Obama makes new gun law push as polls show waning support
March 28th, 2013
12:19 PM ET
1 year ago

Obama makes new gun law push as polls show waning support

Washington (CNN) – With polls showing support for new gun legislation on the wane, President Barack Obama joined police officials and victims of gun violence Thursday to raise pressure on Congress to get something passed more than three months after the Newtown school massacre.

The president called on Congress to pass a package of gun laws coming up in the Senate, saying "none of these ideas should be controversial.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Gun control • Gun rights • President Obama
soundoff (73 Responses)
  1. Fair is Fair

    Sonny – I'll say it again. When the government begins to dimish, restrict, and otherwise water down our most precious rights, that IS something to fear. And if they can do it to 2nd Ammendment rights, they can do it to ANY of our rights. You must see that, don't you?

    March 28, 2013 02:38 pm at 2:38 pm |
  2. Sniffit

    "if the government can erode rights guaranteed under the 2nd Ammendment, they can erode rights guaranteed under ANY of them."

    Except the SCOTUS has already decided, repeatedly, that banning certain weapons deemed unsafe for widespread public ownership and background checks are not "erosion" of 2nd Amendment rights. A registration system would fall squarely into that precedent as well. Anytime you want to put down the childish false equivalence slippery slope demagoguery about "background checks = confiscation of all guns" you just let us know, mmkay?

    March 28, 2013 02:45 pm at 2:45 pm |
  3. Fair is Fair

    Rudy NYC

    How come no gun rights advocate has yet to answer my question? From where to criminals get their guns? Please, do not say "the black market." We all know that they originate from "law abiding citizens" who purchase them legally.
    -----
    Some of them got them legally before they had criminal records. Some of them got them from theft. Some of them got them from federal gun running operations.

    March 28, 2013 02:46 pm at 2:46 pm |
  4. just sayin

    Rudy NYC
    Buying guns in one state and selling them in a state that prohibits them is interstate commerce, which the government can regulate. "That was way too easy."
    ===========
    and already does with thousands of laws. what other constitutional right has that many laws restricting it? none. and the lefties just want to keep adding more and more until the right is impossible to exercise. death of a constitutional right by a thousand tiny cuts.

    March 28, 2013 02:46 pm at 2:46 pm |
  5. The_dude

    Does ofailure give himself these gun guilt speech when he thinks about supplying Mexican drug cartels with weapons?

    March 28, 2013 02:56 pm at 2:56 pm |
  6. sonny chapman

    Fair: The chances of any of my rights, including 2nd Amendment or 1st Amendment rights being eroded, given a realistic view of American History, to the point where I can not continue enjoying my life as I now know it are less than the odds of being hit by a meteor. Therefore, I do not fear the things that seem to scrae you.

    March 28, 2013 02:57 pm at 2:57 pm |
  7. Sniffit

    "Sonny – I'll say it again. When the government begins to dimish, restrict, and otherwise water down our most precious rights, that IS something to fear."

    And I'LL say it again – The SCOTUS has already determined, time and again, that the 2nd Amendment's MEANING...THE RIGHT IT CONVEYS IS SUBJECT TO REASONABLE LIMITATION...which includes banning certain weapons and background checks (and a nationwide registration system would fall into that precedent). Your insistence that the 2nd Amendment conveys more of a right than the SCOTUS has interpreted it as conveying is the seminal problem in your broken analysis. You already canot own a bazooka or a Sherman Tank or fully-automatic machine guns. It is not "further encroachment" if Congress determines that other weapons in our ever-growing pantheon of available death-technology just aren't safe enough to allow anyone who can spell their name correctly and pass a minimal background check to waltz in off the street and purchase during Monday lunch hour. Moreover, it is not "further encroachment" for Congress to determine that it is not working and a source of widespread public risk and danger for us to live with a patchwork system of 50 different levels of background checks, 50 different databases, 50 different levels of registration, 50 different levels of willingness to enforce, and no centralized background checking, registration, databasing and information sharing system. It cannot be "further encroachment" of 2A rights for Congress to do something that Congress HAS ALREADY DONE in myriad ways, and HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED WAS CONSITUTIONAL...all just because you don't like that it might now reach to prevent you from playing with a type of weapon you think it shouldn't.

    March 28, 2013 03:00 pm at 3:00 pm |
  8. Sniffit

    "Some of them got them legally before they had criminal records. Some of them got them from theft. Some of them got them from federal gun running operations."

    How very petty. It's already been shown and is a matter fo public record that those guns walked because AZ law enforcement would not stop the straw purchasers because there was no enforcement mechanism or WILLINGNESS on their parts to allow them to do so. That is precisely why Issa went ballistic and wouldn't let certain witnesses testify about exactly that happening, in their sight and in their hearing and based on their own personal experience with AZ law enforcement. Your insistence otherwise is just more attempts to pollute the discussion with misinformation and inaccurate talking points the GOP/Teatroll abused their Congressional power to manufacture.

    March 28, 2013 03:04 pm at 3:04 pm |
  9. ken

    yes...they are talking about taking our guns...in NY state our governor passed the SAFE act....this was done behind closed doors...now he has posted a bounty on gunowners...$500 reward for turning in your neighbor for having a weapon that was legal on jan14th, but is now illegal as of jan15th....

    March 28, 2013 03:09 pm at 3:09 pm |
  10. anonymous

    If they ban assault weapons then people will just go to Mexico and get them. They can simply walk across the border into the USA with them thanks to the thousands of them that Eric Holder sent to Mexico in Fast & Furious and the lack of border security compliments of Obama.

    March 28, 2013 03:09 pm at 3:09 pm |
  11. Rudy NYC

    Fair is Fair wrote:

    Some of them got them legally before they had criminal records. Some of them got them from theft. Some of them got them from federal gun running operations.
    ------------
    But, the vast majority of your "criminals" get their hands on weapons that were originally purchased by "law abiding citizens."

    1- Guns obtained legally prior to having criminal records are seldom ued in crime. Prove me wrong, otherwise don't make this weak argument again. Although, this reason is one of the underlying factors behind Newtown. An owner problem.
    2. Guns obtained through theft are once again, a gun owner problem. Had the guns been properly secured, then they never would have stolen in the first place. Actually, if the owner could shoot as well as he thinks, the guns would never have been stolen.
    3. Federal gun operations? Really? Did you know that that there are very few federal laws that prohibit gun running. All the yelling and screaming over "False and Frivilous" was for naught. Under Arizona law, no laws were broken. It is legal to purchase dozens of weapons, walk out the store, and sell them to a guy waiting in the parking lot.

    March 28, 2013 03:11 pm at 3:11 pm |
  12. Sniffit

    "and the lefties just want to keep adding more and more until the right is impossible to exercise"

    You have no basis for that claim. Nobody is seriously calling for banning all firearms and then knocking down doors during dinner in order to throw the children on the floor and march the parents to the bedroom to unlock the gun safe and confiscate all means of self-defense. NOBODY. The very few fringers who do call for that are not taken seriously..and no, out-of-context misquotes relied upon by the NRA and ditto-heads like yourself don't "prove" that "it goes all the way up to the top."

    March 28, 2013 03:11 pm at 3:11 pm |
  13. Rudy NYC

    just sayin wrote:

    Rudy NYC
    Buying guns in one state and selling them in a state that prohibits them is interstate commerce, which the government can regulate. "That was way too easy."

    and already does with thousands of laws. what other constitutional right has that many laws restricting it? none. and the lefties just want to keep adding more and more until the right is impossible to exercise. death of a constitutional right by a thousand tiny cuts.
    --------
    "Thousands of laws"? What "thousands of laws" might that be? You're dreaming things up.

    March 28, 2013 03:13 pm at 3:13 pm |
  14. Sniffit

    "Since when has the NRA become the voice of the people?"

    Since the MSM threw all journlistic integrity under the bus and decided that it's far more lucrative to focus on narrow-minded, myopic, misinformed fringe groups and give them constant attention that exaggerates their volume and the size of their "membership" and for whom they are speaking. It's the same thing that happened with the Teatrolls. The GOP, Koch brothers, Armey, et al, knew exactly how to get the MSM's focused attention in such a manner that they could get the constant coverage and broadcasting of their rabid yammering that would create the impression that their "movement" was far more widespread, popular, populist and representative of the public at large than it ever EVER was or would be. They also knew that while they created a radicalized, extremist fringe group as cover for moving further to ther right, the MSM's false equivalence paradigm would quickly adjust to compensate, suddenly treating moderate democrats as "the other side of the coin" in comparison to radicalized Teatroll birthers, islamaphobes, gun nuts, etc. So yeah, the short answer is that the NRA and other radical, extremist groups "became the voice of the people" the second the MSM decided it would become those groups' megaphone as a means of increasing profit margins.

    March 28, 2013 03:20 pm at 3:20 pm |
  15. Sniffit

    "the lack of border security compliments of Obama."

    Obama has more troops and technology on our border than at any time in our history, has set records every year for number of deportations and has reduced net illegal immigration to ZERO. What you're really mad about is that there's more brown people in the country than when you were growing up (and that one of them runs the joint now), not how they got here. Fact is, they're proportion of the population is growing faster beacuse of reproduction more than anything else. Too bad for you that the white folks who ran the country into plutocracy over the past 60+ years have made it harder for their white children to get and afford an education and succeed, buy a house and reach the level of economic/financial stability that lends itself to marrying and reproducing, eh? I guess they weren't thinking ahead when they figured they could just cut taxes, shift all wealth and power to the wealthy and corporations, and then start a few wars as the cherry on top. Don't worry tho....the GOP/Teatrolls anti-abortion stance will fix everything about these reproduction rates, right?....or not....

    March 28, 2013 03:28 pm at 3:28 pm |
  16. Sniffit

    "You're dreaming things up."

    I prefer "lying," but I get it...you're trying to be diplomatic :-)

    March 28, 2013 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  17. Rudy NYC

    Sniffit

    "You're dreaming things up."

    I prefer "lying," but I get it...you're trying to be diplomatic
    ------------------------
    It's either diplomatic, or totally acidic. ;)

    March 28, 2013 03:47 pm at 3:47 pm |
  18. 2 nd amendment

    Why do you think there pushing all this ..to take our guns period!! And rant on NRA all you want..but if not for the NRA. No one would have a hunting gun or any other ...your president does more harm to people the any legal gun owner does!

    March 28, 2013 03:50 pm at 3:50 pm |
  19. Lynda/Minnesota

    "And they are sick and tired of being blamed, penalized and having their constitutional rights trampled with every time some insane criminal person does something bad."

    Oh, how horrible for them to worry what others might think of them as legal gun owners. Beyond that, do you have any concrete ideas on how to help keep guns out of the hands of some "insane criminal person" intent on doing something bad?

    Background checks? Federal firearms registry? ANYTHING? Because believe it or not, it is THEY who we ALL should be working together to keep guns out of the hands of.

    You know. To protect we the innocent ... and, yes, to protect your legal "rights" as well.

    March 28, 2013 04:21 pm at 4:21 pm |
  20. John Ruskin

    Oh, Fair is Fair! You must know that criminals get their guns from the same places drug dealers get their supply. NOT from law-abiding citizens like you or me. From other countries...and, yes...the horrible "black market"! Anyone who doesn't get that is willfully ignorant. And when asked if they would put signs in their yards that say, "This house is proudly gun-free", every anti-gun advocate refused...because, as they said, and I quote, "We would be targeted by criminals with guns". Duh!

    March 28, 2013 05:09 pm at 5:09 pm |
  21. Rick Simm

    HEY OBAMA, this is for you: Criminals obey "Gun Control" laws about as well as politicians obey their oath of office.

    I wonder if he will get the message.

    March 28, 2013 05:43 pm at 5:43 pm |
  22. Thomas

    What is it about America and guns ?

    March 28, 2013 05:57 pm at 5:57 pm |
  23. Alex

    Those who think banning guns is going to make it safer. Do you think that countries that banned guns have no deaths due to guns? Go do your research.

    March 28, 2013 09:12 pm at 9:12 pm |
1 2 3