Obama to appeal to public, law enforcement for support on new gun control laws

[Teh One Who Knocks]

FOX News


President Obama will pitch his gun control proposals to the public and the law enforcement community Monday, as he calls for a ban on assault weapons and seeks to install universal background checks for gun buyers.

Obama will attempt to rally support for his plan in Minnesota, a Democratic-leaning state where officials have been studying ways to reduce gun-related attacks and accidents for several years. His visit to the Minneapolis Police Department's Special Operations Center will mark the first time Obama has campaigned on his controversial proposals outside of Washington.

Two of the country’s most influential voices in the gun control debate weighed in Sunday on the issue, but appeared no closer in reaching a compromise -- even on the issue of universal background checks.

Wayne LaPierre, the National Rifle Association’s chief executive, told “Fox News Sunday” his group has tried unsuccessfully for such a check for two decades.

“I’ve been in this fight for 20 years. We proposed it. I don’t think it’s going to happen,” said LaPierre, who argued the mental health lobby and federal laws have prevented the names of people with potentially dangerous mental health problems from being put into a federal database.

He also said that "criminals won't comply."

LaPierre was skeptical about whether the Obama administration would take the gun-control legislation, if passed, a step farther.

"I think what they'll do is they'll turn this universal (background) check on the law-abiding into a universal registry on law-abiding people," he said. "ObamaCare wasn't a tax until they needed it to be a tax. I don't think you can trust these people."

Retired Navy Capt. Mark Kelly, whose wife former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head by an emotionally disturbed gunman, argued for the background check. He told Fox that Giffords, a Democrat, and others might have been spared in the 2011 mass shooting in Tucson had the state entered the shooter’s name into a database.

The argument came nearly seven weeks after a gunman killed 20 children and six adults inside a Connecticut elementary school and five days after the first Senate hearing on the issue, following the Dec. 14 mass shooting.

Kelly also said he supports tightened background checks at gun shows and proposals by President Obama and fellow Democrats in the Senate to ban high-capacity magazines.

However, he would not fully commit to backing an automatic-weapons ban, which at this point does not appear to have enough widespread support to become law.

Kelly said semi-automatic weapons are “just too dangerous to be on the streets” for criminals, terrorists and the mentally ill.

“Gabby and I know this is going to be a hard problem to solve,” said Kelly, who also pointed out he served in the Middle East with such weapons.

"I don't think you'll find a stronger supporter of the Second Amendment than me," he said. "I fought for it."

The reinstatement of the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004, is expected to be the steepest climb for Obama. Universal background checks for gun purchasers may have an easier time passing Congress, though the NRA also opposes that measure.

The White House picked Minneapolis as the backdrop for Obama's remarks in part because of recent steps the city has taken to tackle gun violence, including a push for stricter background checks.

After a spike in violent crimes, the city launched a program in 2008 aimed at providing more resources for at-risk youth and helping rehabilitate young people who have already perpetrated crimes. In January, Minneapolis also hosted a regional summit on gun violence for elected officials from around the Midwest.

Minneapolis Police Chief Janee Harteau and Hennepin County Sheriff Richard Stanek are also among the officials Obama has consulted as he pursues his anti-gun violence measures.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Rachel Rose Hartman, Yahoo! News | The Ticket


President Barack Obama gave a speech Monday in Minnesota as part of ongoing efforts to earn support for gun control and mental health measures in response to December's shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

Prior to the speech, Obama met with local leaders and law enforcement officials at the Minneapolis Police Department Special Operations Center. He plans to deliver his public remarks on gun violence at 2:30 p.m. ET.

"Minneapolis is a city that has taken important steps to reduce gun violence and foster a conversation in the community about what further action is needed," the White House explained in a release announcing the president's trip.

A politically competitive state, Minnesota is home to many gun-rights advocates. But gun control discussions have increased there since a Sept. 27 mass shooting at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, which resulted in six dead.

The president on Jan. 16 unveiled a sweeping package of proposals designed to combat gun violence. Members of Congress have since introduced some of those proposals as legislation, such as bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazine clips. In the meantime, the White House has continued a general public relations campaign and listening sessions on the issue.

The president and Vice President Joe Biden, whom Obama chose to head up his gun task force, have also been publicly advocating universal background checks, mental health services and screenings, and other measures, and are waiting to see how legislation plays out in Congress.

Gun control measures face stiff opposition from the gun lobby, headed up by the National Rifle Association, as well as from select gun rights advocates in Congress.

[RBP]

While I *generally* don't have an issue with universal background checks, I am a little concerned with what definitions will be assigned to mental illness and how that data will be shared on a federal and state level.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

I purchased another 300 rounds of 9mm on Friday

[Griffin]

A universal background check would prevent me from giving my grandkids a .22 as a gift without saying "Oh , by the way I need you to fill out these papers."

Yet some silver spoon kid could be given a set of keys to a 2.5 ton rolling death mobile on their 16th birthday without question.

[KevinD]

I guess I'm still unclear on exactly the supposed purpose of a "Universal Background Check" is. I mean to buy a gun at any dealer, you already have to undergo a federal background check, and I really don't see any legitimate way to enforce background checks on private sales. Also speaking of private sales, afaik (and I could be wrong) here in Texas, if you buy a gun from someone, and goe to register it in your name, there is still a background check done.

[DemonGeminiX]

I guess I'm still unclear on exactly the supposed purpose of a "Universal Background Check" is. I mean to buy a gun at any dealer, you already have to undergo a federal background check, and I really don't see any legitimate way to enforce background checks on private sales. Also speaking of private sales, afaik (and I could be wrong) here in Texas, if you buy a gun from someone, and goe to register it in your name, there is still a background check done.

Registration isn't required in all states. I don't have to be registered as a gun owner here in Georgia. If I buy from a private seller and don't apply for ccw, it's completely under the radar.

[KevinD]

I understand that DGX, lol, registration is optional here in Texas as well. Currently there a a couple of unregistered guns in my home. One I inherited from my grandfather, and a different one I inherited from my step father. There's also a 20ga single shot shotgun that my brother in law (deceased) bought for my nephew, who being 10 years old, obviously can't have a gun in his name. The 20ga is registered in my bro in laws name, but since he's passed away, I have to figure out a way to register for my nephew. Most likely would do so in his mothers name, but she doesn't want the gun in her house, so it would still have to stay here. Guess I'll put it in my name once all the dust sttles so can figure out how to legally register (all of them)

[RBP]

I'm confused... why is registration necessary? It's documented when you buy it (loopholes aside), so they have that already.

[KevinD]

If you buy from a dealer or gun show, the gun will be registered in your name, along with a federal level background check, before you walk out with it. This is what I'm having trouble with with the new "Universal Background Check" I've yet to see any real documentation of the new system, so don't see the purpose of it.

[Griffin]

I'm confused... why is registration necessary? It's documented when you buy it (loopholes aside), so they have that already.

Accountability.
Giving a firearm to a family member you probably feel secure in it's whereabouts. They trade it to a friend for whatever reason, and they feel secure because they are friends. This friend gets behind on a debt so they give the gun to whoever they owe money to. The debt collector doesn't need the weapon so they give it to their drug dealer. They drop it at the scene of a crime while escaping.

Guess where the point of purchase is.

[RBP]

But that's completely out the giver/seller's hands unless you make people report outgoing transfers as well.

[Griffin]

But that's completely out the giver/seller's hands unless you make people report outgoing transfers as well.

It should be no more complicated than a bill of sale for anything else. Be it a car, lawnmower or bicycle.
You sign, they sign, if they register or not is up to them.

[Hal-9000]

Registration isn't required in all states. I don't have to be registered as a gun owner here in Georgia. If I buy from a private seller and don't apply for ccw, it's completely under the radar.


wow, reading this and Kevin's post and then Griffin's good example of where a gun can end up...

no wonder there's so many asswipes with unregistered weapons in your country shooting the hell out of people...the law doesn't demand that the gun even be registered in some states..


I didn't know that

[RBP]

It should be no more complicated than a bill of sale for anything else. Be it a car, lawnmower or bicycle.
You sign, they sign, if they register or not is up to them.

Right but that doesn't answer your scenario about it ended up left at the scene of a crime at all unless the receiver of the gun chooses to register it (which the criminal will not)... it will still show you as the purchaser/original owner.

[Griffin]

wow, reading this and Kevin's post and then Griffin's good example of where a gun can end up...

no wonder there's so many asswipes with unregistered weapons in your country shooting the hell out of people...the law doesn't demand that the gun even be registered in some states..


I didn't know that

You misunderstood completely. My country, your country....The criminals don't care.

[KevinD]

True, Hal. This is sort of a problem. Personally, I cut up guns I don't want anymore, but then, I have never had any "expensive" ones either. I am not at all against registering my guns, but am worried what the government will/would do with that info. After all, the gubbmint has such a great track record, lol

[Hal-9000]

You misunderstood completely. My country, your country....The criminals don't care.

Not really, but thanks :thumbsup:

[Hal-9000]

True, Hal. This is sort of a problem. Personally, I cut up guns I don't want anymore, but then, I have never had any "expensive" ones either. I am not at all against registering my guns, but am worried what the government will/would do with that info. After all, the gubbmint has such a great track record, lol

yeah sort of a problem :lol:


with a universal law that all guns should be registered to an owner...at least then when the bullets fly there could some sort of accountability. You have to start somewhere and allowing whole states to run around with unregistered weapons is not the way to do it...

I can't honestly believe there's not at least a simple law in all states that says firearms have to be registered to a person.....explains quite a bit really.

[Griffin]

2000 years ago the areas with the largest meteor fields were the most prolific in smelting iron for swords and other armaments.

Today's internet you can download files and build guns with a 3-D printer...go figure.

[Hal-9000]

the age of enlightenment so it seems....

[RBP]

On one hand I can see the legitimate law enforcement applications of guns registered with the current owner... then again the criminals won't be part of that so I can see that side too.

Either way it should be a state issue... I don't want the Feds to have that list because they don't need it and it's a civil liberties risk.

[MrsM]

On one hand I can see the legitimate law enforcement applications of guns registered with the current owner... then again the criminals won't be part of that so I can see that side too.

Either way it should be a state issue... I don't want the Feds to have that list because they don't need it and it's a civil liberties risk.

But if every legit gun was registered then wouldn't it be easier to punish someone for having an unregistered gun?

And would it also help in some kind of trail to see how this criminal may have got that gun?

[Hal-9000]

On one hand I can see the legitimate law enforcement applications of guns registered with the current owner... then again the criminals won't be part of that so I can see that side too.

Either way it should be a state issue... I don't want the Feds to have that list because they don't need it and it's a civil liberties risk.


I envision this - USA says - All guns in the country must be registered to an owner. Of course the majority of the bad guys won't be doing this. So you're left with a demographic...the haves and the have nots. Haves are responsible gun owners with registered firearms, have nots are everyone else.

It won't stop the gun crime from occurring but it's got to be a better situation having a wholesale blanket rule to start weeding out the fuckwads using illegal firearms, perhaps making it more difficult over time (months and years) for them to easily procure weapons. If you leave the current situation as is, you have some states keeping record, while others let caution fly to the wind so to speak.

In my mind you have to do everything possible to make it even the slightest bit more uncomfortable for the bad guys to get weapons. If there's no structure, there's no deterrent or implied penalty for a guy who buys a piece with the intent of using it on another human for whatever reason.

and yes.....I know....the bad guys are still going to get guns no matter what......that's the part that always makes me sad about reading those stories :(

[Griffin]

And would it also help in some kind of trail to see how this criminal may have got that gun?

That is the fallacy of the entire issue. Criminals don't want you to know.

[Hal-9000]

But if every legit gun was registered then wouldn't it be easier to punish someone for having an unregistered gun?

And would it also help in some kind of trail to see how this criminal may have got that gun?

bingo...it wouldn't stop the fckwads but little by little, it would close the gap

in the very least, the criminals would have to explore other avenues when procuring a gun, knowing that they may get caught with an unregistered weapon and the heavy consequence that would go with it.

My idea - make the fine about 100, 000 dollars

[Griffin]

My idea - make the fine about 100, 000 dollars

It doesn't make a rats ass if the fine is a slap or 1 of obamas trillion dollars...
guns are out there, the fuckwads will have them, the decision that has to be made is will you have one to defend yourself or will you be one of the statistics?

[Hal-9000]

It doesn't make a rats ass if the fine is a slap or 1 of obamas trillion dollars...
guns are out there, the fuckwads will have them, the decision that has to be made is will you have one to defend yourself or will you be one of the statistics?

I don't know...you exist in a fairly unregulated system in that respect and simply saying - It will always happen no matter what you do - is a defeatist attitude.

Why don't you try to at least implement some measures before saying it won't make a difference? Since you've never really tried on a nationwide basis it's a little disconcerting to keep hearing - I need guns because the other guys (fuckwads) have guns. It's a climate of fear and escalation no matter how right you are in your observation. Something has to change to stop that fear.

and Griff I hear what you're saying, if some idiot walked into a mall where I was shopping and started shooting random people, my first instinct would be to fire back...believe it or don't.

[Griffin]

because it shouldn't be regulated any differently than any other purchase.

Cars kill more people world wide than guns.
Bombs can be made from fertilizer and pool chemicals.
Crossbows use to be assault weapons before the term was made mainstream.

[Muddy]

Gun are used to kill 11,000 people a year over here.. Under 500 everywhere else.. I love my rights but there is some madness out there you have to admit..

[Southern Belle]

None of this will affect criminals. Only "law abiding" citizens. Who or what will determine who is mentally eligible for gun ownership?

[Loser]

But if every legit gun was registered then wouldn't it be easier to punish someone for having an unregistered gun?

And would it also help in some kind of trail to see how this criminal may have got that gun?

FOIA Is the only reason I'm against a "List"

Because any enterprising criminal can file a FOIA claim, and have the address and list of firearms owned, of every gun owner in america.

If that were protected against FOIA requests, I would be all for it.

[FBD]

bingo...it wouldn't stop the fckwads but little by little, it would close the gap

in the very least, the criminals would have to explore other avenues when procuring a gun, knowing that they may get caught with an unregistered weapon and the heavy consequence that would go with it.

My idea - make the fine about 100, 000 dollarsNow apply "little by little" to 300 million, and that equates to never having all the guns registered. or anything even close to the notion.


I don't know...you exist in a fairly unregulated system in that respect and simply saying - It will always happen no matter what you do - is a defeatist attitude.

Why don't you try to at least implement some measures before saying it won't make a difference? Since you've never really tried on a nationwide basis it's a little disconcerting to keep hearing - I need guns because the other guys (fuckwads) have guns. It's a climate of fear and escalation no matter how right you are in your observation. Something has to change to stop that fear.

and Griff I hear what you're saying, if some idiot walked into a mall where I was shopping and started shooting random people, my first instinct would be to fire back...believe it or don't.hm, because we have to give up rights in order to see if it works, and then once that happens, no way shape or form it would be rescinded by our slave masters...I mean...benevolent protectors in the government.


None of this will affect criminals. Only "law abiding" citizens. Who or what will determine who is mentally eligible for gun ownership?Why, an unelected board of people that are pre-screened to have the "correct" ideology and can apply that without passion at anyone and everyone necessary.

The federal government thinks the 10th amendment doesnt exist. Fuck Them. With Capital Letters.