Obama calls for Gun Control Laws

[Ardemax]

Thank God.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21049942

...Mr Obama called for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and wider background checks on gun buyers.The Democratic president also signed 23 executive-order measures, which do not require congressional approval.
Mr Obama said gun-control reforms could not wait any longer, after last month's school massacre in Connecticut...

Thoughts?

[Cerys]

About time.

I'd like to see how they'd put this into place. Will they take all the gun owners guns off of them or..?

[Chippiewill]

I couldn't stop looking and laughing at Biden in the back who was just nodding along.

Good to see this coming through.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Hahahaha let him try and take them! blood will be spilt in that event is all I can say.

Here is an incomplete list of potential national tragedies that were prevented thanks to an armed populace. I bet you didn't hear about any of these stories on the national news.

A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Miss., was halted by the school's vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck.

A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun.

A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Va., came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter.

A 2007 mall shooting in Salt Lake City, Utah, ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened.

A 2009 workplace shooting in Houston, Texas, was halted by two coworkers who carried concealed handguns.

A 2012 church shooting in Aurora, Colo., was stopped by a member of the congregation carrying a gun.

(Citation: http://www.lp.org/news/press-release...elf-defense-in) (h/t Jack Hunter)

As for the clowns congratulating him on his executive orders, you do realise executive orders are only there in order to clarify law and not create or nullify law? so if he does try and implement law via executive order he'll be bypassing Congress which means the end of the Republic. An attempt was made years ago to nationalise steel mills in the US and was rejected as the President cannot use executive orders to create law.

So if he does succeed in this, you're all cheering on a man who has committed what essentially will be a constitutional coup. Let us hope that if he is attempting to create law be decree and overturn the constitution like a third world dictator that he's impeached immediately.

[FlyingJesus]

It won't get through Congress and he knows it, this is quite plainly just another ploy to get the growing number of liberals in America to think of him as the good guy while he bombs children

[GommeInc]

Obama seems to be doing all the things Americans should hate. Using drones fighting a war he will never win in one of the most undemocratic ways possible - he should of informed his country that he has given the orders to use a cowardly and harmful form of warfare ... and now he's attempting to bypass congress :/ It's hilarious that people wish the UK was a bit more democratic and use the US as an example when they seem to have a worse leader and form of Government :/

[Inseriousity.]

Won't happen, such a big change and could just be a gesture with no substance unless he keeps at it.

[Kardan]

Placing a ban on the sale of certain weapons will just mean that sales will increase up until the ban as people stockpile what they need. A bit like the old lightbulbs back here in the UK.

[Lee]

Hahahaha let him try and take them! blood will be spilt in that event is all I can say.



As for the clowns congratulating him on his executive orders, you do realise executive orders are only there in order to clarify law and not create or nullify law? so if he does try and implement law via executive order he'll be bypassing Congress which means the end of the Republic. An attempt was made years ago to nationalise steel mills in the US and was rejected as the President cannot use executive orders to create law.

So if he does succeed in this, you're all cheering on a man who has committed what essentially will be a constitutional coup. Let us hope that if he is attempting to create law be decree and overturn the constitution like a third world dictator that he's impeached immediately.

All of the quoted examples involve guns - this is what he is attempting to eliminate.

[JoeyK.]

Normally I would consider myself left-leaning, but I'm really against this legislation. Like many others have said, since when do criminals follow laws?

The only thing that this will accomplish is taking guns out of the hands of people who use them lawfully and up the prices on the black market for the multitude of guns that are already around. There's no way they can ever confiscate ALL of the so-called 'assault weapons' that have been sold over the years in the US. Regardless of what people say, the second amendment was not designed to protect someone's right to hunt - it was put in place to defend against those threatening one's family or property, emergency use in a foreign invasion (unlikely), and yes, to oppose the government if it becomes tyrannical.

While the tragedies that have occurred are sad (as a citizen of Colorado, I know all too well - I live 10 minutes from Aurora), taking away the right to purchase guns won't stop people from finding them. Even if they can't, it's not difficult to make a bomb that could kill just as many in a small, enclosed space like a classroom or a movie theater.

Look at Mexico - while it is technically legal to own a firearm given you meet all of the criteria, it is almost impossible for a normal citizen to carry one outside of their own home. Members of the cartels don't seem to care about the law, and the country has a homicide rate of 22.7 per 100,000 people, versus the United States at 4.8 per 100,000. In the UK, the murder rate is 12 per 100,000. Note that gun violence is significantly lower in the UK than in the US or Mexico, but the overall rate indicates that the ability to own and carry a gun with you acts as a deterrent against those who would otherwise commit murder using another method. I'm not entirely clear on whether or not a citizen of the UK can carry a concealed weapon though, if anyone can clear that up for me it would be great.

Somehow I get the feeling that our current system works a little better than the UK's or Mexico's. Nothing you EVER do can prevent 100% of all tragedies. If someone wants to commit mass murder, they will find a way, with or without a gun. The only thing keeping them legal changes is that an armed citizen has a chance to minimize the damage before the authorities can respond.