Gun issue represents tough politics for Obama

[iusmc2002]

No, that wasn't my point. Are you being obtuse on purpose? How could I be a gun owner and want to ban them???? That absolutely makes no sense.

Yes, the guns that they bought were done legally. The point of my question was just as I asked it before: would enforcement of existing law or changes in law to help keep guns out of he hands of individuals who showed serious mental health issues? I don't know and that's why I asked the question. Aside from trying to address that issue I see no reason for any more gun laws/restrictions.

Yeah, a little obtuse on purpose. You asked if the laws in place would have prevented law-abiding (at the time) individuals from purchasing legal weapons. What more laws would need to be enforced? Other than the ones already in place/enforced at the time of their purchases and subsequent carrying of the weapons. What more is there to do?

 

[deadeye]

The Mayans being right about the world ending next year has a higher probability of occurring than the President taking away firearms.

Well if they did the calendar right.

 

[Kevatc]

Yeah, a little obtuse on purpose. You asked if the laws in place would have prevented law-abiding (at the time) individuals from purchasing legal weapons. What more laws would need to be enforced? Other than the ones already in place/enforced at the time of their purchases and subsequent carrying of the weapons. What more is there to do?

Not sure and that is the basis of my question. I don't know if there is a way to keep guns out of the hands of mentally unstable yet law abiding citizens such as Cho and Loughner. Maybe there isn't a way. All I know is that each time a situation like Virginia Tech or Arizona happens it gives the anti-gun people a little more support. The gun folks will always be able to argue the anti-gun crowd into the ground just by using facts. However, all it takes is a V-Tech or Giffords shoot and it becomes a bit harder because the optics look horrible.

 

[Grunwald]

Obama is a political realist, not an idealist, that should be painfully obvious by now. Honestly I don't think we have all that much to worry about unless some dramatic incident causes large scale public outcry - in which case he will likely feel compelled to at least pay lip service to gun control. I think Romney would likely do the same, I don't trust him one bit.

Have to disagree with you on that one. As proof I would like to point to the passing of ObamaCare. There was massive opposition and yet it was rammed through and using budgetary procedures also. He also broke at least 2 of his major campaign promises during the process.
1) All debate would be on CSPAN and/or open sessions for all to see. In reality it was done behind closed doors and with Republican shut out.
2) All bills were to be published for public review and feedback for at least 48 hours. That also did not happen.

 

[Grunwald]

It is my opinion that when Obama gets re-elected he will do something that will not make any of us very happy. Since he might not be able to get anything through Congress, he will very likely issues an executive order.
Before you dismiss that possibility, remember that it was the old shrub that did just that in 1989 (Import Ban on Assault Rifles Becomes Permanent - NYTimes.com).

 

[swoop]

It is my opinion that when Obama gets re-elected he will do something that will not make any of us very happy. Since he might not be able to get anything through Congress, he will very likely issues an executive order.
Before you dismiss that possibility, remember that it was the old shrub that did just that in 1989 (Import Ban on Assault Rifles Becomes Permanent - NYTimes.com).

Yep! Both shrubs were bad, but Barry O is in a class of his own..

 

[deen_ad]

Ron Paul

I'd vote for him IF I THOUGHT HE HAD A CHANCE OF WINNING!! Otherwise it'd be a wasted vote, one that might be needed to keep Obwan out of his second term!

 

[deen_ad]

Obama has vowed to figure out what went wrong with the operation and make sure it's corrected, but with Republicans seizing on the issue to attack the White House, the politics around taking action on guns hasn't gotten any easier.

Obwan can't figure out what went wrong and correct it?

How about "the public found out about it and now he and Holder need to step down".?

So now trying to find out the truth is an "attack" by the Republicans?

 

[pogi]

The Mayans being right about the world ending next year has a higher probability of occurring than the President taking away firearms.

He's not going to take your guns. The Zero is just going to prevent you from buying new guns and, better yet, prevent you from buying ammo to feed said guns.

Ammo availability is the key IMO.

 

[Sling Blade]

He's not going to take your guns. The Zero is just going to prevent you from buying new guns and, better yet, prevent you from buying ammo to feed said guns.

Ammo availability is the key IMO.

Talk like this started the panic hoarding when Obama got elected.

 

[pogi]

Talk like this started the panic hoarding when Obama got elected.

Do you honestly think they are going door to door to confiscate weapons? The soft spot is ammo.

Make no mistake about it, if Bammy gets elected again, they are going after guns in one fashion or another.

 

[Grunwald]

Do you honestly think they are going door to door to confiscate weapons? The soft spot is ammo.

Make no mistake about it, if Bammy gets elected again, they are going after guns in one fashion or another.

Read up on Chicago politics if you want to know how it will be done. Once you know how they think and function in that stinkhole of a city, you will be able to figure out what this administration will attempt to do.

 

[Trlsmn]

Make no mistake about it, if Bammy gets elected again, they are going after guns in one fashion or another.

+11nty billions

What he said!

 

[pogi]

Read up on Chicago politics if you want to know how it will be done. Once you know how they think and function in that stinkhole of a city, you will be able to figure out what this administration will attempt to do.

Exactly. People assume that .gov is going to go through the normal channels to acheive gun control objectives. With the Kenyan and his Chitcago thugocracy pals, all bets are off and the end around play is on.

 

[locobob]

Have to disagree with you on that one. As proof I would like to point to the passing of ObamaCare. There was massive opposition and yet it was rammed through and using budgetary procedures also. He also broke at least 2 of his major campaign promises during the process.
1) All debate would be on CSPAN and/or open sessions for all to see. In reality it was done behind closed doors and with Republican shut out.
2) All bills were to be published for public review and feedback for at least 48 hours. That also did not happen.

Huh, well I kinda see "Obama care" as proof of the opposite. It ended up an ugly mess and a give away to big HMO's, not really what Obama was initially aiming for. Yet he signed and promoted it because as a realist you take what you can get and claim victory when you can.
I guess I just don't see any driving force behind a push for gun control in the current political climate. It's a hugely decisive issue and has proven to be a loser for the Dem's in recent times. There really isn't much campaign money on the side of gun-control either.... what business gains from gun control? I think what we are seeing is more of a fear campaign being pushed by the right than reality. Now don't get me wrong, if we have another big ugly mass shooting I fully expect the Obama administration to put on a bit of a show, I just think its not going to get much beyond that because he isn't going to put it on the line for a bad risk/reward equation.

 

[Trlsmn]

Huh, well I kinda see "Obama care" as proof of the opposite. It ended up an ugly mess and a give away to big HMO's, not really what Obama was initially aiming for. Yet he signed and promoted it because as a realist you take what you can get and claim victory when you can.

Victory? Forcing the American people to purchase a product from a private corporation is victory? Victory for who? Certainly a victory for corporate America and Wallstreet bankers!

I guess I just don't see any driving force behind a push for gun control in the current political climate. It's a hugely decisive issue and has proven to be a loser for the Dem's in recent times. There really isn't much campaign money on the side of gun-control either.... what business gains from gun control? I think what we are seeing is more of a fear campaign being pushed by the right than reality. Now don't get me wrong, if we have another big ugly mass shooting I fully expect the Obama administration to put on a bit of a show, I just think its not going to get much beyond that because he isn't going to put it on the line for a bad risk/reward equation.

What you should be seeing is the real truth in that Democrats are not committing political suicide because Obama wants a second term in office, just wait till you see a lame duck Obama and you are in for a rude awakening. Me thinks you want to talk yourself into voting for Obama even though he had been an abject failure as a leader.

 

[BrentN]

I disagree with you 100% locobob, but I hope you're right. Certainly you have to agree with the lack of transparency that was promised, as we got "you will have to pass this bill to find out what's in it" lip service from Speaker Pelosi.

 

[locobob]

Victory? Forcing the American people to purchase a product from a private corporation is victory? Victory for who? Certainly a victory for corporate American and Wallstreet bankers!



What you should be seeing is the real truth in that Democrats are not committing political suicide because Obama wants a second term in office, just wait till you see a lame duck Obama and you are in for a rude awakening. Me thinks you want to talk yourself into voting for Obama even though he had been an abject failure as a leader.

I'm not sure where you are getting these ideas, that is not even close to what I wrote, perhaps you should reread what I said without applying whatever strange decoder glasses you are apparently wearing.... I have no love for Obama or his health care reform bill.
I will probably vote 3rd party in 2012 as Obama is owned by Wall St. and the Republican candidates are pathetic. And don't even try the spoiler argument on me - I consider it completely invalid that my vote is somehow owned by a corrupt two-party system.

P.S. I am 100% with you in opposition of government requiring people to purchase something from private corporations.

 

[2506]

+11nty billions

What he said!

I'm so convinced this won't happen, I'll put my money where my mouth is. Who wants a piece of the action? Of course, all bets are off if Obama isn't re-elected.

 

[locobob]

I disagree with you 100% locobob, but I hope you're right. Certainly you have to agree with the lack of transparency that was promised, as we got "you will have to pass this bill to find out what's in it" lip service from Speaker Pelosi.

Well I hope I'm right too. All I'm trying to say here is that I don't think Obama is cackling behind the scenes over some grand plot to disarm America. I think gun control is probably not much more than a smudged little mark on his shopping list, its an item that won't end up in his basket unless he gets pestered into seeing some political gain to be had with it. A scenario that is currently unlikely in my opinion.