Was President Obama using code words for gun control legislation?

[Guest milo itchdigit]

Was President Obama using code words for gun control legislation? In his memorial speech in Arizona this week he said this. "None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped these shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind. Yes, we have to examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future." What are "old assumptions"? Maybe code for second amendment rights? Did this immediately register similar thoughts with anyone else? After some thought, I now think this is exactly what he was referring to and was intentionally ambiguous enough to deny controversy but not so ambiguous that the anti-gun crowd would miss his point.

[vontar]

Good think they lost one house, they can't just voite it direct. But it looks like they have some republican's on their band wagon too.

Less then 2 more years and he is Out of here. I do believe he is a 1 term wonder. (wonder he got in, and he will be out)

Edited January 15, 2011 by vontar

[mcurrier]

I was thinking the exact same thing.

[Chief07]

Yes. It was a vailed attempt to rally the far left anti-gun crowd.

It was crystal clear to me. "Never let a good crisis go to waste"

Sound familiar?

The Brady camp is shamlessly fund raising using this horrable tragedy as a reason.

The anti-gun crowd never gives up.

And neither should we as pro second ammendment Americans!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think so, too, but I don't think he will get enough R's to rally with him.

This crap blame game politics the media is doing right now is also working

in concert with his code words, but I think the public is seeing through it.

[BigK]

I've been listening around the office to people talk about this all week. I've heard a lot of folks I know to be hard-core conservatives say stuff like "Why does anyone need a gun that holds that many bullets?" and "Nobody should be allowed to have a gun capable of holding that many bullets". I don't even need to tell you the kind of stupid crap I've heard the lefties say.

These people are ignorant on so many levels it scares me. What frustrates me the most is that there's no way for our side to reach enough people to correct the ignorance to start with. I asked a few how come when a drunk driver kills someone in a car crash they don't call for the immediate ban on alcohol sales or automobile sales, but as soon as a lunatic shoots somebody, they blame the weapon he used? I guess I'm just sick of the way too many people demonize firearms.

[Garufa]

It's really not a question of "if" more strict controls are put into place, but of "when".

Edited January 15, 2011 by Garufa

[Links2k]

It's really not a question of "if" more stict controls are put into place, but of "when".

Bingo!

[Guest mosinon]

We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future." What are "old assumptions"? Maybe code for second amendment rights? Did this immediately register similar thoughts with anyone else? After some thought, I now think this is exactly what he was referring to and was intentionally ambiguous enough to deny controversy but not so ambiguous that the anti-gun crowd would miss his point.

Well, you could easily read this as the "old" assumption being less guns equal less violence. Because the studies haven't born that out. I mean that is the "old" assumption of the anti gun crowd, right?

But I'll bet that isn't what he met. In fact, I'll wager that people are reading too much into this. I'll posit that what "We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future." really amounts to is spin, a good line, kind of saying "I'm gonna do something about this" but that that is about it. It sounds good and all, a new way to combat this problem, but it really doesn't add up to much.

I suspect it will be something about mag capacity and so forth. Which kinda sucks, I'm not a hunter or a self defense guy but reloading is my least favorite part of a range trip. If I could go with a four foot mag that held 500 rounds for my 92fs I'd buy that. I imagine that the pres will get enough people to go along with with mag limits to get something about that passed. Cause, hey, the government has got to do something, right?

Ina perfect world I'd imagine for every page of legislation the government enacted they'd have to repeal two.

[Oh Shoot]

...I imagine that the pres will get enough people to go along with with mag limits to get something about that passed. Cause, hey, the government has got to do something, right? ...

So Hasan killed 13 and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood, using the "cop killer" five seven round, 20 and 30 round magazines, and not a peep about banning anything. What's up with that?

Just that they were all expendable G.I.'s and not a puppy cute 9 year old in the bunch?

Oh, of course, none were US Reps or federal judges either. But everybody's equal, some are just more equal than others, always, eh?

- OS

Edited January 15, 2011 by OhShoot

[macville]

One word: Yes.

[mikegideon]

So Hasan killed 13 and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood, using the "cop killer" five seven round, 20 and 30 round magazines, and not a peep about banning anything. What's up with that?

Just that they were all expendable G.I.'s and not a puppy cute 9 year old in the bunch?

Oh, of course, none were US Reps or federal judges either. But everybody's equal, some are just more equal than others, always, eh?

- OS

I heard some of the same crap after the Ft. Hood shooting. It just didn't last very long. I would be surprised if they can pass anything new.

[Guest Old goat]

They will pass something, it will do absolutely nothing to prevent something like this from happening again, but they will pass it.

[Guest milo itchdigit]

So Hasan killed 13 and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood, using the "cop killer" five seven round, 20 and 30 round magazines, and not a peep about banning anything. What's up with that?

Just that they were all expendable G.I.'s and not a puppy cute 9 year old in the bunch?

Oh, of course, none were US Reps or federal judges either. But everybody's equal, some are just more equal than others, always, eh?

- OS

Damn good observation. Damn good. And after Fort Hood they (the media and the left) weren’t foaming at the mouth with fire coming out of their eyes trying to find blame in his motivations and influences like they are now. Back then they were saying “slow down, lets not blame his motivations or influences. Let’s be careful and not call him a terrorist. He’s a criminalâ€. They didn’t want us to believe Hasan was a terrorist, but now they desperately want us to believe that Laughner is.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I doubt there are 218 votes in the House for any gun restriction legislation. Even a magazine capacity

limit wouldn't make it there. Peter King and who else with an "R" next to their name is pushing this?

How many "R's" would be willing to side with the radicals in the House? Damned few. I don't see anything

coming out of committee that would pass. Too much of a political hot potato. It would bring the Tea

Party people to remind them that 1994 could be repeated, only by replacing more "R's". Hopefully,

that will happen anyway.

[Guest milo itchdigit]

I doubt there are 218 votes in the House for any gun restriction legislation. Even a magazine capacity

limit wouldn't make it there. Peter King and who else with an "R" next to their name is pushing this?

How many "R's" would be willing to side with the radicals in the House? Damned few. I don't see anything

coming out of committee that would pass. Too much of a political hot potato. It would bring the Tea

Party people to remind them that 1994 could be repeated, only by replacing more "R's". Hopefully,

that will happen anyway.

Gun restriction legislation is not their short term goal. I agree, they don't stand a chance at this point. Don’t you think their rhetoric at this time is intended for impressionable minds they can recruit to their side for the benefit of their long term goals?

[mikegideon]

I doubt there are 218 votes in the House for any gun restriction legislation. Even a magazine capacity

limit wouldn't make it there. Peter King and who else with an "R" next to their name is pushing this?

How many "R's" would be willing to side with the radicals in the House? Damned few. I don't see anything

coming out of committee that would pass. Too much of a political hot potato. It would bring the Tea

Party people to remind them that 1994 could be repeated, only by replacing more "R's". Hopefully,

that will happen anyway.

Boehner told Peter King to pound sand. All those newly elected Republicans ran on restoring "freedom". The public is more gun friendly than it's ever been. I don't see anything getting enough steam to pass at the federal level. The idiots in California might pass something else. It's their job to be idiots.

[Moped]

So Hasan killed 13 and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood, using the "cop killer" five seven round, 20 and 30 round magazines, and not a peep about banning anything. What's up with that? Just that they were all expendable G.I.'s and not a puppy cute 9 year old in the bunch?

Oh, of course, none were US Reps or federal judges either. But everybody's equal, some are just more equal than others, always, eh?

- OS

This is the reason your hearing it now.

[Guest Bronker]

So Hasan killed 13 and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood, using the "cop killer" five seven round, 20 and 30 round magazines, and not a peep about banning anything. What's up with that?

Just that they were all expendable G.I.'s and not a puppy cute 9 year old in the bunch?

Oh, of course, none were US Reps or federal judges either. But everybody's equal, some are just more equal than others, always, eh?

- OS

This.

[mikegideon]

This is interesting. I don't know how long the link will hold. two congressmen (one a Dem) talking about carry permits as the best solution.

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

[USMCJG]

I agree with those that think any new gun control legislation will not pass. I believe that for every Republican who would vote for gun control, there would be a pro-2nd Amendment Democrat(yes, they do exist) who would vote against it.

[mcurrier]

Well, you could easily read this as the "old" assumption being less guns equal less violence. Because the studies haven't born that out. I mean that is the "old" assumption of the anti gun crowd, right?

They don't have guns in Britain, but they have the most crime.

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Mail Online

[mikegideon]

They don't have guns in Britain, but they have the most crime.

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Mail Online

Yeah, but it's much more humane to beat somebody to death with a big rock instead of shooting them.

[mcurrier]

They will pass something, it will do absolutely nothing to prevent something like this from happening again, but they will pass it.

Obama is moving to issue an executive order to the ATF concerning 'temporary' gun registration reporting. This was already in the works before the AZ shooting based on the previous melodrama of 'journalism' trying to say that the majority of illegal weapons in Mexico came from the U.S. (which is false).

There is no "bill" being proposed here. They are planning on the BATF simply instituting a new 'regulation' by executive order of Oblahblah, thus by-passing the legislative process, and against the will of the majority of American citizens.

The part of the proposal that is most troubling is the part where it says:

"to require Federal Firearms Licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles within any five consecutive business days with the following characteristics:

(a) semi automatic;

( a caliber greater than .22;

and

© the ability to accept a detachable magazine."

Note, it does not say anywhere 'sold to the same individual within five consecutive business days'. The way it is worded would require any dealer who sells more than 2 guns at all in five days (which would be all of them) to report ALL gun sales, who purchased them, thereby instituting a backdoor gun registry of all gun sales. Also, the wording of the actual proposal does NOT specify which states would be affected by this new 'regulation', thus applying to all 50 states (or 57 if you are Oblahblah).

Only news reports are saying/implying that it is only applicable to border states, the actual ATF proposal does NOT say that.

[kesava]

So Hasan killed 13 and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood, using the "cop killer" five seven round, 20 and 30 round magazines, and not a peep about banning anything. What's up with that?

Just that they were all expendable G.I.'s and not a puppy cute 9 year old in the bunch?

Oh, of course, none were US Reps or federal judges either. But everybody's equal, some are just more equal than others, always, eh?

- OS

It's because an insane man got hold of a gun. Guns in America will never be banned. That's "aluminum foil hat" talk. Obama will be elected again. I will vote for him and so will all of my middle of the road and independent guys along with most democrats. There was no code. There was a guy in my HCP class who shot a different persons target and still got an HCP.