Warner says 'enough is enough' on gun violence
December 17th, 2012
03:24 PM ET
10 years ago

Warner says 'enough is enough' on gun violence

(CNN) - Another high-profile Democrat with strong backing from the National Rifle Association said Monday it was time for tougher gun laws.

"I believe every American has Second Amendment rights. The ability to hunt is part of our culture. I have an NRA rating of an 'A,' but enough is enough," Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia told WBBT, a local CNN affiliate in Richmond.

- Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

Warner's comments follow those of Sen. Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat from West Virginia who's known for his ties to the NRA and support for gun rights. However, Manchin said earlier Monday that last week's elementary school shooting in Connecticut has "changed" him.

"I'm committed to bringing the dialogue that would bring a total change, and I mean a total change," Manchin said on CNN's "Amanpour."

Warner, who's up for re-election in 2014, echoed those sentiments, saying it was time for both parties to meet in the middle on the issue.

"I join with the president and reasonable folks in both parties and the overwhelming majority of Americans who are gun owners who believe that we've got to put stricter rules on the books," he said.

Warner did not go deep into specifics, only saying "there'll be time" to figure out the details.

Virginia is home to the headquarters of the NRA, which is located in Fairfax outside of Washington, D.C. It's also home to the worst school shooting in U.S. history.

Following the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, Congress passed its first gun law in more than a decade. The legislation improved the National Instant Criminal Background Check program to better prevent those with a mental illness from purchasing a gun. In 2008, President George W. Bush signed the law, which had support from the NRA.

Like many lawmakers on both side of the aisle, Warner acknowledged that one single law won't stop an armed person with mental illness.

"But when we have close to 30,000 killings a year from all types of gun violence, even if we save a few lives, we make progress," he said.

Filed under: Connecticut • Mark Warner • Virginia
soundoff (34 Responses)
  1. jinx88

    Limit on guns a person can own is a good start. If feel the need to have a gun in your home for protection in all reality you will only have enough time to get to one or two and load it before your confronted by the person the broke in your home. People with more than 10 guns, your have problem. Definitely ban semi-auto. There is no reason you need to shoot someone 11 times like what happened to the poor child this past Friday.

    December 17, 2012 04:39 pm at 4:39 pm |
  2. Alex

    He is right we should ban guns, and while we're at since 10,000 people died from dui's this year we should ban alcohol too....oh wait....

    December 17, 2012 04:42 pm at 4:42 pm |
  3. Gregory M. Newbold

    When Mr. Obama was elected, gun sales went through the roof because paranoid, insecure Neanderthals thought their world was comming to an end. The angry black man is going to strip us of our gunsa and then we will be at the mercy of the angry black, brown & yellow people. Mr. Obama is NOT the face to put on this to get it done.

    Leadership need to come from police [they can`t like going against better armed people], hunters [they can`t feel comfortable being tarnished by assualt weapon owners], politicians in BLUE STATES [working to comphrehensively outlaw guns & ammo in BLUE STATES] and a kalidescope of citizens of every color because every race/creed/color of American has been the victim of this gun culture madness.

    December 17, 2012 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  4. Jay

    Well reading these comments it apperas that the general consenus from gun owners is that nothing can be done. Oh well, I guess we should just ignore what happened and move on. Think again.
    I don't see why any responsible gun owner would not want regulations to protect innocent children and preserve their rights. I like guns. But anything design to kill carries more responsibilites. It is designed to kill and destroy. You should have to have a license to own a gun and you must take mandatory classes to keep it active. No license or c.e. certificate means no guns or ammo. Close the gun show loophole. You would eliminate some criminals from obtaining guns.
    I mean gun people like to talk about how since you cannot eliminate guns from bad guys that we all should carry. Here's a thought; try putting your energy towards addressing how we can begin to reduce guns from those that shouldn't have them. Of course, therein lies the problem. The things needed to address the problem would also require gun owners to give up some long standing ideas.

    December 17, 2012 04:47 pm at 4:47 pm |
  5. The Real Tom Paine


    Rudy NYC
    Does requiring everyone to carry a piece include first graders? Looters are not afraid of guns. They're extremely afraid of getting caught, which is why the commit such cowardly acts. Most are cowards.
    Sooo, your idiotic statement means that we ban guns all together so that the only people that will have them are cops and robbers? How many kids would still be alive today if the principal or an teacher was allowed to protect themselves? So let's assign a police officer to every school? We see exactly how a gun ban works. Look to the school in CT. It is a gun-free zone. U forget it was a kid that killed those children. Look at Chicago to see just how well gun control works.

    Lastly, terrorists could not get guns thru airport security so they smuggled in box cutters and used planes as weapons to kill 3000 innocent people. the point? Evil always find a way no gun ban will stop those sickos fr shooting up a school full of innocent kids. If that kid did not have access to guns he would have found a way to get them or found another way to put his twisted plan in motion.

    We live in a society where human life is not valued and there is no personal responsiblity. that is the real problem.
    And the solution you have is to demonstrate how much you value human life distribute even more tools of death out there....wonderful. Are you willing to pay for the security measures for your school district? I doubt it. We would not even be having this discussion if people had been limited to how many guns they could buy YEARS before this happened. The NRA had no problem banning Satruday Night Specials after Reagan was shot, but apparently kids are fair game. What if a teacher misses and blows a hole right through one of his/her kids? Teacher training should not have to include firearms, unarmed combat, and hostage negotiation. Apprently you think thats the new norm, and you complaion about idiotic statements. Khrist.

    December 17, 2012 04:49 pm at 4:49 pm |
  6. realitybite


    Sooo, your idiotic statement means that we ban guns all together so that the only people that will have them are cops and robbers? How many kids would still be alive today if the principal or an teacher was allowed to protect themselves? So let's assign a police officer to every school? We see exactly how a gun ban works. Look to the school in CT. It is a gun-free zone. U forget it was a kid that killed those children. Look at Chicago to see just how well gun control works.
    Your logic is flawed sir/maam. If the shooter didn't have a gun, we wouldn't be talking about this at all. The solution is not to add another gun and have two guns instead of one. Republicans are such idiots actually. What would have happened if the guy shot the principle first and got her gun as well? He would have had two guns to shoot more innocent kids!
    Infact, had he know that the principle has a gun, he would have shot her first.

    I heard this same argument presented by a republican senator! What kind of idiots do you guys elect?
    Guns are the fuel that power these lunatics. More fuels doesn't put out the fire. It just makes it worse.

    December 17, 2012 04:50 pm at 4:50 pm |
  7. Samuel, Virginia

    Mr. Warner and Mr. Kaine should reject Mrs. Feinstein's senate proposal that has little chance of passing on the GOP side and write their own bill. A bill, that expands on past legislation already on the books. Adding, that a competent citizen's Second Amendment rights will not be challenged, unless they are the primary care giver of mentally ill persons living within their homes. Therefore retaining those persons Second Amendment rights, only limiting their rights to be observed outside their homes.

    December 17, 2012 04:53 pm at 4:53 pm |
  8. v_mag

    People I have known who own assault weapons think of them as their babies. They would never give up their "gun babies" just to save real children from being murdered. That is a sick, perverted, and cowardly mentality.

    Personally, I don't think we need to accommodate such people at the cost of human life. What the cowards need is mental health treatment for paranoia. On the one hand, they talk about the rarity of shootings like Sandy Hook, and in the next breath they fantasize about how they would defend their homes against hordes of invaders, as if that scenario is likely. If that is not paranoia, I don't know what is.

    December 17, 2012 05:00 pm at 5:00 pm |
  9. Sniffit

    "the 2nd amendment was put in so the common people could protect themselves against a totalitarian govt of which is now in DC;"

    How can anyone take you seriously when you can't even construct a simple sentence???

    See? You just prove his point. He doesn't believe he needs basic comprehnsion and mastery of our spoken language and its grammar for you to take him seriously. You'll take him seriously enough when he's firing his AK at your feet and yelling "dance, you liberal pinko commy socialist dictator's puppet, dance!!!!"

    December 17, 2012 05:03 pm at 5:03 pm |
1 2