Obama demands 'concrete proposals' on gun violence by January

[Frank Castle]

Obama demands 'concrete proposals' on gun violence by January


Let that games begin.




http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/19/16020864-obama-demands-concrete-proposals-on-gun-violence-by-january

[SADShooter]

President demands someone else do some work. Boy, does that sound familiar...

[Tallpine]

I have some proposals for him, but he won't like them 

[Monkeyleg]

I have some proposals for him, but he won't like them 

Do any involve acts that are physically or anatomically impossible? :)

[lupinus]

Do any involve acts that are physically or anatomically impossible? :)

I dunno.

Does he do yoga?

[longeyes]

The real assault weapons are in human form and live in Washington DC.

[brimic]

I have some proposals for him, but he won't like them

Do they involve concrete?

[Waitone]

Should be easy to accomplish.  Just whistle up a half dozen anti-gun orgs and ask for a PDF dump, merge all files and presto chango we have a comprehensive solution to the gun problem.  The perfect solution except for just a few irritating issues remaining undiscussed:  mental health, involuntary commitment for dangerous people, civil liberty questions, the role of psycho active drugs, obsessive use of violent video games, media violence, and government sponsored and operated false flags operations (e.g. Fast and Furious).  We'll have a few unexplored issues but THE problem will be solved.

[kgbsquirrel]

Here's my concrete solution to gun violence.

Take all the criminals who engage in "gun violence" and their enablers that constantly try to disarm their next victims, and drop them in a solution of concrete. Ankle weights may be necessary, allow time for curing. Ta-da!

[SADShooter]

Here's my concrete solution to gun violence.

Take all the criminals who engage in "gun violence" and their enablers that constantly try to disarm their next victims, and drop them in a solution of concrete. Ankle weights may be necessary, allow time for curing. Ta-da!

Now that's a constructive idea with some serious reinforcement.

[longeyes]

This will end up backfiring on Obama and the Left.  At least I hope it will.  People will start asking why we let the actions of one deranged individual make policy for tens of millions of law-biding Americans, why we should lose our rights because other people didn't do their jobs. And maybe they will start asking why the pall of silence over violence in the ghettos, inner cities, underclass?  They might even start asking why otherwise good middle-class folks are willing to spend hundreds of dollars on "assault weapons" to defend home and hearth and why it's not because they think Jack down the street might get drunk and disorderly some night?  I predict there will be a national conversation all right, but it won't go quite the way The Left thinks.

[Dunning-Kruger]

Trying to react in an artificially compressed timeframe, when the criminal investigation and real lessons learned, if any, will take months, is pure political folly.  Reacting in a factual vacuum to the unknown specific acts of an irrational youth with mental defect is never a sound basis for principled, reasoned legislation.

If DC wants to address what happened, then please wait until we know what in fact happened.  Beware the unk unk.

[SADShooter]

Trying to react in an artificially compressed timeframe, when the criminal investigation and real lessons learned, if any, will take months, is pure political folly.  Reacting in a factual vacuum to the unknown specific acts of an irrational youth with mental defect is never a sound basis for principled, reasoned legislation.

If DC wants to address what happened, then please wait until we know what in fact happened.  Beware the unk unk.

But Mel Brooks nailed this one many years ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTmfwklFM-M

[longeyes]

They have zero interest in really dealing with the problem, only in positioning themselves to gain electorally.  I think we all know that.  The question is whether the American people are still smart enough to see the flummery and ambition and demagoguery.

[Tallpine]

Do any involve acts that are physically or anatomically impossible? :)

1. Nationwide "Constitutional Carry"

2. No Gun Free Zones, except secure facilities like jails

[Monkeyleg]

This will end up backfiring on Obama and the Left.  At least I hope it will.  People will start asking why we let the actions of one deranged individual make policy for tens of millions of law-biding Americans, why we should lose our rights because other people didn't do their jobs. And maybe they will start asking why the pall of silence over violence in the ghettos, inner cities, underclass?  They might even start asking why otherwise good middle-class folks are willing to spend hundreds of dollars on "assault weapons" to defend home and hearth and why it's not because they think Jack down the street might get drunk and disorderly some night?  I predict there will be a national conversation all right, but it won't go quite the way The Left thinks.

What you're describing is no different than what we had in 1994. It did backfire on Clinton and the Democrats, with the Republicans taking control of both the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years. That didn't change the fact that the AWB passed.

[SADShooter]

What you're describing is no different than what we had in 1994. It did backfire on Clinton and the Democrats, with the Republicans taking control of both the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years. That didn't change the fact that the AWB passed.

I'm concerned that the political landscape has changed in such a way that if AWBII becomes law, we won't se the same backlash.

[Ben]

What you're describing is no different than what we had in 1994. It did backfire on Clinton and the Democrats, with the Republicans taking control of both the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years. That didn't change the fact that the AWB passed.

This is one of the big problems. Yes it can "backfire" as it did after '94, but you're still stuck with the restrictive laws. I would be willing to bet that any AWB (or anything else) that might pass now will not have a sunset like the '94 ban. So though it may change the composition of Congress via voting, we'll be stuck with whatever restrictions they pass.

ETA because we posted at the same time, SAD makes a valid point as well.

[Fitz]

the good news is, that when Republicans are elected, they keep their campaign promises to roll back restrictive/unconstitutional legislation!

[HankB]

the good news is, that when Republicans are elected, they keep their campaign promises to roll back restrictive/unconstitutional legislation!

In much the same vein, we should all be relieved that John Boehner followed through on his 2010 election pledge to roll back spending to 2008 levels - just imagine the fiscal problems we'd have if he'd hadn't kept his word - why, we'd be in danger of going right over a fiscal cliff as soon as the end of this year if he hadn't kept his word!

[longeyes]

The people who value liberty enough will know what to do, and it won't be to allow their inalienable rights to be stolen from them or to permit themselves to be submerged in the "one nation" ruse.  We are two nations; we need to decide which one we belong to.  If we wish to be disarmed in what looks more and more everyday like a hostile nation inimical to our rights and certainly our ability to defend ourselves, that is up to us. 

[Matthew Carberry]

If you don't already, I really recommend following Sebastian and Bitter's www.pagunblog.com.

They are doing some very good analysis of the situation on the anti-gun side and have concluded that the most competent threat out there is Bloomberg as he has the money and credibility to push ideas.

That's relevent in this case because he has already come up with a list of restrictions the administration can put into effect via use of executive power, most quite legal (if not Constitutional in our eyes).

The President's stated plan is to avoid long debate and a commission to "study the issue" for 6 months and have its report shelved when the furor dies down.  He wants a list to trot out at the State of the Union address to try to beat-up the Republicans with, like the whole millionaire tax nonsense (this is as much putting them on the defensive as doing gun control) to have leverage to get laws passed.

It's a two prong approach.

I'm of the opinion we actually want them to come big, with the proposal they -really- want, not something we can live with like the '94 ban. Make them say they want no grandfathering and immediate sales stoppages.  Let them push for mandatory registration.  Make sure that they are driven by their extreme members, and talk about confiscation and criminalizing mere possession.  Make it clear to those who would "go along to get along", the Zumbo's and Fudd's, and the undecided Americans who want to "do something" but who know and trust their friends and neighbors who are gun owners, exactly what they are after.  Make them give their proposals teeth so our side will be energized and their side will look extremist.

If they try to soft-pedal, call them on it; if they propose a half-measure, point out it won't have any effect. Get the Ladd Everett's and japete's and baldr odinson's up in arms and protesting Occupy-style with dancing vaginas and the public threats of "death to gun owners" about being betrayed by their politicians. Turn the undecided's off and forever associate gun control with nut jobs, like trutherism and birtherism.  Make sure that in the future when it's brought up by a Pelosi or Schumer the public rolls their eyes, picturing foaming at the mouth crazies, not so-called reasonable moderates.

[longeyes]

This is one of the big problems. Yes it can "backfire" as it did after '94, but you're still stuck with the restrictive laws. I would be willing to bet that any AWB (or anything else) that might pass now will not have a sunset like the '94 ban. So though it may change the composition of Congress via voting, we'll be stuck with whatever restrictions they pass.

ETA because we posted at the same time, SAD makes a valid point as well.

And this is exactly why we are not going to avoid, finally, the real problem.  WE ARE TWO NATIONS NEVER TO BE UNITED AGAIN.  Any "unified solution" will end with our serfdom.