Obama Notably Silent on Gun Control After Mass Shootings

Jul 20, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: ABC News

President Obama has been notably silent on the issue of gun control during his presidency, in spite of at least four major mass shootings during his term - Binghamton, N.Y. ; Fort Hood, Texas ; Tucson, Ariz.

Comments
21 - 40 of 211 Comments Last updated Oct 28, 2012

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Aug 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
President Obama wishes to take our guns, and if that is what it takes then I say 'do it'. I do not want to be the next victim of a mass shooting. Do you?
So you don't believe in the Bill Of Rights, nor support the U.S. Constitution ?
Tray

Tupelo, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Aug 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
President Obama wishes to take our guns, and if that is what it takes then I say 'do it'. I do not want to be the next victim of a mass shooting. Do you?
Well being that I carry maybe I will not be a victim but the guy the attacker fears. Just when is Obama planing to show up at my door wanting my guns? Just how many can he carry at one time? How many trips is he planning on making to carry my guns off? What makes you think I would stand by and watch someone rob me? Do you fear death? Take care of yourself, eat right, don't chase wild women, don't drink, don't do drugs guess what. YOU STILL GOING TO DIE. You were born to die, we all are it just depends if it happens on your feet or on your knees.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Aug 2, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Well being that I carry maybe I will not be a victim but the guy the attacker fears. Just when is Obama planing to show up at my door wanting my guns? Just how many can he carry at one time? How many trips is he planning on making to carry my guns off? What makes you think I would stand by and watch someone rob me? Do you fear death? Take care of yourself, eat right, don't chase wild women, don't drink, don't do drugs guess what. YOU STILL GOING TO DIE. You were born to die, we all are it just depends if it happens on your feet or on your knees.
I could say a few things about that.

LOL

from my cold dead hands....

SUPPORT THE SECOND AMENDMENT !

SUPPORT TEH U.S. CONSTITUTION !

ALL OF IT !!!

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Aug 10, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe in them both, FaFoxy (chuckles), but I do not support the idea that people can shoot innocent Americans because the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution gives us the freedom to bear arms...we have the right to possess weapons for self-defense, and hunting game, or for shooting at targets, etc., but never were we given the priviledge or right to shoot random people at will.
If you consider that 'a right' then you are one sick person.
I never said that.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Aug 10, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
I was so angry when I heard the news of the shooting in Colorado. Our nation needs to reform our gun laws, or outlaw them completely if we cannot use them properly and in a civil manner.
They need to raise the age of when one can possess a deadly weapon such as the gun the shooter used to kill those people, and forbid private pawn shops and internet businesses from selling these weapons.
We need dramatic reform there, and less elsewhere.
Notice that every one of these mass shootings occurred in "gun free zones". Only law abiding Americans obeys the law. Criminals don't, which is why they are criminals. And the one thing that all criminals have in common is that they prefer unarmed victims.

By your belief, these incidents did not happen since the guns were already illegal to be there. So either you must admit that you think they did not occur, or that your gun restriction laws are a failure.

If you legislate guns out of existence, you can be certain that these crimes will become commonplace everywhere. Drugs are illegal. Yet they are easily available, even in the most guarded, policed areas such as our nation's prisons.

While these tragedies do occur, they happen far less frequently than they did during the Clinton gun ban. The FBI reports that all gun related deaths are at a historic low today and gun ownership and possession is at an historic high.( fbi.gov )

You want to raise the age of who can possess a gun? Our majority of soldiers are 18-25 years of age. Do you wish to send them into battle with sticks? There are many, many youth organizations that teaches children the proper care and use of firearms, and many youth oriented competitions. To date, not a single person who as a youth that have ever been involved with these programs has ever engaged in such mass shootings or ever involved in an offensive gun related crime. And these programs date as far back as 1891! This argument shows that not only should children be taught at a young age the safe use of firearms, but should be encouraged.

Click on any of the Youth shooting program links, and notice the discipline,respect and attire that these youths demonstrates. Now click on any of your anti-gun (or any other popular youth) links and notice the youth there. Dressed like whores, or dressed in a manner where their pants around the ankles; disobedience, protesting for the legalization of drugs, extreme sexual conduct, etc....

Private pawn shops and internet companies use the same exact background checks and forms that are required by all gun dealers. Go to gun shows and the requirement is the same.(There is no "gun-show loophole). Sure,you can buy a gun from an individual, but the same goes for buying a car or any other item from them.

I am far more comfortable being beside someone with a gun than I am beside someone who is a liberal.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Aug 10, 2012
 
Virginia Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice that every one of these mass shootings occurred in "gun free zones". Only law abiding Americans obeys the law. Criminals don't, which is why they are criminals. And the one thing that all criminals have in common is that they prefer unarmed victims.
By your belief, these incidents did not happen since the guns were already illegal to be there. So either you must admit that you think they did not occur, or that your gun restriction laws are a failure.
If you legislate guns out of existence, you can be certain that these crimes will become commonplace everywhere. Drugs are illegal. Yet they are easily available, even in the most guarded, policed areas such as our nation's prisons.
While these tragedies do occur, they happen far less frequently than they did during the Clinton gun ban. The FBI reports that all gun related deaths are at a historic low today and gun ownership and possession is at an historic high.( fbi.gov )
You want to raise the age of who can possess a gun? Our majority of soldiers are 18-25 years of age. Do you wish to send them into battle with sticks? There are many, many youth organizations that teaches children the proper care and use of firearms, and many youth oriented competitions. To date, not a single person who as a youth that have ever been involved with these programs has ever engaged in such mass shootings or ever involved in an offensive gun related crime. And these programs date as far back as 1891! This argument shows that not only should children be taught at a young age the safe use of firearms, but should be encouraged.
Click on any of the Youth shooting program links, and notice the discipline,respect and attire that these youths demonstrates. Now click on any of your anti-gun (or any other popular youth) links and notice the youth there. Dressed like whores, or dressed in a manner where their pants around the ankles; disobedience, protesting for the legalization of drugs, extreme sexual conduct, etc....
Private pawn shops and internet companies use the same exact background checks and forms that are required by all gun dealers. Go to gun shows and the requirement is the same.(There is no "gun-show loophole). Sure,you can buy a gun from an individual, but the same goes for buying a car or any other item from them.
I am far more comfortable being beside someone with a gun than I am beside someone who is a liberal.
Excellent post ! I agree with everything you said.

If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Aug 10, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
President Obama wishes to take our guns, and if that is what it takes then I say 'do it'. I do not want to be the next victim of a mass shooting. Do you?
No. I do not want to be a victim of a mass shooting. This is why I conceal carry and hope that my fellow Americans there do as well.

My strategy for survival is not hoping and begging that the attacker will have mercy on me.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Aug 21, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, please, why is it that every discussion is always blown out of context?
I never ever said or even conceived disarming our military. Why? Because they are well trained and most of them are responsible with the weapons they are given (Do not even attempt to throw the few cases where veterans of these recent wars have killed themselves...that is a different subject entirely.)
The people I am speaking out against are the civilians, still in the US, still random employees at some retail store, bank, etc., who lack the ability to be responsible and obviously have no fear of the law whatsoever. They are the ones that need to be disarmed or punished.
The civilian carries and uses a firearm for the same reason our soldiers and police do; for protection.

Americans will not surrender their guns. This is why America has never had to surrender.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Aug 24, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, soldiers and police officers possess firearms for protection...like some civilians do...you cannot conclude that every civilian possesses a firearm for protection.
Let me ask you this? Why are those who shoot random civilians carrying a firearm? Is it for protection? Or terror?
I think it not wise to assume every civilian carrying or using a firearm is doing so for protection.
There are those, sadly, that are, no doubt, carrying a firearm, but are carrying it to walk into a public place and consciously murder innocent people.
Read the news. Another shooting just occurred in NYC. Something must change!
Under ideal circumstances, I believe responsible individuals should still have the right to possess and use a firearm, but those who cannot use them responsibly must be punished.
Thus, the question is asked...how can one know who is responsible and who is not?
Answer: It is nearly impossible to know.
What do we do then?
Tighten restrictions and regulations on gun ownership, limit usage of firearms to those who have been trained solely on keeping peace, such as: soldiers and police, and finally, require every person wishing to possess a firearm take the same course as police.
Will people agree? Probably not. But something must change. If we do not want the federal government taking them away completely, then we need to agree to some regulations.
Insanity.

The Federal Government was designed to have the citizens as it's master not the other way around.

Your ideas are those of a totalitarian state.

It is collective punishment to try to put forth any infringement because of the acts of others.

I don't see you putting in a breathalyzer ignition lock because your neighbor or someone across the country drove drunk and killed someone.

Is the victim of drunk drivers a child of a lessor god ?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Aug 24, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, soldiers and police officers possess firearms for protection...like some civilians do...you cannot conclude that every civilian possesses a firearm for protection.
Let me ask you this? Why are those who shoot random civilians carrying a firearm? Is it for protection? Or terror?
I think it not wise to assume every civilian carrying or using a firearm is doing so for protection.
There are those, sadly, that are, no doubt, carrying a firearm, but are carrying it to walk into a public place and consciously murder innocent people.
Read the news. Another shooting just occurred in NYC. Something must change!
Under ideal circumstances, I believe responsible individuals should still have the right to possess and use a firearm, but those who cannot use them responsibly must be punished.
Thus, the question is asked...how can one know who is responsible and who is not?
Answer: It is nearly impossible to know.
What do we do then?
Tighten restrictions and regulations on gun ownership, limit usage of firearms to those who have been trained solely on keeping peace, such as: soldiers and police, and finally, require every person wishing to possess a firearm take the same course as police.
Will people agree? Probably not. But something must change. If we do not want the federal government taking them away completely, then we need to agree to some regulations.
There are some people out there that has a firearm and bad intentions with it. There will always be that threat regardless of any law or restriction. This is why I carry. While I try to avoid any place where I may need to use such force to begin with; I also remain prepared to react with such force should the need arise.

Yes, another incident happened in New York. And not surprisingly, New York City is one of those "gun free zones" that we warn you about. Yet once again, the law abiding citizens had to hope for mercy from the homicidal maniac because they had no means of defending themselves.

Even with all of these incidents that you hear about on the news and media, the fact remains that they are occurring at a much lower rate than in the past. More guns= less violent crime. This is why when you hear of instances such as this, it is in a gun free zone or where firearms are heavily restricted.

There are over 20,000 gun laws in the U.S.. I have yet to know of any anti-gun activist that can name just 15 of them without the use of the internet.

I agree that there needs to be a change. All gun free zones need to be eliminated. criminals should serve their full sentence. The right to stand your ground should be applied in all States. This is how to reduce gun crime. The statistics proves this without a doubt.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Aug 24, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Virginia Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
There are some people out there that has a firearm and bad intentions with it. There will always be that threat regardless of any law or restriction. This is why I carry. While I try to avoid any place where I may need to use such force to begin with; I also remain prepared to react with such force should the need arise.
Yes, another incident happened in New York. And not surprisingly, New York City is one of those "gun free zones" that we warn you about. Yet once again, the law abiding citizens had to hope for mercy from the homicidal maniac because they had no means of defending themselves.
Even with all of these incidents that you hear about on the news and media, the fact remains that they are occurring at a much lower rate than in the past. More guns= less violent crime. This is why when you hear of instances such as this, it is in a gun free zone or where firearms are heavily restricted.
There are over 20,000 gun laws in the U.S.. I have yet to know of any anti-gun activist that can name just 15 of them without the use of the internet.
I agree that there needs to be a change. All gun free zones need to be eliminated. criminals should serve their full sentence. The right to stand your ground should be applied in all States. This is how to reduce gun crime. The statistics proves this without a doubt.
I agree all states should have their own "stand your ground laws".

And ANY criminal convicted of ANY crime involving the use of a gun, should recie a MANDATORY MINIMUM of 20 years in prison.

In addition, ALL states should have "three strikes" laws.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Aug 25, 2012
 
Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, soldiers and police officers possess firearms for protection...like some civilians do...you cannot conclude that every civilian possesses a firearm for protection.
Let me ask you this? Why are those who shoot random civilians carrying a firearm? Is it for protection? Or terror?
I think it not wise to assume every civilian carrying or using a firearm is doing so for protection.
There are those, sadly, that are, no doubt, carrying a firearm, but are carrying it to walk into a public place and consciously murder innocent people.
Read the news. Another shooting just occurred in NYC. Something must change!
Under ideal circumstances, I believe responsible individuals should still have the right to possess and use a firearm, but those who cannot use them responsibly must be punished.
Thus, the question is asked...how can one know who is responsible and who is not?
Answer: It is nearly impossible to know.
What do we do then?
Tighten restrictions and regulations on gun ownership, limit usage of firearms to those who have been trained solely on keeping peace, such as: soldiers and police, and finally, require every person wishing to possess a firearm take the same course as police.
Will people agree? Probably not. But something must change. If we do not want the federal government taking them away completely, then we need to agree to some regulations.
I usually do not do this, but I think that it is fitting for your comment concerning the "highly trained law enforcement" and the NYC incident.

Jeff Johnson (the NYC gunman)shot just one person, and it was the one that he was aiming for. It was the police that ended up shooting 9 innocent bystanders.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Aug 25, 2012
 
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree all states should have their own "stand your ground laws".
And ANY criminal convicted of ANY crime involving the use of a gun, should recie a MANDATORY MINIMUM of 20 years in prison.
In addition, ALL states should have "three strikes" laws.
brilliantly stated

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I'm from New York, born and raised there these past 50 years, and just moved to Oro Valley recently. Because of that, I still follow news from New York each day.

Regarding the shooting at the Empire State Building, the criminal who was killed by the NYPD shot & killed only one person. ALL of the other innocent bystanders who were shot, were shot by the NYPD.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Aug 25, 2012
 
FaFoxy wrote:
I'm from New York, born and raised there these past 50 years, and just moved to Oro Valley recently. Because of that, I still follow news from New York each day.
Regarding the shooting at the Empire State Building, the criminal who was killed by the NYPD shot & killed only one person. ALL of the other innocent bystanders who were shot, were shot by the NYPD.
Figures.... Honest citizens can't legally carry though.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Providence060109 wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it quite humorous when someone must be so dramatic to argue a point.
I do not wish for a totalitarian state, as you put it; I only wish that citizens, such as yourself, would wake up and realize...we have a problem...
Drunk driving is a problem also, but please do not stray from the original topic.
We need tighter restrictions...I never said "totalitarian". Get it right.
Why would the law abiding need tighter restrictions ?

There is no logic in your presentations.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dem Douche-baggers wrote:
<quoted text>From one Texan to another Texan, I hear that...
He needs to be outsourced come Nov. 6
"Finnish parents obviously claim some credit for the impressive school results. There is a culture of reading with the kids at home and families have regular contact with their children's teachers.
Teaching is a prestigious career in Finland. Teachers are highly valued and teaching standards are high."
rwb

Van Wert, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Aug 25, 2012
 
Virginia Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, another incident happened in New York. And not surprisingly, New York City is one of those "gun free zones" that we warn you about. Yet once again, the law abiding citizens had to hope for mercy from the homicidal maniac because they had no means of defending themselves.
Now you do realize that the 9 civilians were allegedly shot by police accidentally. Now with that, I am not accusing the police of wrong doing, just stating that when a shooting rampage engages, everyone is in danger.
rwb

Van Wert, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Aug 25, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Sorry Virginia Patriot, I went back and saw your post.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Aug 25, 2012
 
rwb wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you do realize that the 9 civilians were allegedly shot by police accidentally. Now with that, I am not accusing the police of wrong doing, just stating that when a shooting rampage engages, everyone is in danger.
I would say these policemen need more target practice.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••