Quote:

---

Lawmakers tend to stay quiet in the immediate aftermath of mass shootings, hoping to avoid attempts to politicize such tragedy.

But two days after the attack that took the lives of 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school, lawmakers were eager to take on the gun debate Sunday - with many saying a tipping point had finally been reached to pass stricter laws.

In Congress, multiple gun control bills have been introduced in recent years, but not a single one has advanced to a floor vote.

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California said Sunday the president will soon have legislation "to lead on," announcing she will introduce a bill next month to place a ban on assault weapons.

"The purpose of this bill is to get...'weapons of war' off the street of our cities," Feinstein said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

The senator added she'll introduce the bill when Congress reconvenes in January and the same legislation will also be proposed in the House of Representatives. It's modeled after the original assault-weapons ban that Feinstein helped champion in 1994.

"We're crafting this one. It's being done with care. It'll be ready on the first day," she said, adding that she'll soon announce the House authors.

Fellow Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, who worked on the House version of the assault weapons ban in 1994, said Washington has been "gridlocked" over the issue because "you have both sides off in a corner."

The New York senator said if pro-gun-control lawmakers can admit "there is a constitutional right to bear arms" and if anti-gun-control lawmakers can admit that "every amendment should have some balance and some limitation," then both sides can meet in the middle.

"Maybe we can make some real progress instead of each side being off in their corner, one side saying ban guns, get rid of guns, and the other side saying don't you touch anything about guns," Schumer said.

Connecticut has some of the strictest assault-weapons laws in the country, but Gov. Dan Malloy said Sunday that the lack of similar laws at the federal level makes it difficult to keep such weapons out of the state.

He said manufacturers can use "descriptive terms to try to get around the limitations that are built into our statutes" and added many guns found in the state had been tracked from gun shows in other parts of the country.

"One can only hope that we'll find a way to limit these weapons that really only have one purpose," Malloy, a Democrat, said on CNN's "State of the Union."

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who's long called for more action on gun laws, said Sunday "We kill people in schools. We kill them in hospitals. We kill them in religious organizations. We kill them when they're young. We kill them when they're old. And we've just got to stop this."

He's not the only one calling on the White House to act. More than 126,000 people have signed a petition since Friday asking for Obama "to produce legislation that limits access to guns."

The White House is required to respond after 25,000 signatures, and so far, the newly created web document has more signatories than any of the 154 petitions listed on the White House's website.

Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert said the deadly Connecticut school shooting could have been halted sooner if staff at the school had been equipped with guns.

"I wish to God (the principal) had had an M4 in her office, locked up, so when she heard gunfire she pulls it out … and takes him out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids," the Republican from Texas said on "Fox News Sunday."

Another Republican, former Education Secretary William Bennett, made a similar argument, saying the political debate should be put on hold while emotions are still high. Bennett also agreed with the idea that schools should have a gun.

Others also emphasized a need to boost mental health programs in the country. Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper of Colorado, who was intimately involved in the aftermath of the Aurora movie theater shooting, said Colorado has spent almost $20 million in new programs to support those dealing with mental illness.

"That's something we can do immediately without getting into some of the battles of gun legalization or restricting access to guns," he said on CNN, though acknowledging some gun laws need to be tweaked.

In particular, he said the debate should focus on access to high-capacity magazines. His support for tougher laws in the state marks a change in policy for the governor, who earlier this year said stricter gun laws would not have helped.

Sen.-elect Chris Murphy of Connecticut said Americans should not expect the newly resurfaced debate to go away anytime soon.

"Frankly the tipping point should have happened a long time ago, but if this is the tipping point, then we're going to go down to Washington and prompt a conversation that's long overdue," Murphy said. Excerpts from http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/16/gun-debate-gains-tract
ion-as-some-lawmakers-say-its-time-to-act/?hpt=hp_t2]
For me, the idea of principals or others having guns at school is absurd; they would have to be carefully locked up to ensure kids didn't get to them, there's a question as to how fast they could be gotten to and how effective a principal or others could be in confronting the gunman. This one shot himself in the head after only a short time of firing, and most mass murderers DO shoot themselves after a short time of shooting. To me that's just more of the usual argument that "if everyone had a gun..."

I find it strange that they refer to people in Congress wanting to eliminate guns entirely. Anyone who thinks that way is deluding themselves, in my opinion, and I'd like to know how many of those people there actually are. As far as I know, there are only two common-sense stances on this: Those of us who would like SOME limits on semi-automatic weapons, high-capacity magazines, enforcement of current gun laws, and background checks (oh, and eliminating the gun-show loophole); and those who want NO limit on ANY gun, anytime, anywhere. To keep saying it's all about those who want NO guns and those who want guns is absurd; anyone who thinks we can eliminate guns in this country is deluded. It's not all-or-nothing on both sides, it's "all or moderation", yet people keep saying all their guns are in danger of being taken away. It's not possible, period.

I was surprised to hear Bloomberg say last night that New York has one of the lowest rates of gun-related deaths of any metropolitan area in the country, third only to Boston and Hartford, Conn. I looked it up, and he's right; not only that, but when it comes to central cities specifically, New York is the lowest next to only San Jose. It also has THE lowest rate of gun-related suicides by metro, as well as the lowest by central city. ( http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2012/12/geography-us-gu
n-violence/4171/) Given Bloomberg's anti-gun views, New York's stringent gun laws, and the vast number of people crammed into New York City, for me it goes a ways toward putting the lie to the idea that "gun laws don't stop" gun-related deaths.

I don't want to see guns eliminated in America; after thinking about it, I wouldn't want it even if it were possible. I'd just like to see some common-sense limitations. For the vast majority of thinking people, the idea of eliminating all guns in America is just laughable. I wish it were possible to discuss THAT, rather than pro-gun people constantly saying it's "all or nothing".

I hope some legislation gets passed--I'm not holding my breath, but I can hope--to do something about the availability of semi-automatic weapons and high-volume magazines. More would be better, especially closing the loophole on gun-show sales and better enforcement, but at the very least, I'd like to try minimizing the ability of unstable people committing mass murders.

Quote:

---

You constantly hide behind this "Constitutional right" bullshit, to justify having multi billion dollar weapons manufacturers dictate policy to you.

I'm not even going to bother getting into the argument.Suffice it to say, that the rest of us are PRAYING that you do something about it, just so as we can welcome you to the grown up world. It's been far too long in coming.

---

Quote:

---

Truthfully, we as a nation will not spend money on preventative measures of any kind. Treating mental illness might be the best way to avoid future shootings, but we won't go there. The occasional shooting & its clean up is cheaper than a health care system tweak of any kind, I find that rather disgusting my own self, but there you go.

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

"Everything should be on the table," West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin declared Monday. He is a conservative Democrat, avid hunter and lifelong member of the National Rifle Association. Manchin said he's "not afraid of the political ramifications" from defying the NRA.

---

Quote:

---

Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa proposed a study of both gun violence and mental health issues.

---

Quote:

---

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed Congress would soon "engage in a meaningful conversation and thoughtful debate about how to change laws and culture that allow violence to grow." In 2010, top NRA official Wayne LaPierre called Reid "a true champion" of gun rights.

---

Quote:

---

U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth said Monday that he was wrong for not speaking up sooner about gun violence and that legislators should not fear the pro-gun lobby in passing stricter controls aimed at avoiding a repeat of the carnage at a Connecticut school.

---

Quote:

---

Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, who is the chairman of a subcommittee on the Constitution and civil rights, said that he would hold hearings on Second Amendment rights. “What will it take?” Mr. Durbin wrote, listing one by one the mass shootings that have occurred in the United States over the past few years. “What it will take is for the majority of Americans, and the majority of thoughtful gun owners and hunters, to agree that there must be reasonable limits on gun ownership and weapons.”

---

Quote:

---

In Albany, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo said he would make several gun policy proposals in his state of the state address next month.

---

Quote:

---

Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York called for “a new paradigm” in the gun control debate and cautioned that proponents of tighter regulation needed to be mindful of the concerns of responsible gun owners as they pursued their cause.

“First, those of us who are pro-gun-control have to admit that there is a Second Amendment right to bear arms,” he said. And the other side, he added, was being counterproductive by claiming “the left wants to take that hunting rifle your Uncle Tommy gave you when you were 15.”

---

Quote:

---

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut who is about to leave Congress, was among those calling for restrictions on assault weapons. Mr. Lieberman repeated his views that assault weapons “were weapons created by the U.S. military for use in war.”

---