Speaking at the interfaith memorial service for victims and survivors of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre, President Obama has called for a new assault weapons ban. If not in so many words. “Are we doing enough as a nation?” the President asked. “We can’t tolerate this anymore. This tragedies must end. To end them we must change . . . Surely we can do better than this. If there’s even one step we can take to save another child, or another parent or another town . . . surely we have an obligation to try . . . What choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine. Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage? That the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?” Watch this space. And while you’re waiting, read up on The Truth About “Assault Weapons.”

Recommended For You

147 Responses to President Obama Calls for Assault Weapons Ban. Kinda.

  1. I’m really saddened reading a lot of gun owner comments on TTAG. They want “better mental health” checks and “communication”. I want to eliminate back ground checks. They do nothing. I want to legalize real assault weapons. I have the moral high ground. No law will deter anyone bent on killing. Not deranged robots like Lanza, not anyone.

    Obama, Fineswine, et al can off themselves. They have no right to say I have to get their permission to buy anything their bodyguards, police, individual soldiers carry around in public. Period.

    • You can want whatever you believe. Being here in CT and finding out families who have been impacted, you have no moral high ground. Emotions will trump logic. The society has been changed to think with emotions and not logic. This is how we have all these stupid laws. Stand on your beliefs, but the emotions of the nation are against you — the Brady Campaign is already recruiting family members. Gun owners can help with the change or it will be changed for them. The president has the political clout having been re-elected as well as the media and the short term emotion of this event.

      Emotions will trump your logic — nobody outside of the gun community wants to hear your logic and the Democrates will not waste this tragedy to push their agenda. In a sick way, they were probably dancing the jig as soon as it happened. I am sure there where some who fist pumped and yelled “yes” — this is the tipping point moment they were waiting to happen.

      • Sure, there are emotional and ignorant people in the world. There are also many who have heard the promises of gun control for decades, and are asking where are the results? Why are our rights and our ability to defend ourselves and our communities being infringed without any benefit for the law-abiding?

      • Yup. Only a lunatic would underestimate the magnitude of this event…..or the limits the grabbers will go to milk this tragedy for all its worth politically. Twenty funerals each featuring an innocent child and their angelic face on the TV screen is a powerful emotional tool indeed, if used for nefarious ends.

        • Politically, it will be a hard thing to do, pulling off an AWB. It is the use of those images (heartbreaking) of six and seven year olds as a battering ram on the nieve bleeding hearts who have come down with a nasty case of ‘do something disease’ that conserns me because of its unique nature.

        • So we should ignore pictures of murdered children? Or, like the people on this board seem to suggest, America should use them to push for even more guns?

          That last part was sarcastic, of course. I don’t think people should, or would, “use” a tragedy to advance their own political cause. I think the tragedy has an emotion, and an impact, that is completely independent of political causes.

          Anyone who tries to play on other people’s emotions using these pictures runs the risk that the emotions will turn against you. It is one reason that the NRA is so quiet.

    • If you are saddened by your allies at TTAG, then how do you respond to everyone else? I don’t know anyone on this site who supports AWB 2.0 except Mike and Mikey numbers.

    • Uhh I agree that criminals will eventually get guns if they want them, but shouldn’t we at least put in the very little effort it requires for a background check? I mean seriously, the FFL makes a call that takes 5 minutes or less and you’re out the door. How is that bad?

        • It’s 25 bucks in my state that I can use on something more useful… It does nothing to stop straw purchasers… So lets get rid of it!

        • Double plus bad. It converts a right into a privilege. Into Mother May I. “Uncle Sam says I’ve been a good boy! I can buy some more property. Hooray!”

          And of course, uncle sam tells the gun dealers to keep good records of all those gun buyers!

      • It can take hours when the system is lagging, which is often is lately. And it takes hours because we already do put in the effort for background checks, millions of us do.

        Once again, the criminal disobeys the law while the law-abiding bears the burden.

    • Dont even ask me to Consider 10 round mags until after the cops and military change over (even then, I would say it was batpoop crazy and solved NOTHING). I thought the libs were wary of military and police? Why give them even more power over you if you ‘kinda’ hate them? Why would anybody be a fan of the Nazi and Soviet schemes to disarm their citizenry? To really slow somebody down, you would have to go with 5 round mags anyway (assuming you could remove the millions of cheap little ‘boxes with springs’ from the nation and world…and stop new ones from being built).

    • So you think every single person prevented from buying guns legally because he failed the background check went elsewhere are got one anyway – every single one?

      And do you suppose if we stopped private sales without background checks, those same guys would find other ways?

      I think some would, but not all. And the inconvenience to lawful folks, almost nothing.

      • “…background checks… And the inconvenience to lawful folks, almost nothing.”

        Except when the system is swamped or down, like on Black Friday and at the gun show I attended on Saturday, and the background checks (which usually take just a few minutes) are taking anywhere from “hours” to “pick it up at the shop on Monday,” turning what is supposed to be an instant (National Instant Check System, natch) and seamless process into a de facto waiting period.

        • Nowhere did I say “scrap the system.” I was simply answering your statement that “the inconvenience to lawful folks” is “almost nothing.” That is not currently the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. When it works (I’m referring to it’s operation, not it’s efficacy), it’s a minor inconvenience. But it has the potential, more and more frequently of late, to not work as designed and intended (again, operation, not efficacy).

      • airport searches and wiretapping are not inconveniences to lawful folks either…but that doesnt make them any more acceptable and any less bullshit.

        • Ah. So your philosophy is that “Guns don’t kill people, except for the guns that the ATF walked into Mexico, those guns actually killed people”.

          That is going to be a little tough to fit on a single bumper sticker, but I am sure you can do it.

        • So your philosophy is that “Guns don’t kill people, except for the guns that the ATF walked into Mexico, those guns actually killed people”.

          That is going to be a little tough to fit on a single bumper sticker, but I am sure you can do it.

        • low budget dave,

          that doesnt make any sense. LTC didnt say “guns kill people”, he said background checks dont always work.

          LOL, two completely different philosophies.

  2. He just took the NRA’s tag line. He is ALL IN. He wants your guns.

    Let the panic buying on AR’s, AK’s and ANY mag over 10 rounds begin.

      • I know a place with 6920’s in stock and I am buying a couple tomorrow. He won’t get an AWB though, not whole the republicans control the house.

        • More worried about this if it happened in mid to late 2014; two years is a long time and sadly most of this will be forgotten by the time the mid term election rolls around.

        • Yes he can.

          Anyone who doesn’t vote on it after an incident involving children is going to be made to look like an @$$.

          They want to get reelected (at which point they will be able to take it back off under a different president, possibly, but we will still have to live with it for a while).

  3. These are dark times, this anti gun chatter is just masking all the REAL problems that are coming to roost, like an economy that is eggshell fragile and ready to crack much worse than before.

        • Hey, if you want to be a slave or be executed once the Glorious Revolution begins, feel free Comrade. I’ll put myself out of my misery before I live as a slave.

        • I think Billy Joe Shaver said it best when he said “When God comes and calls me to his kingdom, I’ll take all ya sons of bitches when i go!”

  4. Nothing here that was not predictable.

    Expect them to not only exploit an opportunity, but to keep the emotional furnace stoked cherry red. Expect the bloody shirt in your face constantly. Facts won’t matter. The constitution won’t matter.

    The only thing that will count in the end, is overt political power.

  5. Sad that he used children graves as a platform to attack rights. BUT we must help our friends in congress win. Call them and send support!!!

  6. In case anyone missed it, the President promised anything “within the power” of his Office to do what he thinks is necessary. Perhaps executive fiat (executive order or presedential directive) will beat Diane Feinstein to the political trough?

    I’m gonna be really upset if my Garand is caught in the wide net that will soon be cast!!

    BTW RF, you are on the ball!! I love this site more each day, no need to troll the web, everything one needs to know in one comprehensive location….thanks!!

      • He canceled a fiscal cliff meeting to go there tonight.

        You know he can hear his buddy Rahm in his ear:

        “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

      • Not to mention that the President cannot create new laws via an EO. He can only issue and EO regarding enforcement of current laws (otherwise he’d be a dictator if he could issue any new law by decree).

        People have let it slide for far too long, but if he tries an EO to ban anything, we’ll finally get lawyers to wake up and smell the Constitutional violation of his office’s power.

  7. This was a particularly bad incident, and it’s no surprise that the control freaks are pushing for new bans, but unless the Republicans in both the House and the Senate have a huge attack of cowardice, no new law will pass. There’s a reason that our Founders gave us checks and balances.

    • And the morons in this country voted for President Scumbag. Every gun owner in America who voted for Obama should hang their heads LOW at this point. I am from Illinois, I knew what we were getting in 08 and I knew that even worse was coming in 12 but thanks to a softball Media and a Republican Party afraid to voice the strengths of its own stated agenda here we are.

    • I believe this was my comment yesterday. I hoped he wouldn’t do this, just like I would hope that a pro-gun President would not have used it to call for armed teachers. Neither the time, nor the place. You wanna stand in front of the klieg lights outside, after the service, OK. But from the dais at the memorial service? You’re a jackass.

      • How could you possibly have expected otherwise Matt? Sometimes, I wish I was still young and idealistic. Sigh.

        • Yeah, my usual practice is to expect nothing (or worse) and then be pleasantly surprised. Occasionally I give the other way a shot, but I usually get kicked in the teeth.

        • I could have told you he would do this. The bottom line IMO is this: Providing real security for our school children would cost in the hundreds of billions; the only way to get that $$$$ would be higher taxes which the republicans wont’ agree to, or spending cuts which the democrats wont agree to.

          Blaming the guns and trying to take the moral high ground costs ZERO. I hope if anything positive comes out of this we get some anti gun Senators on the record voting in favor of an AWB so they can be voted out in 2014.
          I would also hope we begin to tackle the lofty social issues that brings about mass shootings like this but I am not that optimistic.

      • Like I’ve said everywhere the last few days, the anti’s aren’t going to waste one second of the bad emotions to push their agenda and any idea of “respectful silence” by pro-Second Amendment people is just giving them a bigger and bigger lead.

  8. Some of you guys need to look at the CT gun forum:
    http://www.ctguntalk.com/smf/index.php

    This is one post and it sums up some of the emotions happening here:

    “He said what he had to say. He kept politics to a minimum and only said he would do whatever he could to make children safer in this country. It remains to be seen what that actually means and it probably will include gun control. Everyone is letting their negative bias toward him find fault in everything he says. The fact is, he is our president and will be for four more years. He did what any president would and should do and delivered a positive speech. You may hear something else and it may be true, but it’s hard for me to sit here and yell “fvck you” at my TV when the president is telling everyone he is committed to making our children as safe as possible. The people who react this way are the reason why those on the other side think we care about literally nothing other than our guns. These people are the ones who will ultimately end up hurting all of us. ”

    Flame away, but you need to understand the situation….will something happen…sure…but the president acted like someone in his office would.

    Let’s not forget the children and parents and what they must go through.

    • That’s the point of the speech! Saying “It’s for the children” and all is to make you change your opinion on the entire subject by changing the wording of a few sentences! Anyone who opposes it will be painted as the person who posted that said and accused as a selfish baby hater. Don’t get roped into that, think of what the real battle is, not the words, but the message.

  9. Do you folks really think that passage of draconian laws or executive decrees would mean anything to our patriotic brethren who reside in the Southwest and / or in other red states? I’d expect zero compliance from anyone who pledged to defend the Constitution from threats, both foreign and domestic.

    • +1! I really think it’s about time to demonstrate the power of the people and make the gov’t subservient to the citizenry as was originally intended! We must defend our rights and give no quarter to these heathen fools! We the people are not to be toyed with and I believe it’s time for some real pro-gun work!!! I will message, in one form or another, every entity with power that I possibly can! I shall unite my friends in this endeavor and defend our freedoms in a fashion that hasn’t been seen before! I have never been patriotic in the past, but I regret voting for Obama, and I shall do everything in my power to set what entities in power right as I can!

  10. I was just remembering how Ronald Reagan gave a speech after the Challenger exploded. He said he would do anything to get “O ” ring control…..oh…thats right…he didnt say such a thing at all. He prayed and spoke of their bravery. He left the “O ” rings for another day.

  11. “Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage?”

    I’m not. I carry. Only victim-minded mental slaves like progs and gun-grabbers accept helplessness. Indeed, such a mindset is required of their belief system.

  12. The best liars use an ounce of truth. His question floors me, “Are we prepared to say such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?”

    He suggests that our freedom to have firearms (scary black rifles in this particular case) is what caused this carnage. But lack of freedom was a huge contributing factor — because no one had the freedom to “legally” carry firearms for defensive purposes in that school.

    • Absolutely. Mixing the truth in with a lie makes the whole thing go down more easily on the weak-minded. Gun control in schools allowed this catastrophe, and more gun control will not fix it. The sad thing is that I believe more gun control is heading our way.

  13. I have to put up with the people that believe that if you give to billionairs their magnificent countanances will flow down upon thee, lol./// Here is where my fellow dems are screwed up too, they never met a gangbanger or mass murderer they couldn’t save, lol. No dems, you sure wouldn’t want to shoot these pricks, Randy

  14. I really don’t see a point of an assault weapons ban. There is no way it will stop someone from using a gun really any weapon. Also I hear talk of people wanting to go after video games and any form of violence. I understand this tragedy is worse then ever. But we cannot blame everything single thing. We need to educate people about guns. Also we need time to grieve. Then we can talk about what to do next.

    • It’s not the worst though. Look up the Bath School Disaster.

      38 kids killed, two teachers dead, four parents dead, 58 wounded – all because a school board member got pissed that his property taxes went up to fund the school and he decided to bomb it and bash some heads in with a club. No guns involved and a much higher death toll, but it gets ignored by the media because of the lack of guns.

  15. Obama is now giving his canned speech to the families of Newton. He just said that our most important job is to teach the children to learn — get this one “self-reliance”. Self-reliance(?) as in depending on the police to pick up the victimized bodies and do an investigation after the crime?

  16. What is with the mindset and insane need to defend our country within when there is absolutely no threat! We can imagine, through our expensive scopes, that there is the need to arm ourselves with automatic assault weapons to fend off imagined threats, but truth be known, the only threat that exists is ourselves.
    Does anyone really beleive that there is any need what so ever that AK’s, Full Autos and any other assault rifle is necessary to be available in America?
    Surely sanity will prevail! Think of what you really use them for and pray to God that you never have even a glimpse of what they are intended for.
    Shooting them is a huge rush, I know first hand. Owning one and thinking that one day you will have to use it on our own land as it is intended to be used is the most horrific nightmares we could imagine.
    Big boys toys or Big Boom Phallic symbols to each other shows our lack of ego and insecurity to all!
    I also own them all from Poppers to Boomers. Single Bolt to Auto!
    In the name of sanity, I would gladly dispose of the Autos when this land has sense enough to stay out of the rest of the worlds internal affairs. You wack a hornets nest and your gonna get stung! Beleive it!
    Obama is perhaps the most sane and intelligent President the USA has had in many years and he will do the right thing.
    I for one do not want to have to stand on our boarders with an Auto in the hopes of stopping an invasion, thats going to happen economically!
    The world is not going to end on Dec 21st, or if we jump over the cliff, but it sure as hell will when all of our internal sychotic militia gather and take our country block by block. Disarm them now and eliminate their assault capability!
    Let sanity and good will prevail. Use your reasoning power and erase the threat from within. We only threaten ourselves!

    • I say we ban everyone named Mike. They all appear to be trolls.
      All of these Modern Sporting Rifles are an essential part of our culture. I do not want to lose part of our identity as a nation and fall into the Homogenous mixture of household violence that are the other weak countries that can’t protect their citizens and don’t want to try! The AKs in the country are fantastic for target shooting and hunting, and if a legally purchased AK saves one life in a DGU it is completely worth it.

      • I agree ban all these idiots named Mike, they are doing nothing more than ass kissing and trying to change the minds of the few that understand the Constitution and the Intended rights thereof. As I took an oath to protect the “country” and Constitution I dont remember there being a even if we may alter it clause in there.

      • I’d say anyone named Mike should be beaten with a baseball bat, THEN banned from commenting. My guess is that they’re all MikeB under different names.

        • I really don’t think it’s mikeb sock-puppeting. I may dislike everything he stands for, but I do think he’s smart enough to know that he’s not likely to change minds to his point of view, whether he uses one login or a dozen.

        • MikeB has no intention of changing anyone’s mind, he’s just a creature who lives under a bridge (since the T word is verboten).

    • I am really disappointed in this web site. You let this garbage posted by MikeyMarksMan stay on the page yet you deleted one of my post for suggesting the Mainstream Media is the real enemy to America. I guess I will start looking for a new site to get my information from.

    • Sanity is putting armed security in every school tomorrow (should have been 20 years ago!).

      Insanity is spending time on a policy stalemate where if you win you won’t even fix the issue while our kids continue to die.

  17. Obama confirmed today what told my best friend the week before the 2008 election. “Well, my choice is to vote for a Democrat or a communist, so I’m voting for the Democrat: McCain.”

    • It is bothersome that they blew so much of it trying to help Mitt “I signed an AWB in my state as governor” Romney instead of saving it for when it is really needed.

      • Yes my name is Mike. However I have no idea who MikeB is and I am a first time poster who has followed the discussions on this sight as an interested party only.
        In general all of the discussions here are very interesting and informative, from persons intelligent and I respect their opinion.
        I do however have my own opinions and did expect a comment or two on my post.
        Being ex Military, I have had enough experience and exposure to weapons and as an owner and collector of weapons I was just stating my position and thoughts.
        This is a very emotional subject and I respect and understand all of your positions.
        Please respect mine. I am not a Troll and do not need the baseball bat treatment.
        FLAME DELETED

    • You should be ashamed of yourself. These children were MURDERED. Take your bullshit talk of “sacrifice” somewhere else.

    • Actually the children were murdered because schools are naive and idealistic gun-free zones and the school staff was unarmed. Be reasonable, even if all guns had been banned years ago, crazies and criminals will always find a way to access weapons. Look south to Mexico and to the UK were gun and other crime has increase since most guns were banned and confiscated. Overall, violent crime is way down in America because of the spread of gun ownership and rights. Happy Holidays.

    • children are dead because anti-gun people are unwilling to protect them at even an equivalent level as we protect money, judges in courthouses, and packs of cigarettes at gas station convenience stores. those innocent kids were sacrificed due to adults being utterly negligent in taking simple, tried, and true methods to guard them.

      Schools are mandated to have fire extinguishers, lit exit signs, handicap accessibility and resources, school nurses… they should be required to have an armed security presence.

      • Children are dead because a lunatic took a couple of guns and went out shooting and not because any antigun or pro-gun or who else people did not do enough for their safety. It’s impossible, in any sence, to predict all possible situations. Schools still get on fire, banks are robbed and children are getting ill despite fire extinguishers, armed guards and nurses.

    • Look no further than the disgrace of a President who signed the Gun Free School Zone Act of 1993 into law as well as the murderous legislators who voted in favor of that bill. They have blood on their hands. People like you don’t want a solution; all you want is to blame the NRA and those of us who think the Constitution means what it says.

        • I guess to someone who doesn’t like what it says, it says whatever they want it to say. See how that works?

        • Chas: No, that actually is not how it works. The way it works is that we have judges who decide what it means.

        • What about “shall not be infringed?” When the background check system is down, or just swamped, resulting in a de facto, extra-legal waiting period, I’d say that’s starting to tread the infringement line. Especially when it happens as often and predictably as it does in recent months.

  18. My issue president Obama can issue executive orders buy pass congress and senate make new assault-weapons ban law of land. President Clinton passed frist ban on assault-weapons useing executive orders get round congress senate enforce frist assault-weapons ban. Most likely Obama well use executive orders pass new assault-weapons ban.

  19. I don’t see anything that singles out Assault Weapons specifically. Obviously, this speech is parsed and he could have mentioned them but if he didn’t, it is possible that he means mental health checks or armed security guards at school. No he probably doesn’t but he could mean it.

  20. Seams like we going to market a knee jerk headline. “President Obama Calls for Assault Weapons Ban. Kinda.” He didn’t say anything. Bad journalism award!

  21. I watched the entire speech, at no point did Obama call for an AWB, not even “kinda”. I’m a freedom loving American who wants no new restrictions on firearms but lately TTAG has left a sour taste in my mouth. Stop being a part of the agenda-pushing liberal media you hate so much.

    Also, there is no way for Obama to force an AWB through Executive Order. That’s just not how the law works. He could forbid them from being sold across state lines, or from being imported, but banned? No, that is not within the power of the Executive Order.

    • You’d have to be pretty naive to not read between the lines with Obama. The way he “called for an AWB” in this speech is the same way we around here sometimes joke about our “boating accidents” where we “lost” all our guns.

      Just because he’s too much of a political coward to come out and claim his controversial stance doesn’t mean he doesn’t have it.

  22. In her book “Shock Doctrine,” Naomi Klein talks about people who have agendas that would be hard to pass, pouncing after a disaster to get everything implemented. I think both sides of the debate are pouncing, but the knee-jerk reaction is probably going to favor the gun-control side unless the RKBA side gets creative and effective in framing the debate.

    For the RKBA side, now is a good time to speak up with a calm and convincing summary of our position.

    I wish I had such a summary, instead I only have a jumble of thoughts:

    1. We all agree the recent circumstances are tragic.
    2. The basis of the 2A is to prevent a. our own government from going rogue, b. to have an armed populace in case of foreign takeover
    3. With the current number of arms in the country, the safest immediate solution is actually to train and equip greater numbers of everyday people with firearms. Doing the opposite is analogous to removing a lion-tamer’s whip and chair.
    4. These widespread mass assaults are unacceptable, and we need to analyze and repair the root cause or causes, not necessarily the first ideas served up by either pouncing agenda.
    5. I don’t think the media attention given to the events and perpetrators is the inspirational spark, but it does fuel the incentive of spree killers. A media-ban would be against the 1-st amendment, but perhaps media self-restraint would help.

    Currently the debate is being framed around guns, which naturally leads to: if you are against school killings then you should be against guns. Yes we need to successfully counter these arguments, but the true progress in finding a solution to spree killers is actually going to be when someone frames a more interesting and louder debate around finding and fixing the roots causes of these mass assaults. Our problem here is that a website called TTAG is always going to frame the argument around guns, when guns are not the true issue. My suggestion for us is to spread out an change the frame of the discussion to divert the focus from guns (a tool which can be easily replaced (by bombs or fire or poisons, etc)) and shift the focus of the argument to the real problem (broken people). Staying on the defensive only leaves us as a target.

    • I have stayed out of these discussions purposely because I see the issues much as you do. I think you framed your points and concerns very well.

      I do think TTAG’s framing the discussion around guns is just part of their “turf” and they feel obligated to keep it so based on past criticism by their readership and commenters.

      For the root issues of these mass killing sprees, guns are an adjunct, not a root cause. We need to address the root causes, but the general discussion seems doggedly determined to focus elsewhere. Past failure to address root causes with more “gun control” legislation has demonstrated the folly of that tactic, yet it seems we will repeat it again. More people will die needlessly and the dis-identified Rights of US Citizens will be further infringed.

  23. Gun control isn’t a Republican vs. Democrat issue. The weak sisters from Maine (Snowe and Collins) will be all for an AWB, the handful of Dems left from Red States will be against it. The President can issue some executive orders, but he can’t ban anything. It will be ugly, it will be expensive, but ultimately I don’t see a new AWB or limit on magazine capacity. The NRA, like ’em or hate ’em, made a lot of people pay with their political lives for the Clinton AWB, I just don’t see it happening again. (I hope I’m right.)

    • yeah. people act like the NRA is doing something underhanded to have the power they have.

      they have power because most people agree with them.

    • LTC F, I hope your right too, but at this stage I can see ANYTHING happening. I just cant put limits to this ‘european style socialistic democracy’ wave that has been lapping at many of our citizens minds.
      Answer: Bring back patriotism and God to the classroom.
      But a knee JERK ‘big gov’ power grab ‘in the name of the children’ to FAIL to ban little metal moxes with springs in them will FEEEEEEEL so much better to…..let the HEALING begin.

  24. Anybody see the weird anti-gun movie Saturday night at 9pm prime time (west coast) on NBC featuring Wesley Snipes (made over 10 years ago). Very interesting timing indeed on airing such an obscure movie. Lib media bias? Answer: of course, stupid. Watch in AWE as the ‘machine’ grinds down on the 2nd Amendment with ‘Big Gov’ being the winner.

  25. I would accept requiring modern military-style rifles (or modern sporting rifles, or whatever we call them to avoid calling them assault rifles) to transfer through FFL with NICS if the following happened as well:

    1) the de-regulation of suppressors, sbr, and sbs at the national level.
    2) permissive shall-issue carry at the national level requiring not more than passing a background check and passing a written safety exam on par with the written exam for a drivers licence.
    3) the ability for school staff to train and qualify as armed emergency security officers, in every state.
    4) establishing at the national level that “no firearms” signs on public access private property do not carry the weight of law. i.e. if I carry behind one of these signs it is not a crime, but I could still be asked to leave if I get “caught”.

  26. I have been staring at this picture of Obama for several minutes, something is wrong. This is from the memorial service right? I know what greif stricken faces look like and that is not one of them. I am around them on a regular basis.

    Look at him, have you ever seen someone who has looked so pleased with himself before? That man is not sad, hes smug. Just look!

    • From all indications he is a sociopath. He and his TOP MEN used to joke around about drone strikes even though he authorized them to kill scores of innocent people.

      Even if you were killing an enemy you shouldn’t rejoice or joke about it. It indicates a sick mind.

      Plus look at all his lies, his superficial charm, fake tears yesterday, etc.

    • I noticed that too. I’m glad that you commented about it. Before I read your comment the descriptive word that had come to my mind also was that Obama looks ‘smug’.

      Obama sees himself as Revolutionary political leader; the great man type that is different from most other leaders. He sees himself as a visionary and transformational leader. Huge numbers of the common sheeple suffered and died for socialist progressives Lincoln and Mao. They saw their deaths as sacrifices to a greater society. I don’t think Obama is any different when it comes to carrying about human life. What counts to him are not individual people but achieving his political dreams.

    • The look on his face in the lead photo does look smug, but perhaps that’s why it’s the lead photo. I didn’t watch the memorial service, but before I drew any conclusions I’d like to see a clip from about 10 seconds on either side of that moment. I found it online, but I’m not gonna watch the entire thing trying to figure out precisely when that photo was taken.

    • I have always thought he is patterning himself after Mussolini, nose up, chin out. Arrogant posture. However, I am bi partisan, I despise them all.

  27. Here what Obama could do becuase what Clinton did during his term. President Clinton also used the power of executive orders to implement gun control policies. On April 6, 1998 Clinton signed an order that permanently banned the importation of more than 50 semiautomatic “assault weapons”.[12] In 1999 White House domestic policy chief Bruce D. Reed said, “The country is tired of waiting for Congress to respond to the tragedy in Littleton. The administration is going to do every thing in its power to make progress on guns.”[13] In 2001 Clinton also used executive orders to ban the importation of “assault pistols” and tighten licensing rules on gun dealers.[14] Many accused Clinton of overuse of the executive power on gun control issues.

  28. How about beefing up or adding security in such places like schools, theaters, malls, etc? Obama asked if we are doing enough to prevent these kinds of terrible crimes. Well obviously not.

    Let responsible law-abiding adults carry into schools, and eliminate “No-Gun Zones” in places like theathers, hospitals, and malls–meaning do not allow private businesses to post such signs and legalize them in places currently prohibited (within reason of course). Encourage every responsible adult to get their CWL, and provide free firearms training subsidized by the government.

    Taking that a step further, why not hire armed security for theaters, malls, other public places, and especially in schools to keep our children safer. Allow teachers and school faculty to carry within campus as long as they are trained and have passed the proper background checks. Banning firearms and these so-called “Assault Weapons” has never been the issue.

    When bad guys know that they are walking into a mall, school, theather, etc and there are hundreds of law-abiding concealed carriers, they will think twice about commiting crimes.

    • That is exactly what the NRA is counting on. People are willing to vote for voodoo economics as long as they get to keep their unregulated guns. As a result, you can shoot anyone who breaks into your house to steal your 10-year-old TV set, but you can’t do a thing to the bankers who stole your retirement.

  29. Hey lets look at the UK, once guns were outlawed the deaths from stabbing sky rocketed, now that they restrict knifes to 2′ or under they are now bludgeoning each other and the murder rate is even higher than it was prior to guns being banned. You take away our guns and only the criminals will have them.

    • In the UK – population 56.1 million – there were an estimated 550 murders in 2011-12, a rate of about 1.4 per 100,000. Of these 39 were carried out with a firearm.

      This is hardly a “sky rocketing” murder rate. Even if you use the “Home Office” figures from 2010, the murder rate in England and Wales has fallen from 644 to 619 to its lowest level for 12 years.

      Both sets of crime figures, the British Crime Survey, which measures people’s experience of crime, and the police recorded crime figures show continued substantial falls in offences, bringing the risk of becoming a crime victim to a 30 year low.

      There was a small rise in gun crime in the first two years of the ban, but after that, the trend has continued downward.

      So basically, what I am saying is that: 1. You are wrong, and 2. You are using 10-year-old statistics in a desperate attempt to avoid admitting the obvious truth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *