Promises on Gun Control

[SecularMotion]

President Obama’s fleeting mention of the need for stronger gun controls at a presidential debate last month was hardly the kind of forceful political statement needed to address the scourge of gun violence in this country. Even his tepid remark was considered by the nation’s gun owners as a threat to take away their firearms. In what amounts to a buyers’ panic, they are again ramping up gun and ammunition sales as they did four years ago, convinced that Mr. Obama intends a gun-control crackdown.

Yet in his first term, Mr. Obama did nothing to cross the gun lobby, and he actually signed legislation allowing loaded firearms to be carried in national parks. Let’s hope Mr. Obama shows more courage on guns in his second term. He said during the debate that he would see “if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced” and that we need to look at “other sources of the violence,” like “cheap handguns.” Now it’s time to follow through on those promises.

Wary politicians, including Mr. Obama, will issue statements of mourning for the victims in mass shootings, which seem to happen ever more frequently. But they refuse to say much about 30,000 American lives that are lost each year because of shootings.

Horrific incidents like the massacre in July at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., and the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords and murder of six others in Tucson last year produced vows in Congress to screen the mentally ill more effectively and to ban battlefield clips of 100 rounds of ammunition that have no place in a civilized country. But there have been more than 60 multiple shooting incidents since the Tucson shooting, and nothing has been done to make such killings less likely in the future.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/24/opinion/promises-on-gun-control.html

[glacierbay]

1. Hundred round battlefield clips?

Tells me all I need to know about the author of this article.
Even if Pres. Obama were to call on Congress for another AWB, what are the chances of it getting through the Senate, much less the House?
Answer: None, the House is controlled by the Repubs, who will never allow it and the Sen. is headed by Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is a staunch supporter of the RKBA.

Gun control is pretty much done for in this country and all the whining and moaning by the controllers and banners ain't going to change it.

[Lizzie Poppet]

4. They are as much of a chimera...

...as journalists who bother to become adequately informed about firearms.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

7. Maybe journalists at the NYT should be required to disclose whether they are stockholders in any

of the companies that produce ammunition and firearms.

Every time they stoke the fires with these type of stories, the price of ammunition goes up. As do firearms.

[upaloopa]

36. If you fools wouldn't get you knickers in a wad and stop rushing out to stock up on your habit

every time chicken little says Obama will take your guns away the price wouldn't go up. Don't blame the NYT. Take some personal responsibility!.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

38. You are obviously foolish for thinking that Obama is going to take away any guns. He isn't.

[upaloopa]

59. I didn't say a damn word about Obama doing anything.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

66. Sorry. From your post, I thought that your foolishness extended to that.

[upaloopa]

35. Some day Reid and the republican House will be gone. Some day the conservatives on the SCOTUS

will be the minority. Some day .......................................

Never say never!

[PavePusher]

58. And who do you intend to enforce restrictions/confiscations? (Yes, those are clearly your goals.)

Will you hire armed thugs? Do you intend to volunteer for the job?

[upaloopa]

61. You don't know a damn thing about my goals. That is why all your self serving propaganda ia so

full of shit. It is all based on your fear that you may have to do something about your infatuation with guns.

[PavePusher]

62. Avoidance/aggresion, a classic distraction technique.

It won't work here, but good luck with it.

[cherokeeprogressive]

64. You were asked a question... or did you not notice that?

[rrneck]

67. So what are your goals? nt

[slackmaster]

2. No matter how outdated an idea gets, there will always be a few die-hard fanatics

http://www.prohibitionparty.org/

[gejohnston]

3. he didn't promise anything

in his first term, Mr. Obama did nothing to cross the gun lobby, and he actually signed legislation allowing loaded firearms to be carried in national parks. Let’s hope Mr. Obama shows more courage on guns in his second term.

Or he had more important things to do. Or, maybe he took what Nixon predicted and Clinton experienced to heart. It's not the NRA lobbyists, it is the members plus another 75 million that include people who otherwise vote Democratic. Did this idiot expect Obama to veto a very important as credit card regulation simply because of a trivial rider that will not affect anything?

He said during the debate that he would see “if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced” and that we need to look at “other sources of the violence,” like “cheap handguns.” Now it’s time to follow through on those promises.

That wasn't a promise.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

12. It Most Certainly Was a Promise!

He said it in the debates.

He said it in the platform.

[gejohnston]

45. no, he said "we could see about it"

Last edited Sun Nov 25, 2012, 04:00 AM - Edit history (1)

Since the very pragmatic Pelosi told Holder to STFU, and Reid, who has every right to be pissed off at "progressive" religious (anti Mormon) bigots, plus he is from a western rural state, not happening.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

46. No?

'We Could See About It?' And you think that was the President's intention?

You may be right or wrong about whether or not it will happen, but the President has repeatedly and in different forums said he supports an AWB.

[gejohnston]

51. he was also correct that such a ban would do nothing

because "assault weapons" are almost never used in crime. There is also no such thing. One thing I can say for the Canadian system, the people who decide which guns are in the three categories, IIRC, is a cabinet secretary who basis his/her decision on input from professional armors, aka gunsmiths and firearms experts. Ours on the other hand are largely based on buzz words created by propagandists and unknowing politicians jump on the bandwagon. In other words, Canadians rely on technical experts, we rely on ideologues and idiots.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

55. AWB Would Do What?

Do nothiing? No . He never said any such thing. He did say we need a comprehensive solution that includes an AWB. Anything else is propaganda not from my side but yours. (PS...you didn't imply I was an idiot did you?).

[gejohnston]

68. he said, correctly, the weapon of choice with Chicago gangs

were pistols, not modern looking semi automatic rifles and carbines which are almost never used in crimes. What I find interesting is that until Nixon's WOD, these same gangs confined themselves to switchblades and tire chains even before the Gun Control Act was passed. My theory is that the WOD increased profit potential and stakes. Actually, I was thinking of everyone's favorite DINO (she served one or two terms as a Dem but still a registered Republican), on the other hand, she is voting the the Dems on other issues more often, have to give her credit for that.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

69. That may be but

That may be but it has nothing to do with your claim that the President ever said a 'ban would do nothing.'

Not even close to reality.

[gejohnston]

70. to me he implied it

especially when it comes to most of the crime.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

72. Huh?

He flat out has said repeatedly that we need an AWB.

Nothing 'implied' by that fact other than the need for .......an AWB.

[gejohnston]

73. he said what amounts to looking at it,

but when Pelosi told Holder to shut up about it, Obama didn't press the issue. He said it would help.
Reality is that it won't for the reasons above. BTW, most modern design/looking semi automatic rifles and carbines that you call "assault weapons" are perfectly legal in Canada and most of Europe. Many up there only require an Unrestricted PAL, not needing registration. I know of at least one AK looking rifle that is made by CZ specially for the Canadian civilian market and it, like the IMI Tabvor copy, are not available in the US or anywhere else other than Canada.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

74. Did he say we need an AWB?

[gejohnston]

75. he said "see if we can get"

What he actually said "weapons designed by soldiers", since neither he and Mitt are gun guys, he thought he said what you call an "assault weapon" what he said without realizing it, most likely, are weapons that have been tightly regulated since the 1930s, with the registry closed since 1986.
Most of he said I agree with.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

76. Oh ok

LOL.

[gejohnston]

77. did you know that the origional one

started an import regulation under Bush one, at the suggestion of Bill Bennett. I bet you never thought you would agree with Bill Bennett.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

79. Conclusions

Let's not jump to conclusions about who you think I would agree with when neither one of us agrees on what the President said.

[gejohnston]

81. the AWB was partly Bill Bennett's idea

he was for the AWB, you were for it. Seems kind of obvious to me.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

82. I don't gamble.

What is that...guilt by association.....two can play that game and it's a game I won't play.

(Ok, I play Powerball once in a while).

If you want to argue that the President and I have something in common with Bill Bennett, go ahead. It's silly and irrelevant and designed not to further the conversation but to circumvent or abate it.

(PS: we're all Americans too and last time I checked Bennett is still breathing as well. Wow, we do have something in common!)

[gejohnston]

83. Actually I was going for genetic fallacy

Bennett had a lot of bad ideas, he thought of it, therefore it is a bad idea.

[PavePusher]

5. Amazing how fast the Times closes comments when they don't flow to their bias, eh? n/t

[AnotherMcIntosh]

6. Certain events "produced vows in Congress to ... ban battlefield clips of 100 rounds of ammunition"?

Is this true?

[ileus]

9. "battlefield clips" I love it...

Never mind that there's no such a thing on the battlefield.

[Trunk Monkey]

42. IIRC Ammunition for an M249 SAW comes in hundred round belts

So technically......

[oneshooter]

44. This is a M249 SAW 9squad automatic weapon) with a 100rd bag mag.

The bag contains a 100rd teaser belt.

[ileus]

8. Someone is FOS...there's plenty of Ammo and firearms at our local dealers.

I can't tell any difference at my local LGS and Wal-turd.

On guy at work dealer is selling loads but there's plenty of stock for him to sell.


I do recommend with Christmas coming up to buy your loved ones a nice firearm. (according to their desires) Show your support for your fellow Americans and buy an American made firearm of your choice.

Merry Holiday and keep safe.

[glacierbay]

10. Already done

Marlin XL7 30-06, one each for my 3 kids.

[ileus]

18. Would you mind adopting another kid?

I haven't owned a 06 since 94.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

11. Excellent Editorial

And here is some more from that editorial:

Mr. Obama talked about starting “a broader conversation” about reducing gun violence. The best place to start is in Congress, which has been grossly negligent toward constituent safety for the past 20 years as it bows to the demands of the gun lobby.

The lobby’s defense of unregistered and untracked gun sales at black market flea markets and weekend gun shows is strongly opposed by Americans in opinion polls. In fact, four out of five gun owners see the wisdom of checking on anonymous sellers and buyers.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who was a principal in the 1994 enactment of a 10-year ban on civilian use of assault rifles, intends to propose its reinstatement. “Weapons of war do not belong on our streets, in our classrooms, in our schools or in our movie theaters,” she said after the Aurora killings. This bill affords President Obama an opportunity to follow through on his 2008 campaign promise to work to revive the ban.

Mr. Obama is free of the pressures of campaigning — and free to lead the nation toward sensible laws that can help reduce the flood of guns and related homicides.

The need for strong leadership on this issue is growing as statehouse politicians cave to ever more lethal demands from the gun lobby. State laws allowing students to go armed to class in Colorado, freeing owners in Oklahoma to wear holstered weapons in public, and letting people “stand your ground” in Florida and a score of other states have already damaged public safety immeasurably.

Bravo!

Source
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/24/opinion/promises-on-gun-control.html

[glacierbay]

13. I'm curious as to how this has endangered public safety?

The need for strong leadership on this issue is growing as statehouse politicians cave to ever more lethal demands from the gun lobby. State laws allowing students to go armed to class in Colorado, freeing owners in Oklahoma to wear holstered weapons in public, and letting people “stand your ground” in Florida and a score of other states have already damaged public safety immeasurably.

The reason for laxer gun laws are because the citizens of those states lobbied their state officials and got the laws passed.
That's democracy in action.

Mr. Obama is free of the pressures of campaigning — and free to lead the nation toward sensible laws that can help reduce the flood of guns and related homicides.

Pres. Obama may be free from the pressures of campaigning, but the Congress Critters are not. There is no apetite in congress for more gun control laws.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who was a principal in the 1994 enactment of a 10-year ban on civilian use of assault rifles, intends to propose its reinstatement. “Weapons of war do not belong on our streets, in our classrooms, in our schools or in our movie theaters,” she said after the Aurora killings. This bill affords President Obama an opportunity to follow through on his 2008 campaign promise to work to revive the ban.

Dianne Feinstein has been trying to get the AWB re-instated since it's sunset in 2004. Not going to happen and here's why:
The Repubs control the House and no bill will survive a vote, also the Sen. has Harry Reid as the Majority Leader and he is a staunch supporter of the RKBA and he will not allow any gun control legislation come to the floor for a vote.


The fact is that Pres. Obama can propose any gun control measure he wants, but the Congress won't allow it to happen.
Support for more gun control laws are at it's lowest point in recent memory.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150341/record-low-favor-handgun-ban.aspx
C

[fightthegoodfightnow]

14. Understand

I agree that Republicans are blocking Democrats on gun control.

It calls for leadership from President Obama.

[glacierbay]

15. That's not necessarily true

there are plenty of pro gun Dems in the House and Senate. It's not just Repubs blocking new gun control laws in the House, and in the Senate, it's several prominent Dems that are pro gun rights, including Sen. Harry Reid who controls what comes to the floor for debate and a vote and he's made it quite clear that no such bills will be coming to the floor.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

19. Maybe It's Time for Some Obama Leadership Rather than Reid Obstructionism

...to the party agenda.

I'm sure there are more than a few Democrat Members of Congress who disagree with the party on guns. You made no mention of them in previous post. They are, of course, a minority within the party.

[glacierbay]

21. Pres. Obama doesn't have to run for office again

but members of congress do and let's be honest here, gun control is a poison pill for the Dems, no matter what the party platform says.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

22. Your Take

Not mine. But let's assume it's true (which I do not - why would the party embrace something that is bad politics?....because it did not)... But let's assume it's true, even more reason the President needs to give political cover to those who support gun control laws ... Because it's the right thing to do (in my opinion).

[glacierbay]

24. Fair enough

I can respect your opinion even if I disagree with it.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

25. Right Back at You

...and I find myself tempering my responses when I read your posts due to that mutual respect. You are a good influence on me.... LOL.

Wish it would catch on.

[glacierbay]

26. I find talking to you stimulating, it makes me think

which is a good thing.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

27. We could all do more of that in this group!

[upaloopa]

37. The more gun violence increases the more will come calls to do something. The gun lobby

is losing it's control over our government. You could help yourselves by engaging in the discussion instead of your stubborn insistence on no legislation.

[X_Digger]

41. Free clue: gun violence is decreasing, not increasing. n/t

[upaloopa]

60. That is like a right wing responce. Make up anything that suits your meme.

[glacierbay]

71. What's RW about it

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/gun-sales-violent-crime-down-again

Why is it that with you controllers if it goes against your beliefs, it's RW response?

[X_Digger]

80. Check FBI's UCR, or the DOJ's BJS *snort*

It's more of a right wing response to ignore facts in the face of faith.

*pat* *pat* *pat* Run along now, folks who deal with facts are talking.

[glacierbay]

54. Where did I ever insist on no legislation?

There are things that can be done to tighten up the regs. w/o adding further restrictions on the law abiding citizen.

Prove that I ever said that I don't support legislation.

[rrneck]

23. That's Democratic. A telling mistake on your part.

Your loyalties do seem a bit one dimensional.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

29. Loyalties?

Loyalty?

To the party? I support the party's position on guns.
To the President? I support the President's position on guns.

Worry less about your characterization of my loyalty and/or what's Democratic.

I know what is.

[rrneck]

30. If you say so. Just be more careful next time.

There are members here who will parse your every word to root out partisan disloyalty.

Don't let that mask slip again.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

32. LOL

Ok.

[derby378]

63. The Constitution, however, trumps both party and President alike

And I happen to believe that the Democratic Party should support the Constitution, not undermine it.

Now, on the other hand, if you believe that there is something fundamentally flawed about the Constitution, you are free to agitate for changing it. It's a slow and tortuous process, but it can be done. It's why we no longer have the infamous "three-fifths clause," and it's also why women have the right to vote. Our consciousness as a nation has evolved over the past 231 years, and there's no reason why it can't evolve some more. But there are certain concepts that should be kept in place lest the nation crumble to pieces, including freedom of speech, the right to a trial by jury, freedom from self-incrimination - you get the idea.

At least that's the observation from my porch.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

65. Hum No

Nothing the President, our party or what I have said conflicts with the Constitution.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. He has so many higher priorities, why should he waste time and effort on a loser

for the party? Take the long view here vice being kneejerk anti gun for a change

[fightthegoodfightnow]

34. Long View?

Knee jerk?

Nah...I'm asking the President to do what he said needs to be done.

Need a reminder? Comprehensive plan that includes an AWB ....

[ProgressiveProfessor]

39. Ask all you want, but clearly he is doing the smart thing

It will hurt the party during the mid terms, there is opposition within his own party, and it would waste his time when there are much more important things to do.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

40. I Agree He Is Doing the Smart Thing (Exhibit A: the Election) with his call for an AWB!

I Agree He Is Doing the Smart Thing (Exhibit A: the Election) with his call for an AWB!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

43. You confuse statements with action

There is no action being taken and very unlikely there will be any.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

47. True

You can fault him for not doing what he said he would do.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. The real effect of your desires would weaken the party at mid terms and less would be done on more

pressing matters. And some call the pro gun rights people zealots...

[fightthegoodfightnow]

56. Perhaps

Not in my opinion, but perhaps. Some very competent politicians can make more than one thing a priority.

You say 'And some call the pro gun rights people zealots...' You're not one of them are you? That would be like me saying all anti-gun control adversaries are zealots.

[spin]

16. The Republicans control the House for the next two years ...

and Harry Reid has shown little interest in bringing a new gun control law to the floor of the Senate.

I don't see the passage of any new gun laws or another AWB daytime in the near future.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

20. Another reason Obama needs to step it up

.

[spin]

31. Currently there are far more important items for Obama to worry about. ...

I don't believe Obama will waste much of his time or political capital on a relatively insignificant issue such as passing another useless AWB or trying to ban cheap handguns.

Of course that's not what the NRA would have you believe.

[hack89]

48. Harry Reid is not a Republican. nt

[fightthegoodfightnow]

49. Agree

I agree that Republicans and a minority of Democrats are blocking Democrats on gun control.

It calls for leadership from President Obama.

[hack89]

50. He has bigger issues to spend political capital on.

he understands that he can do nothing and gun violence rates will still fall. He needs to deal with fiscal issues - people want jobs not gun control.

[Simo 1939_1940]

53. Yup. Good policy = good politics. NT

[fightthegoodfightnow]

57. Perhaps

not my argument, but perhaps.

[Eleanors38]

17. "...Obama is free from the pressures of campaigning..."

But Democrats at Congressional, state and local levels are not.

Sometimes I think the NYT's editorials are its journalistic training wheels; newbies learn to prove their mettle in the gun ban culture wars; where error and myth are maintained, nay, celebrated spitefully.

Then, ones career advances.

[Remmah2]

28. Does anyone proof read this crap before they print it?

[Straw Man]

78. Let's see ...

Ban the most popular rifles in the country despite the fact that they are rarely used in crimes and despite the risk that it will cost some rural Democrats their seats?

Yeah, that sounds like a good idea ...