Obama calls for agreement on gun reforms

[aGameOfThrones]

http://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20110314&t=2&i=362300825&w=460&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=2011-03-14T160708Z_01_BTRE72D18RZ00_RTROPTP_0_USA


Obama, in an opinion piece published in the Arizona Daily Star, said some 2,000 people had perished from gun violence in the short time since a gunman in Tucson killed six people and shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in the head.

"Every single day, America is robbed of more futures. It has awful consequences for our society. And as a society, we have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to it," he wrote.

Obama said he believed the U.S. Constitution's second amendment guaranteed a citizen's right to bear arms.

"I'm willing to bet that responsible, law-abiding gun owners agree that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few -- dangerous criminals and fugitives, for example -- from getting their hands on a gun."

"We should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to (gun) sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can't escape it," he wrote.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/14/us-obama-guns-idUSTRE72D04T20110314

[specsaregood]

I agree, take the guns away from the standing army police.

[Bern]

Background checks will not stop crazy people with clean records. The government can never provide 100% security. Citizens have a personal responsibility for protecting themselves.

[Krugerrand]

"I'm willing to bet that responsible, law-abiding gun owners agree that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few -- dangerous criminals and fugitives, for example -- from getting their hands on a gun."

Perhaps we should first outlaw being a dangerous criminal or fugitive. Then, we can pattern the gun measures after a successful implementation of such a program.

[Lucille]

Are there any other red meat hot button issues this demagogue clown wants to dredge up so he can get his base all agitated to vote for him again, and the other side likewise, so Americans will continue to vote for the ruinous status quo brought to us by the false left-right paradigm of our one-headed two party system?

[aGameOfThrones]

Background checks will not stop crazy people with clean records. The government can never provide 100% security. Citizens have a personal responsibility for protecting themselves.

You don't care about the children, do you?

[Brett85]

"I'm willing to bet that responsible, law-abiding gun owners agree that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few -- dangerous criminals and fugitives, for example -- from getting their hands on a gun."

We already have laws on the books that prohibit convicted felons and people who are mentally unstable from buying guns.

[pcosmar]

"

We already have laws on the books that prohibit convicted felons and people who are mentally unstable from buying guns.

And even more laws to declare even more people to be "felons". And they are expanding the definition of "Mentally Unstable" to include anyone that disagrees with them.

[AZKing]

"I'm willing to bet that responsible, law-abiding gun owners agree that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few -- dangerous criminals and fugitives, for example -- from getting their hands on a gun."

I'm curious to know if he thinks people who get convicted for possession of marijuana are dangerous criminals. Most states do view them as such.

[pcosmar]

"I'm willing to bet that responsible, law-abiding gun owners agree that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few -- dangerous criminals and fugitives, for example -- from getting their hands on a gun."

I'm curious to know if he thinks people who get convicted for possession of marijuana are dangerous criminals. Most states do view them as such.

Or writing a bad check. Or arguing with the wife or kid, or pissing in an alley behind the bar etc etc etc

[ChaosControl]

I hate guns, but gun laws only stop law abiding citizens from possessing them, they do nothing to stop criminals.

[jtstellar]

speaking of which.. i need some easy to maintain firearms for self defense.. any rec's

[YumYum]

speaking of which.. i need some easy to maintain firearms for self defense.. any rec's

My favorite:

http://randommization.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/gatling-gun-replica.jpg

[Maximus]

He is clearly tacking back to the left, having his approval ratings go up when he went to the center after the election must have unnerved him.

Let him talk about guns, no one is going to care about it in 2012. People are worried about jobs and he'll be talking about guns, this guy has no clue.

[Kylie]

Well, I would say that his first priority if he wants to keep guns out of the hands of criminals would be to dismantle the ATF immediately.

Since they seem to be not only supplying the guns, but allowing them to cross borders and go lord only knows where, they would be at the forefront of this "illegal" activity, right?

[pcosmar]

Simple answer.
Eliminate 99% of the laws.
That will give you a huge decrease in criminals.
End ALL restrictions on gun sales, ownership and carry. This will further eliminate criminals.

[Brett85]

And even more laws to declare even more people to be "felons". And they are expanding the definition of "Mentally Unstable" to include anyone that disagrees with them.

Yep. Since I have to take an anti depressant pill, that will probably prohibit me from buying a gun.

[Jack Bauer]

I think this effort will have a huge blowback.

[Brett85]

Also, the bottom line is that all federal gun control laws are unconstitutional. The original intent of the commerce clause doesn't give Congress the authority to regulate gun or ammunition sales.

[pcosmar]

Yep. Since I have to take an anti depressant pill, that will probably prohibit me from buying a gun.

Switch to St Johns Wort.
;)

[fisharmor]

People are worried about jobs and he'll be talking about guns, this guy has no clue.

He never did.
He only ever had two things going for him:
1) he's not Bush
2) he's black.

He's already successfully removed 50% of the reason people voted for him. Turning full-bore anti-gun just gives reasons to vote against him.

Switch to St Johns Wort.
;)

But whatever you do, don't plant any, or you'll have a whole new reason to be depressed. Stuff's more invasive than mint.

[Pericles]

I can easily agree to repealing the unconstitutional National Firearms Act of 1934, and other unconstitutional provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968, such as have to be 21 to buy a pistol from a FFL, and prohibitions on felony convictions being a disqualification (perfectly OK before 1968), after all, it is just common sense. Muggers don't use machine guns they are too heavy.

I can't agree to giving up Constitutionally guaranteed rights in order to make somebody else feel good.

[sailingaway]

I agree with most people here that his 'gun reforms' are unConstitutional. I'm very agreeable. Don't agree with him, though.

Funny how now he wants us all to agree when before it was all about 'I won.'

[Krugerrand]

I'm perfectly willing to agree with Obama on gun control laws - provided he changes his position to abolish them.

[AFPVet]

Common sense gun laws are simple... have guns. Security is our responsibility.

[outspoken]

While I am an advocate gun ownership, do any of you guys believe that the gun manufacturers have any responsibility in producing firearms that are not as easy as operating a video game joy stick? I don't believe in enacting more laws but I think many of the 'proud' NRA tooting members I have encountered in my life are also alarming ignorant of the nature of human nature. The inner city thug and the backwoods racist hick are often cut from the same mold in terms of their propensity towards violence.... thus it is no wonder how their women and children most often end up as recipients of their violent tendencies. It is easier to fire a handgun than open a bottle of children's vitamins in this country. I think that is pathetic. I don't want more laws... rather, I'd like to see citizens and corporations more conscious. Responsible gun owners should not be an oxymoron to the liberals and yet it is understandable why that is the case. It would be nice to see gun owners advocate for production of weapons designed for safe and boycott those that make cheap killing machines. And is there a point at which a gun is more than just self-defense? I think it is pretty sick to 'love' guns... it is right up there with dictators who 'love' weapons of mass destruction. While guns are necessary, they are a necessarily evil and are designed to for the purpose of killing. That is a responsibility many in our culture cannot handle... particularly mentally unstable people and child. I suggest reading the book the Gift of Fear and how it relates to violence in our society. Just playing devil's advocate here... I don't support any president enacting more laws on anything including guns but many of the gun manufacturers in this country are not not any higher on the conscience scale than the banking corps or health ins corps. They all play into our unconcscious fears... is there a line where we regardless of govt involvement say we wish to create a more civilized and conscious society that understands human nature's propensity towards violence? With great freedom, comes great responsibility.

[bruce leeroy]

I agree with gun law reform
Reform the law to respect the second amendment which states "shall not be infringed"
meaning get rid of permit systems, prohibited persons, background checks, waiting periods, restrictions on FA firearms and get back to "shall not be infringed"

[Brett85]

"I think it is pretty sick to 'love' guns... it is right up there with dictators who 'love' weapons of mass destruction."

There are a lot of people who love guns, and that doesn't mean that they love to kill people. Many people simply enjoy guns and like to collect them. It's simply a hobby. Other people like to own different guns and use them for target practice. Many others, including myself, enjoy using guns to hunt deer, turkeys, pheasants, and other animals. I don't think there's anything wrong with "loving" guns. I don't have any problem with guns at all. I just have a problem with certain people who abuse them.

[Fox McCloud]

I wonder how many people have died, since the Tuscon shooting, thanks to government roads.

Of course, you'll never heard that talked about.

[anaconda]

This is Orwellian nonsense. Puppet POTUS job is to give brainwashing speeches (in this case editorial). And no, law abiding responsible gun owners WILL NOT agree to allow the state to take away guns from anyone a unless it is at the state or local level and unless they are convicted of a serious violent crime.

[anaconda]

I wonder how many people have died, since the Tuscon shooting, thanks to government roads.

Of course, you'll never heard that talked about.

Excellent economic method of analysis. The Paul's would be proud.

[IBleedNavyAndOrange]

"Every single day, America is robbed of more futures. It has awful consequences for our society. And as a society, we have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to it," he wrote.

I want to hear this line when he speaks about the wonderful people in federal reserve

[Teaser Rate]

I wonder how many people have died, since the Tuscon shooting, thanks to government roads.

Of course, you'll never heard that talked about.

Roads don't kill people, bad drivers do.

[bruce leeroy]

I just called my rep, joe barton. The lady that answered told me he has never voted for any gun control.

[Fox McCloud]

Roads don't kill people, bad drivers do.

Bad drivers may be a proximate cause, sure, but they're not the ultimate cause.

[Teaser Rate]

Bad drivers may be a proximate cause, sure, but they're not the ultimate cause.

Is there some sort of revolutionary, cost-effective road safety breakthrough I’m not aware of?

Roads are just pieces of asphalt, and as long people will continue drive on them with relatively unsafe cars at high speeds, there will be crashes. The laws of physics don’t change because a surface is publicly or privately owned.

[Fox McCloud]

Is there some sort of revolutionary, cost-effective road safety breakthrough I’m not aware of?

Roads are just pieces of asphalt, and as long people will continue drive on them with relatively unsafe cars at high speeds, there will be crashes. The laws of physics don’t change because a surface is publicly or privately owned.

But it certainly may change the types of vehicles on the roads, the design of the roads, the speed limits, penalties, etc....right now, there isn't an economic incentive to improve the roads, at all---under a private system, there would be.

[Brett85]

I just called my rep, joe barton. The lady that answered told me he has never voted for any gun control.

Except for the Patriot Act.

[Teaser Rate]

But it certainly may change the types of vehicles on the roads, the design of the roads, the speed limits, penalties, etc....right now, there isn't an economic incentive to improve the roads, at all---under a private system, there would be.

First of all, the government does have an economic incentive to prevent accidents. It’s the reason for speed limits, checkpoints, radar, speeding cameras, etc. City planners and engineers make continuous efforts to make roads and intersections as safe as possible. The lack of a price system does not imply the lack of an incentive, for instance the government still has a strong incentive to keep our water clean and our food poison-free.

Is your claim about possible changes to reduce casualties based on any research or are you just speculating? If there is good research to indicate that roads could be made safer, why do you think they aren’t being implemented right now?

I have a hard time seeing how private roads would be safer without a dramatic increase in prices due to coordination costs.

[aGameOfThrones]

first of all, the government does have an economic incentive to prevent accidents. It’s the reason for speed limits, checkpoints, radar, speeding cameras, etc. City planners and engineers make continuous efforts to make roads and intersections as safe as possible. the lack of a price system does not imply the lack of an incentive, for instance the government still has a strong incentive to keep our water clean and our food poison-free.

Is your claim about possible changes to reduce casualties based on any research or are you just speculating? If there is good research to indicate that roads could be made safer, why do you think they aren’t being implemented right now?

I have a hard time seeing how private roads would be safer without a dramatic increase in prices due to coordination costs.

lol!

[Freedom 4 all]

"I totally support the second amendment. I'm only going to grab guns from people who fit my vague, arbitrary criteria."

[Acala]

While I am an advocate gun ownership, do any of you guys believe that the gun manufacturers have any responsibility in producing firearms that are not as easy as operating a video game joy stick? I don't believe in enacting more laws but I think many of the 'proud' NRA tooting members I have encountered in my life are also alarming ignorant of the nature of human nature. The inner city thug and the backwoods racist hick are often cut from the same mold in terms of their propensity towards violence.... thus it is no wonder how their women and children most often end up as recipients of their violent tendencies. It is easier to fire a handgun than open a bottle of children's vitamins in this country. I think that is pathetic. I don't want more laws... rather, I'd like to see citizens and corporations more conscious. Responsible gun owners should not be an oxymoron to the liberals and yet it is understandable why that is the case. It would be nice to see gun owners advocate for production of weapons designed for safe and boycott those that make cheap killing machines. And is there a point at which a gun is more than just self-defense? I think it is pretty sick to 'love' guns... it is right up there with dictators who 'love' weapons of mass destruction. While guns are necessary, they are a necessarily evil and are designed to for the purpose of killing. That is a responsibility many in our culture cannot handle... particularly mentally unstable people and child. I suggest reading the book the Gift of Fear and how it relates to violence in our society. Just playing devil's advocate here... I don't support any president enacting more laws on anything including guns but many of the gun manufacturers in this country are not not any higher on the conscience scale than the banking corps or health ins corps. They all play into our unconcscious fears... is there a line where we regardless of govt involvement say we wish to create a more civilized and conscious society that understands human nature's propensity towards violence? With great freedom, comes great responsibility.

Violence is a software problem, not a hardware problem.

Our nation is steeped in violence. The essence of our government is violence. Our foreign policy is violence. Every law, fee, tax, and regulation is enforced with the threat of violence. Our entertainment is about 80% raw violence. Our schools are based on violence. We live and breath violence. We bring our children up in it. And the politicians who weep over a killing here and there are, in fact, nothing less than mass murderers on a global scale.

But you think the violence in our society is due to some defect in machinery? You are mistaken.

[Pericles]

Violence is a software problem, not a hardware problem.

Our nation is steeped in violence. The essence of our government is violence. Our foreign policy is violence. Every law, fee, tax, and regulation is enforced with the threat of violence. Our entertainment is about 80% raw violence. Our schools are based on violence. We live and breath violence. We bring our children up in it. And the politicians who weep over a killing here and there are, in fact, nothing less than mass murderers on a global scale.

But you think the violence in our society is due to some defect in machinery? You are mistaken.

That ^^^ Any reasonable person would conclude that a certain amount of violence is a certainty, and plan accordingly.

[pcosmar]

do any of you guys believe that the gun manufacturers have any responsibility in producing firearms that are not as easy as operating a video game joy stick?

It would be nice to see gun owners advocate for production of weapons designed for safe and boycott those that make cheap killing machines.
Gun Manufacturers???
You obviously know absolutely nothing about guns. I am old fashioned, I still like Sam Colt's "Peacemaker" And John Moses Browning's designs. Both the most copied handguns in existence. The only changes to them in the last hundred years was in the area of safety.


And is there a point at which a gun is more than just self-defense? I think it is pretty sick to 'love' guns..

I am mechanically inclined. A HotRodder and Fabricator. I have an appreciation for mechanical design and an interest in innovation. I know many collect guns of historical value. For others it is aesthetics.
The present laws have stifled that, and have put several good manufacturers out of business.

Add to that, of the many millions of guns in existence in this country and the several millions of gun owners I would say that both safety and responsibility are already practiced.

[A. Havnes]

"Every single day, America is robbed of more futures. It has awful consequences for our society. And as a society, we have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to it," he wrote.

I want to hear this line when he speaks about the wonderful people in federal reserve

Or the IRS.

Note how he said, "as a society..." which doesn't mean government. I think Obama is a little confused. Society means teaching our kids not to point guns at people and using proper judgement when deciding if your kid is ready for a gun or if a gun would just lead to a disaster. It is not for the government to say, "Well, said person has ADD. You know, a 'disease' with no biological cause in the brain as far as our science can tell, but it disqualifies him anyway." It is for us to teach our kids about guns.

On that note, notice that it's really only been since the widespread use of psychiatric drugs that we even have these messed up stories of school shooters and whatnot.

I'm just going to stop before I start ranting...

[pcosmar]

On that note, notice that it's really only been since the widespread use of psychiatric drugs that we even have these messed up stories of school shooters and whatnot.

I'm just going to stop before I start ranting...

That is a whole nuther deep, dark and ugly rabbit hole. Following that trail is not for the faint of heart.
:(

[IBleedNavyAndOrange]

...teaching our kids not to point guns at people and using proper judgement when deciding if your kid is ready for a gun ....

It is for us to teach our kids about guns.


I cannot even imagine the consequences of touching any of my dads firearms without his permission when I was young.
And to fire one without permission?!
Jail / prison would have been a much better alternative for me.

Perhaps the government sponsored break-up of the family would reduce gang violence.

[AFPVet]

To some, firearms are simply tools; however, to others, they are artistic pieces which are to be admired. Firearm collectors may never fire their weapons—but they admire their beauty and fine craftsmanship which is shared with other weapons such as swords.