals. They put the insane people on the streets to same the government money, Plan and simple. Reagan never stopped to think of the repercussions of his actions would be. Same thing when he Busted the PATO union. How many millions did he put at risk there. I see today that Boeing's new Dream liner has been grounded. You know what, back when Boeing Plans were built by union workers and built in one place, they never had these problems. The outsourcing to non union shops overseas will likely be the undoing of Boeing. The once most trusted name in Plan makers in the world, Now look at them. How many times does it take for people thinking cutting quality for Profits never works in the long run.
And to your saying we are being fooled. The only ones being fooled is the NRA members. They have been fooled for years. And the latest was after Newtown. They told there people that they had better get out and buy these AR 15 now before the government banned them. Man the Prices went trough the roof. I am surprised the government didn't nails them for price Gouging. Talk about being suckered. A gun that cost $ 1,500 now goes for $5,000 for more and the clips that hold 30 rounds and up, well they are 10 times highers.
"The Potatoes Man's Revenge." The Bushmaster gun company is owned by a conglomerate of gun companies called "The Freedom Group," who also own Remington, Marlin and others, making it the country's largest gun manufacturer. In turn, "The Freedom Group" is owned by Cerberus Capital Management, whose Chairman and CEO is Dan Quayle. Ex- Bush Secretary of the Treasury John Snow also sits on their board.
So duct taping multiple low count magazines together wouldn't have done as much damage in these situations?
In the Tuscon shooting, the shooter was taken down by people in the crowd when he changed magazines. Doesn't ABSOLUTELY solve the problem, only gives a better probability of stopping the carnage.
No, I'm saying a high capacity magazine can be BUILT by cutting the top off one magazine and taping (or welding) it to the bottom of another, then install the follower and two springs.
I understand what you are saying...and I answered..."Doesn't ABSOLUTELY solve the problem, only gives a better probability of stopping the carnage" - i.e. SOME mass murderers might NOT self-extend their magaines. The point is to construct "road blocks"...doesn't mean they can't be gotten around by some.
Like Obama said, the ban on assault weapons was allowed to expire and now kids are dead..
Thanks again, G.W.Bush !!
Columbine happened during Clinton's ban you moron.
Availability of semiautomatic rifle weapons are not the problem. Most shootings are done with very cheap handguns. Why not ban them all. Why not put a 50% tax on all ammo and enforce evasion of the tax with severe penalties.
Google "zip gun" if you want a really really cheap gun.
Drugs were banned, yet today we have more drug users than ever. Alcohol was banned and demand for it spurred organized crime to satisfy the peoples demand. Murder is against the law, Chicago didn't get the memo. Sodomy was against the law, today we have HIV and same sex "marriage" is all the rage. Ban guns and the only people having guns will be those who ignore the law. The real problem is much deeper than availability of things.
"Where God is forgotten or even denied, there is no peace either." ~ Pope Benedict XVI
If we are going to ban guns for killing people, then we should also ban forks and spoons for making all you libs obese.
As far as I know no fork or spoon has taken out 20 kids and six teachers in less than fifteen minutes. You have a stupid argument
No they just created millions of diabetics and heart problems.
Did you know that more children die each year from health problems than a firearm?
You people have a real difficult time in correlation.
As a non gun owner, but supporter of the Constitution. I am okay with all the President's recomendations. If just one child would have been saved because Lanza had to reload, I can live with that and no one can argue the fact that the police chief and the coroner said they were " riddled with bullets". If you feel you need a gun for protection...fine...you want to hunt...fine......target shoot...fine..but a few limitations are not a bad idea. what are you really losing.
"If just one child would have been saved ...." ? At least one child was saved when the crazed killer used up his ammunition riddling the already little dead bodies. Yes, it was a horrible massacre. But not because of the means or body count. If only one child had been killed the deed would still have been a terrible evil. The progressives objectives in restricting guns has little or nothing to do with saving children's lives.
"Watch out that you are not deceived."
It's not the journey, but the destination, which is troubling. Research where the President would like to take us (read Chicago, NYNY, DC) and you'll uncover why.
People need to hold lawmakers accountable at the ballot box if they resist strengthening gun laws and closing up the loop holes. No one can make a legit argument to support bad guys getting guns, and doing nothing to close down their access to weapons and ammo. Gun owners need to be responsible, and cooperate with authorities to keep guns away from people who shouldnt have them.
Criminals and mental health patients do not have 2nd amendment rights.
Any argument about hassling law abiding citizens is garbage. We have to separate who are the good guys and bad guys, somehow. And the so called good guys need to cooperate, or they are not good guys. Stop only thinking of yourselves. And anyone that is, needs to be exposed for it. Especially politicians. Enough kids have been sacrificed. Its time to act.
One of the ways we can make streets alot safer, is by controlling ammunition sales, and bullet making materials for self loaders. No criminals should be able to buy ammo for their illegal gun.
A gun license system, and a gun registry, are an obvious answer to closing up some major loopholes. Requiring a license to buy anything gun related, especially ammunition, should be at the top of the list of new laws. Renewing that license periodically, is how you retest gun owners every year or so. To make sure they are still not criminals. Lots of law abiding citizens become criminals after they have bought a gun. Theres no way for authorities to know about it, and confiscate their gun, unless they are caught in public with it, and the officer runs a check. A criminal needs to be disarmed as soon as possible. The only way to do that is with a gun registry. A gun license is just a convenient way to show other people that you are okay to buy gun related stuff.. It would be a good way for private sellers to check a buyer, no license, no sale. Currently, private sales get no check of any kind. That needs to change.
I personally dont think bans on so called assault weapons are necessary. But I do think that people who want to own an assault weapon, should have to go through a lot more of a process to get one. And they should have a bunch of rules attached to that ownership. With regular unannounced inspections to make sure they are complying with said rules. They should have to have a secure gun safe, thats bolted down and cant be stolen. They should have to have an alarm on it. They should have to store the ammo for that assault weapon in a separate safe with the same precautions. In a different room than the gun safe. If the assault rifle isnt in your immediate possession, it should have to be locked in the safe by law. And the ammo in its safe. Adam Lanza wouldnt have been able to steal his mothers guns if they were locked up in this manner. It should be illegal for anyone else to have access to those guns in any way. Including family members, especially any with mental health issues.
There is no question that gun violence can be reduced by strong gun laws. Other countries are proving that right now. Criminals and the mentally ill do not have any gun rights.
The ironic thing here is the government isnt coming to get anyone but groups will be fighting other groups. The one little girl got on the internet and wanted to have her say in legislation and the cops told her it might not be safe to do that and she might want to take it down. So was it the police who could threaten her right to free speech? No, it was the gun owners who were using their guns, or would, as a threat against free speech.
the big lie is lack of gun control insures a free america. the truth is it will deplete it just like in these mid eastern countries with the Taliban (the NRA is nothing more than the american Taliban) and other tribes who war against each other. There is no government taking away their freedoms, they took their own away.
Amazing.
The lunacy of this article knows no bounds along with those who lap up this huge platter of assumptions all the while reading "would" instead of "might".
So tell me Pete Williams, have you interviewed the families of Columbine yet? Did you ask them how effective Bill Clinton's ban on assault rifles was for them?
There is no question that we need sensible gun regulation and I am in complete support for many of the 23 executive orders our current Administration passed yesterday. There needs to be far more education, security at our schools (that is #18 of the 23 executive orders OBAMA passed for those who disagree), tracking of mentally ill Americans, and harsher penalties for those who are not being responsible with their firearms. Much of what was passed yesterday will address theses issues.
But to sit here, and post an article of "might's" and "what if's" is simple intellectual dishonesty. I could sit here and say if everyone in the country had a firearm Sandy Hook "might" not have ever happened, the Aurora shooter "might" not have ever got a bullet off...
Do you see how utterly stupid that sounds Pete? Either side making broad assumptions over an issue that many folks know nothing about is just plain silly.
Oh, I can swap a magazine out in less than 2 seconds on an AR. Limit me to 10 rounds? I'll just have 10 mags.
And ONE child dead at a school is enough for me. You attempt to state that if Lanza's mother was limited to 10 rounds there would have been less deaths. But DEATHS none the less. And the simple fact that he had more than one firearm on him exactly what would a 30 round mag ban have done?
Not a damn thing... that's what. Children and teachers still would have been murdered and you seem be completely missing that fact along with the root of the problem.
Nothing is a "guarantee." Limiting the magazine size only reduces the probability of mass murder. As you note, their are ways around it. But, I believe the Tuscon shooter was subdued when he paused to change magazines, thus saving who knows how many additional causalities.
Do not let "perfect" be the enemy of the "good."
IOW, it's a relatively small step in the right direction. What is the argument FOR large capacity magazines?
Oh I don't disagree with you there. It is definitely the right step. We doing nothing would only have allowed this madness to continue.
So I support the President in his actions yesterday.
Argument for a large clip? Well other than sport and hunting (many folks use 30 round mags for varmit hunting down here near the border throughout their ranches) I would say security. Each year thousands of Americans defend themselves successfully from intruders and assailants. The data is out there for everyone to see. Just recently a 15 year old boy had to defend his sister from two home invaders. He grabbed his fathers AR-15 unloaded on one, and shot at the other who was coming through the back door. He managed to hit the adult three times. That adult still lived and both intruders fled.
Google :
Investigators: 15-year-old son of deputy shoots burglary suspect
Another story was a 12 year old girl who hid in a closet at her mothers home. An intruder was breaking in and she called her mother who told her to grab the gun and hide in the closet. When the intruder found her and started to open the closet she fired through the door multiple times hitting the intruder in the arm. He lived as well but fled.
Gogole:
Oklahoma girl, 12, shoots home intruder while hiding in closet
My point is you limit someone to 10 rounds you only give them 10 chances and most children are not equipped to handle such situations. I would much rather give my child 30 chances than 10. And I would much rather have criminals know that we can match them round for round when they choose to walk around with 30 round clips because they do not obey the law.
The same arguments regarding multiple smaller magazines made for those intending harm, may be made for self-defense. Nor, do I think we want to get into pre-determining "good guys" from "bad guys," (other than perhaps convicted felons, court certified "dangerous people," etc., so the rules have to be the same for all.
I'll grant you that high crime areas (inner cities, the southern border, etc.) present special problems. If there were adequate border enforcement, perhaps the problem would be reduced.
HOLY CRAP Nbc News. Talk about kissing White House butt. Hey if we had semi auto rifles in the civil war more people would have been saved because we could have ended it sooner. That statement makes about as much sense as as this whole damn article.
Clean the brown off your nose.
Obama's coulda, shoulda, wouldas would fill a tome...to think that anyone can change the past is lunacy...the US isn't a constitutional monarchy...Obama can't create any laws at all...none...zero...nada...his little EOs aren't worth the paper they are printed on...Obama and his minions are proof that the schools pass through an uneducated group of imbeciles...
They are law until congress approves them, or not. Good luck getting it through congress in the next 4 years.
What a USELESS, MEANINGLESS piece of propaganda!
An assault weapons ban MIGHT or MIGHT NOT have blocked the sale of a weapon to Lanza's mother. Does anyone know when she purchased the firearm?
It's simply speculation. We could just as easily say if Adam Lanza was never born then there would not have been a shooting. Or if the "rapture" occurred like the wacko predicted in late 2011 then there never would have been a shooting.
Bottom line is that until the US Constitution gets amended all US Citizens have the right to individually bear arms without infringement. Background checks and registration are not infringements as long as the information is not used in some way to the detriment of current or future gun owners. Confiscation or forced sale would be an infringement. Banning new sales of certain types of weapons is technically an infringement, but creating additional background check requirements for them (just like with fully automatic weapons today) would probably not be.
As for the magazine capacity limitation effort, its would increase danger to law-abiding citizens and it would not make a damned bit of difference to a mass murdering wacko. The law-abiding citizen might not have enough rounds to defend themselves while the wacko would just bring additional magazines or weapons with them. No unarmed potential victim is going to be prepared to "jump" a gunman in the 2 or so seconds it would take to change a magazine or draw out another loaded pistol.
Happened in Tuscon.
How long has the gangbanger violence in our cities been going without any intervention by Obozo and crew? It has been going on in all administrations and it has been elevated in the past few decades because of the love of drugs by this country! It is also because of the lack of jobs and a lack of pride and respect for others.
Of course there are the mentally ill and some people who are just evil and should be locked up for life after they have committed serious crimes resulting in the death of others. Take a look and see just how many morons who committed violent crimes have been released from prision only to commit more violent crimes.
The judicial system is a farce and the many judges are stupid liberal nuts who are the ones that should be locked up for letting these imbeciles run loose.
Face it, too many liberal nuts, too much BS about being politically corrent and parents who do not do their job of raising responsible children with high morals and ethics. The reason many parents are dope heads and drunks and could care less.
This society is crumbling because of the greed, selfishness, lack of morals and total disrespect for anyone except for themselves. It is not the guns and most liberal nuts just don't get it and think tramping on the constitution by some idiot elitist so-called professor who has his head up it and got elected to fullfill his socialist agenda is the answer to all of the country's social problems.
The country is going down the tubes because of idiots who can not lead and others who continue to follow blindly through life!
Our schools are pushing children through even though many can't even read or write. Our education system is a farce and lacks behind even some third world countries.
Hey losers, it is not Guns, it is the idiots who have no respect for others, mentally ill who need assistance, and drug morons who want to rob and kill to get what they can off of innocent people.,
A real leader who clean up the gangbangers and crime by making stiffer sentences and keep these idiots locked up for life. So do you still think it is guns?? You need help!!
Gun control is about disarming bad guys.
This article is ridiculously biased. A lot of "might have's" and "may have's". These people might have stolen a gun if they couldn't get one legally, or they may have just brought multiple low capacity legal magazines (oh wait they did in a few of these cases). Also, an "assault rifle" is just a semi automatic rifle that looks like a military weapon. Obama is not banning semi automatic rifles, he is banning semi automatic rifles that look like military weapons. In other words, people will still be able to easily buy (or steal) a semi automatic weapon with as much capability as a so called "assault rifle".
the NRA has always supported better background checks,and laws prohibiting mentally ill and felons from obtaining guns..
They give lip service to that, then fight every attempt to put it into practice. Actions speak louder than words.
Gun advocates can try to distract and throw out bogus arguments all they want. But you cant argue basic logic. And people are not stupid, so spare us the rhetoric. And the threats.
Keeping guns away from people who shouldnt have them, will reduce gun violence. Its obvious, and the right thing to do.
Gun sanity NOW!!!
NBC, you got to be kidding right? Now in depth reporting about "what if" scenarios from the past? OK, all you psychologists and psychiatrists.... find a new line of work. No one is going to go in for help anymore and have their names put on a potential mass murderer list for public display and information. "Doctor, my husband left me, I am so frustrated and angry...." "Ah, secretary, would you please call the mental health commission and have them lock this woman away and raid her home for guns and sharp objects.... she qualifies to be placed on the potential mass murderer list and public website...". Yep. Scarlet letter. Labeling, dividing, and defining everyones lives one tick at a time.
These laws are not going to be used to persecute innocent people. Its about keeping guns away from the real nuts. And if they are real nuts, they wont be voluntarily going to a shrink anyway. Crazy people dont think they are crazy, they think everyone else is. Adam Lanza was taken to a shrink by his mother.
Morejustice.... think not? You are right, the government would never take advantage of open ended non defined laws to expand its power and beaurocracy over the people. Keep believing.
How about this... the new in depth background checks.... interviewing neighbors, co-workers, credit history, religious affiliations, spending habits, political affiliations..... what a great excuse to get info on people. Oh, I forgot, the government wouldn't do that... the open ended law would just have government doing a police check.... Sure. And how about the uncontained fees for the background checks, the time wait, how about a $5000 gun registration fee like on your car? No, the government would never take advantage of an undefined open ended law. You are right, and people should have no fear of their mental health services being made public,,,, especially when we are all lined up for Obamacare.
Thank you for straightening me out as to the limited direct purpose of these laws. But I still aint going in to get mental health when my loved one dies or anything... no no no... keep it to myself and my name off the "lists".
"What is amazing is that in each case, if the changes to the laws President Obama is proposing were enacted, the guns used to KILL would not have been available. So much for the 'new laws won't work' argument."
Well, no. Your point is moot.
I'm a Democrat, I voted for ObamaX2, and am all for (the concept of) Gun Control. However, logic is being distorted here.
Had the Bushmaster gun not been available for the mother to purchase, she would have simply owned a different gun. It might have had slower firing. It might have had a smaller magazine. Neither of those factors would have prevented that 'other' gun from killing a bunch of kids.
More importantly, the legislation against large-capacity magazines seems rather pointless and ineffectual. In almost every incidence of these mass murders, the culprits brought multiple firearms, and didn't even have to resort to their use. If you kill a bunch of people with a 12-round magazine, you could just as easily kill the same number of people with two 6-round mags. Or, simply use your secondary or tertiary weapons. In Connecticut, didn't the kid have two other guns with him, that he didn't use? Besides that, magazines are designed to be quick to change. So, instead of killing 20 people in 45 seconds, maybe it takes you 60 seconds. If the point of this new "tough" legislation is to prevent these crimes, it doesn't work. If the point is to make the killers slightly less efficient, kudos. Well done.
Executive order 45665487 ban all assault Forks which contribute to the obesity and death of fat people. Cant believe you all are letting NBC news milk you for more stories. Discussion is pointless with people scared of guns. Just buy up arms and ammo and cure your apathy. Its time to prepare.
Oh we need a new executive order fat people use their fingers.