January 13th, 2013
02:25 PM ET
10 years ago

Countdown to new wave in gun violence battle

(CNN) - When a set of recommendations to reduce gun violence hits President Barack Obama's desk on Tuesday, it will trigger a new stage in a decisive political battle consuming Washington. And it will show just how much America may have changed in the wake of last month's massacre in Newtown, Connecticut.

The proposals from a White House task force may include some with broad support on issues involving mental health. But one of the most intense flashpoints is already known: The group, overseen by Vice President Joe Biden, is expected to support reinstating an assault weapons ban.


Filed under: Gun rights • Joe Biden • NRA • President Obama
soundoff (20 Responses)
  1. Rick McDaniel

    What it will show, is that the Dem socialists want to take away the right of the people to bear arms. They want no ability to resist them, in their efforts to establish a socialist dictatorship.

    January 13, 2013 03:29 pm at 3:29 pm |
  2. yaine

    Its all about profit ...to hell with our kids...right NRA?

    January 13, 2013 04:05 pm at 4:05 pm |
  3. CBP

    Wouldn't it be nice if we could talk about guns without someone telling us that we want to take away their 2nd amendment rights. Let's listen and discuss openly and try to make our laws reflect the realities we face. Do we really need these ammo clips and do we need such high powered rifles. Let's really listen to one another and then try to work together to keep everyone safe.

    January 13, 2013 05:07 pm at 5:07 pm |
  4. ThinkAgain: What is it about "well regulated" that you don't get?!?

    Quick question for those out there who believe that the only thing between the U.S. government immediately attacking them is their military-style weapons and high-capacity magazines: Is this the same government whose military personnel you so ardently support and believe that if we cut even one dime from the defense budget, we'll immediately be attacked? Because if it is, then isn't your support of our troops and the defense budget aiding and abetting your OWN enemy?

    Just a thought ...

    January 13, 2013 05:15 pm at 5:15 pm |
  5. ThinkAgain: What is it about "well regulated" that you don't get?!?

    Gun owners, as represented by the NRA, are simplistic, black-and-white thinkers. Banning military-style weapons and high-capacity magazines, along with requiring background checks on ALL gun sales (including at gun shows), is not an infringement on people's Second Amendment rights – which specifically talks about a "well regulated" militia.

    I'm guessing that the NRA, like the current GOP, penalizes those moderates among its membership who recognize the need for reasonable gun control. These moderates need to start standing up; otherwise, they are already victims of the tyranny they proclaim to despise.

    January 13, 2013 05:15 pm at 5:15 pm |
  6. ThinkAgain: What is it about "well regulated" that you don't get?!?

    @Rick McDaniel: "What it will show, is that the Dem socialists want to take away the right of the people to bear arms. They want no ability to resist them, in their efforts to establish a socialist dictatorship."

    Closing the loophole that allows unlimited weapons purchase without a background check at a gun show and banning military-style weapons will leave plenty of guns available for people to defend themselves and their property. Ditto on banning high-capacity magazines.

    To think this will lead to tyranny is paranoia, pure and simple.

    January 13, 2013 05:18 pm at 5:18 pm |
  7. Gurgyl

    Just introduce the gun-control law. Pass. Obama signs.

    January 13, 2013 05:33 pm at 5:33 pm |
  8. Ancient Texan

    yaine- The NRA is a large organization (club) of gunowners that do not want the Constitution trampled on by anti-gun zealots. Profit? HUH?

    January 13, 2013 05:53 pm at 5:53 pm |
  9. Patrick in Wisconsin

    Rick McDaniel, keep blathering on about your stupid conspiracy theories. You're still 10 times as likely do die from a bullet here than in the rest of the OECD and we still have some of the most loose gun laws. Also, take a logic class, there you'd learn that slippery slope arguments are fallacious and invalid.

    January 13, 2013 07:04 pm at 7:04 pm |
  10. Tim

    for god sakes its not black and white!!!!!! Taking away easy access to weapons of mass killings like autos does not mean we care two licks about rifles, handguns and shotguns.

    Why dont we start arming our children with rpg's and thermo nuclear weapons? those are arms we have a right tg bear....

    January 13, 2013 07:16 pm at 7:16 pm |
  11. Thomas

    Top gun lobbyists predicted that there’s not enough support in Congress for a new ban on assault weapons and that even curbs on high-capacity magazine clips were in doubt.

    It's time to vote out the elected officials who are owned by the NRA .

    January 13, 2013 09:04 pm at 9:04 pm |
  12. U.s. law101

    Ppl don't seem to understand that after 911 everyone felt very comfortable "bending" the 4th amendment. They felt comfortable bending our rights to privacy. Yet 10 times more ppl die if gun violence every year than died in 911 and no I one is willing to give up their 30 shot semi auto for the good of our nation but they are totally ok with torture and unlawful detention of us citizens. Ps if you can't defend yourself with 6 shots I don't think 24 more will help. And last but not least the second amendment calls for the right to bear arms in a well regulated militia!! Regulated is in the amendment, so dont say regulation is unconstitutional

    January 13, 2013 10:01 pm at 10:01 pm |
  13. Jake from Canada

    Seriously, these reforms seem like common sense. Do people really need AR-15's? Do they really need high capacity ammo clips?

    Look, for the people that have the fantasy of fighting off the Government with your guns, there are a couple very simple realities to look at.

    1. There is not even a remote possibility of any kind of Government tyranny anytime soon. Sure, there are 4th amendment violations up the wazoo, but no one seems to care about those. But, real tyranny as seen in Syria or Lybia or elsewhere, would basically be impossible in the U.S.A as the way the Country has been set up with the Executive Branch being the least powerful. And if you think congress can somehow legislate tyranny, well, that's actually incorrect as well seeing as the Supreme Court is the guardian of what is constitutional and what isn't. The only conceivable way of Tyranny actually being enacted is if the Military did a coup. However, no one wants to talk about cutting their budget at all , now do they?

    2. Even if there was Tyranny, and again, pretty much impossible. But, if there was, you would be instantly crushed by the Military. They have things that are so far beyond what civilians are allowed to get, there would be virtually no chance of preventing it.

    For all the people that say, well, Hitler got rid of all the guns and the people couldn't fight back. Well, I would like to remind you that Hitler was democratically elected. He didn't seize power. They voted for him. He remained extremely popular for most of the war, until they started to lose. Just make sure you get the facts right about something, before you use it as an example.

    January 13, 2013 10:06 pm at 10:06 pm |
  14. Sorensen

    The NRA is making the USA a banana republic.

    January 13, 2013 10:35 pm at 10:35 pm |
  15. ely

    First our guns then our freedom. read history. its a no brainer! wake up and smell the take over.

    January 14, 2013 12:08 am at 12:08 am |
  16. Getoverit

    My home was burglarized last year. You can have my gun... when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    January 14, 2013 12:36 am at 12:36 am |
  17. Larry L

    @Rick McDaniel

    What it will show, is that the Dem socialists want to take away the right of the people to bear arms. They want no ability to resist them, in their efforts to establish a socialist dictatorship.
    You're getting to be a real drama queen – overdose on hate media. You couldn't define "socialist" if you had an hour on Google. Nobody is trying to take away anybody's right to bear arms. Reasonable people want to restrict the capability and capacity of future guns sold – because none of you have given a reason to own weapons only suited for the military. Don't give me the crap about "liberals don't know what they're talking about". I'm pretty certain I know more about guns than you and have used them in more critical scenarios. I also know the crazies of the right-wing are more of a threat than any other political group – because they've learned to hate our federal government since we had the audacity to elect an African American President.

    January 14, 2013 01:40 am at 1:40 am |
  18. Name lynn

    count down to what, what going to happen next about the gun laws. Who going to stop putting guns in the wrong people hands. what can the nra do, what can them white house leaders do, what can the democrates do, what can the republicans do about the shooting an killings.

    January 14, 2013 03:08 am at 3:08 am |
  19. GayAtheist

    The second amendment exists not to take up arms agaisnt government accountants and clerks, but to take up arms against US Troops.
    This is what the NRA is doing. They are preparing for a sick doomsday christian bible fetish thing where they invision themselves winning a glorious war against US Troops.
    I don't know about the rest of you, But the NRA wanting to attack and harm US Marines, Navy Seals, and our good Soldiers, and other US Military personel, is, to me, profoundly repugnant and UNamerican.

    January 14, 2013 03:44 am at 3:44 am |
  20. fiftyfive55

    For a group that doesn't want to politicize the shootings,they sure are doing a LOT of it. I also believe they are using this subject to distract us from the fiscal problems they keep pushing off to the side so they can turn our focus to what someone with mental problems did.

    January 14, 2013 07:13 am at 7:13 am |