Quote:

---

WASHINGTON: The US President, Barack Obama, has announced sweeping gun control measures, calling on Congress to act fast to reintroduce a ban on assault rifles and to introduce a ban on high capacity magazines, as well as expand mandatory background checks to all gun sales.

Should the measures be passed they would be the most significant new laws on gun control created in the US since 1994.
Sweeping measures: US President Barack Obama, accompanied by Vice President Joe Biden, announces his proposals to reduce gun violence.

Making his announcement before four children who had written to him asking for action after the Sandy Hook massacre, he then sat before the assembled audience and signed 23 executive actions – orders he can issue without Congressional action – he believes will help cut gun violence.
Advertisement

They include instructing the Centres for Disease Control to study gun violence (doctors had been banned from gathering data or discussing guns with patients under regulations backed by the National Rifle Association), increasing funding for security in schools, nominating a new director for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, increasing access to mental health treatment and instructing government agencies to share information for the background checks.

He acknowledged the political fight to have the measures passed would be long and difficult, but declared, “This is are first task as a society – keeping our children safe. It is how we will be judged.”

He said the measures he was announcing were not only intended to help prevent future mass shootings, but also the daily toll of gun violence in America. He noted that since 20 children and six adults were shot in Sandy Hook a further 900 people had died “at the end of a gun” in America.

In the audience watching the announcement were Chris and Lynn McDonnell, the parents of seven-year-old Grace who was killed in Sandy Hook. He said for them time since the killings had been measured in seconds and minutes rather than in days.

Also in the audience was Colin Goddard, who was shot four times in the Virginia Tech massacre. He earlier told the Vice President, Joe Biden, that he was in the audience not because of what happened to him, but because “what happened to me keeps happening to other people and we have to do something about it.”

“Colin, I promise you we will,” said Mr Biden, who had put the package of reforms together on behalf of Mr Obama.

Minutes after the President spoke the Texas representative Steve Toth appeared on CNN to say God conferred rights upon the people, not the Congress, and he would introduce legislation that would make it illegal to for federal agents to enforce the laws in Texas. A similar bill has already been introduced in Wyoming while other states and counties are considering following suit.

Constitutional lawyers could argue federal law overrides state law, should the laws be challenged.

The Floridian Republican senator, Marco Rubio, considered a potential future presidential candidate, quickly came out opposing the proposed ban on military-style rifles.

"I think it's completely misplaced. Because here's the issue in this public policy debate that's different from others: There is a constitutional right to bear arms," he told the Laura Ingram radio show.

"I did not create that and he cannot erase that. It is in the Constitution. If they want to change the Constitution, if they want to believe the Second Amendment should not be in there or if they believe it should be rewritten in the 21st century then let them have the guts to stand up and propose that."

He also condemned the President for choosing to share the stage with children as he made his announcement.

"I think most of us would have preferred if it just had been a straightforward address to the country because it implies that somehow those of us who do not agree with his public policy prescriptions don't equally care about children."

There was also much discussion today of a new advertisement released by the National Rifle Association which calls the President an elitist hypocrite because his children are protected by armed guards, but he does not support the NRA's proposal to install armed guards in all American schools – rather he wants to make them “gun-free zones”.

Though recent polls have shown a majority of Americans support some increased gun controls – especially with regards to background checks – there is no certainty any of the measures he has proposed will become law.

As he finished speaking the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner, said the House would consider any bills when and if they were first passed by the Senate. And even though Democrats control the Senate, many of them are backed by the NRA and are sympathetic to its cause.

Over the weekend even the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, called for caution in acting on guns.

In 1994, then-president Bill Clinton championed another ban on assault rifles that expired 10 years later.

That ban is thought to have cost the party its control of the House and is one of the reasons the party has since been so fearful of gun control. Recent analysis shows the coalition of voters that supported the President in the recent election broadly support gun control.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/it-is-how-we-will-be-judged-obama-annou
nces-widest-gun-control-measures-in-18-years-20130117-2cufc.html#ixzz2IAvcUlP3

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
There's actually some good in Pres. Obama's proposals, along with some stuff thats mostly 'feel good' but will have no practical effect.

For example, addressing the perceived legal barriers that prevent states from reporting people whose mental health status would prohibit them from owning guns seems a good idea, considering the number of folks with identified issues that have been involved in shootings.

---

Quote:

---

Going after folks who provide guns to criminals through 'straw' purchases, or illegally sell to criminals would be worthwhile, although current laws prohibiting straw purchases are enforced in a rather spotty manner. Perhaps this will get DOJ and Federal prosecutors to move on more of these cases.

---

Quote:

---

The item about prosecuting gun crime sounds good. maybe it'll also get Federal prosecutors to start bringing cases under existing laws prohibiting felons from possessing firearms. NB: Maybe this would be a good time to also consider getting folks convicted of non-violent drug possession and small-time dealing out of the prison system to make room for the actually dangerous folk.

---

Quote:

---

The Making Schools Safer section seems a mixed bag, with some proposals pretty generic. Nice to see a note about reducing bullying in schools, since that's seemed to be the trigger in some recent incidents.

---

Quote:

---

The whole section on improving mental health services seems worthwhile, even if it wasn't in relation to violence.

---

Quote:

---

Encouraging folks to get gun safes and locks seems like a good idea, although making such things mandatory would be an enforcement nightmare from both cost and civil rights issues.

---

Quote:

---

15,000 more cops on the street might be useful, depending on whether they're fighting crime or writing traffic tickets.

---

Quote:

---

Doing background checks on intra-state private sales(interstate private sales already require a check) might seem a good idea, but it'll mostly inconvenience the law-abiding folks who sell or trade firearms as a hobby. Folks who want guns for criminal purposes will get them the same way they do now, from straw purchases and illegal sellers. The increased prosecution of straw purchasers and illegal sellers will probably do a lot more to keep guns out of their hands.

---

Quote:

---

The "assault weapon" and magazine capacity restrictions on sales end up as mostly 'feel good' for several reasons. First, there are millions of semi-automatic rifles with detatchable magazines in private hands already. There are probably hundreds of millions of magazines holding more than 10 rounds, for both rifles and pistols. Second, anyone who is willing to practice for a few days can reload any magazine-fed firearm,(or even a revolver, if properly equipped) in just a second, so folks carrying more low-capacity magazines can shoot just about as fast. Third, most shootings don't involve as many as ten rounds being fired.

---

Quote:

---

The 'armor-piercing bullets' ban just won't die, although documented instances of folks using them in crimes are pretty much nil.

---

Quote:

---

It'll be intersting to see what makes it through the legislative process, and what ends up as Executive Orders.

---

Quote:

---

The "assault weapon" and magazine capacity restrictions on sales end up as mostly 'feel good' for several reasons. First, there are millions of semi-automatic rifles with detatchable magazines in private hands already. There are probably hundreds of millions of magazines holding more than 10 rounds, for both rifles and pistols.

---

Quote:

---

Second, anyone who is willing to practice for a few days can reload any magazine-fed firearm,(or even a revolver, if properly equipped) in just a second, so folks carrying more low-capacity magazines can shoot just about as fast.

---

Quote:

---

Third, most shootings don't involve as many as ten rounds being fired.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

The "assault weapon" and magazine capacity restrictions on sales end up as mostly 'feel good' for several reasons. First, there are millions of semi-automatic rifles with detatchable magazines in private hands already. There are probably hundreds of millions of magazines holding more than 10 rounds, for both rifles and pistols.

---

Yes, and there were hundreds of millions of gas-guzzlers on the roads polluting our air before clean air standards and higher gas mileage standards were introduced.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Second, anyone who is willing to practice for a few days can reload any magazine-fed firearm,(or even a revolver, if properly equipped) in just a second, so folks carrying more low-capacity magazines can shoot just about as fast.

---

Bullshit. "Anyone" can't reload a magazine in one second. If there is anyone who can, it's very rare.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Third, most shootings don't involve as many as ten rounds being fired.

---

Except mass shootings like Sandy Hook, Aurora, Tucson, Virginia Tech, Killeen, Fort Hood, Columbine, etc. You don't get those kinds of massive casualty numbers from fewer than ten rounds.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:Everyone - or - No one.
Anything else is tyranny, which that is.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:Everyone - or - No one.
Anything else is tyranny, which that is.

-F

---

I think you need a dictionary.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

---

Quote:

---

tyr·an·ny
[tir-uh-nee]
noun, plural tyr·an·nies.
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
2. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.
3. a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.
4. oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler.
5. undue severity or harshness.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Quote:

---

tyr·an·ny
[tir-uh-nee]
noun, plural tyr·an·nies.
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
2. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.
3. a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.
4. oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler.
5. undue severity or harshness.

---

1. Executive Orders.
2. See Above.
3. Inapplicable, currently.
4. Invasion of privacy, lack of respect for the consititution, overbearing legal code.
(See Also: Three Felonies A Day.)
5. The War on (some) Drugs.

Seems pretty clear to me.

If you wanna get COMPLETELY nitpicky, where I am referencing ties in with the "arbitrary" portion of number 1. here - when you make a law that applies only to SOME people, then you've just violated the necessary equality provision, rule of law, and due process.

When you make a law, it should either apply to EVERYONE, or it should apply to NO ONE.
(And thus should not BE a law)

Otherwise you're just recreating what is essentially a caste society, something this whole nation was founded on the opposition of.

-Frem

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Allowing the police to have weapons civilians can't is not making laws that only apply to some people. It is an exemption in the law for certain positions, not certain people.

---

Quote:

---

Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

---

Quote:

---

COMMUNIST CHINA ORDERS OBAMA TO BAN GUNS IN USA DECEMBER 2012
http://www.infowars.com/communist-chinese-government-calls-for-america
ns-to-be-disarmed/

China's Public Executions in Sports Stadiums Big Hit on TV
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17303746
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53842
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1425570.stm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
Yeah, I read all about that a while ago...might even have posted about it. It's a long way from being viable at this point, and I doubt they'll be able to make an automatic or semi-auto gun for a long time to come.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

---

Nope. Never said it. We've already been over this. Did your crazy inbred redneck ass already forget?

---

Yeah, Hitler allowed lots of guns inside the death camps...for the death squads.



Lots on guns for Germans on the Eastern Front...not much firewood though.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
I fail to see the difference.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Unfortunately, or fortunately, I really don't know....
That genie has done escaped the bottle.
Last known test of a 3D Printed semi-auto got off six shots before it broke, and that was the first week of last Decemeber, but I wasn't speaking of weapons actually, a weapon receiver and bolt has to endure some pretty hefty stresses since it's essentially containing and directing an explosion.

What I was more speaking of was high capacity magazines, for if they were "banned" it would be easy enough to produce them on any 3D Printer with the right template, many of which ALREADY exist because of difficulty obtaining them or expense involved, and many high capacity magazines are already made of plastics to begin with, and the springs are no harder to make or obtain.

Which means such a ban would be utterly and thoroughly unenforceable and would simply create an underground market, and the same resultant consequences as prohibition or the "War on (some) Drugs" - and every penny wasted there just making the problem worse is one less that COULD have been spent on better mental health care, you see ?

-Frem

---