RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

The Guardian UK reports: "Bloomberg urges President to use executive powers to close loopholes but tighter laws will require congressional approval."

President Obama has been urged to go around Congress on gun control. (photo: AP)
President Obama has been urged to go around Congress on gun control. (photo: AP)

Obama Attacks Pro-Gun Lobby As He Faces Calls to Bypass Lawmakers

By Ewen MacAskill and Ed Pilkington, Guardian UK

15 January 13



Bloomberg urges president to use executive powers to close loopholes but tighter laws will require congressional approval

resident Obama vowed on Monday to act decisively to prevent a repeat of the Newtown school shooting, issuing a defiant message to the pro-gun lobby, which he accused of "ginning up fear" among law-abiding gun owners that the federal government would confiscate their weapons.

Exactly a month after the tragedy in which 20 children and six staff were killed at Sandy Hook elementary school, Obama added his voice to a rising chorus of demands across the country for firm action to stem the spate of shooting sprees. The debate over how to protect the nation's children from further massacres has reached fever pitch on the eve of vice-president Joe Biden's formal presentation to Obama of his recommendations for curbing gun violence.

Obama told a White House press conference that he would begin on Monday to review the proposals from Biden, whom he appointed as head of a special gun violence panel in the wake of the Newtown tragedy. Asked about a sharp increase in gun sales over the past month, and about widespread opposition to new gun laws among both Republicans in the House and rural Democratic representatives, Obama delivered a stern message to the pro-gun lobby.

"As for people lining up and purchasing more guns, I think we have seen for some time now that those who oppose any commonsense gun control or gun safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that somehow the federal government is about to take all your guns away," he said.

"There is probably an economic element to that. It is obviously good for business. But I think that those of who have looked at this problem have repeatedly said that responsible gun owners, people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship - they don't have anything to worry about."

The president indicated that the mounting expressions of opposition would not cow him from pressing ahead with his already-stated ambitions to introduce a congressional ban on semi-automatic weapons and a limit on the number of bullets held in high-capacity magazines, as well as a requirement for background checks on all gun buyers.

Bearing in mind the likely difficulty of steering such measures through the House and Senate, Obama said the administration was also actively looking at moves that the president could effect without congressional approval, such as a more effective system for tracking guns that fall into the hands of criminals.

Obama's executive powers were also invoked by Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, who has been a leading proponent of tougher gun controls. He exhorted Obama to show true leadership through "a stroke of his pen".

Speaking at Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg outlined four ways in which the president could immediately make a difference by wielding his executive powers.

The president could order all federal agencies to hand over relevant records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, to improve the current situation in which some 52 out of 60 federal agencies were found to provide zero mental health records to the database, thus profoundly impairing its usefulness in preventing guns falling in the hands of mentally ill people.

Obama should make it a priority, Bloomberg said, to increase prosecutions of criminals found to be lying when they undergo federal background checks. In 2010, there were more than 76,000 cases referred by the FBI to the justice department, but only 44 were prosecuted.

"That's is a sad and lethal joke. These are felony cases involving criminals trying to buy guns. It is shameful and it has to end, and the president can do it just by picking up the phone and telling the Justice Department: 'This is your job, go do it,'" he said.

The other two executive orders identified by Bloomberg was the appointing of a director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a position that has remained vacant for six years partly due to congressional resistance; and the repeal of the so-called Tiahrt restrictions, which strictly limit public access to information about the movement and trafficking of guns, including a requirement on the FBI to destroy records of all gun background checks within 24 hours.

Despite the potential significance of Obama's executive powers, the fact remains that the most seminal aspects of any attempt to tighten gun laws are likely to be those that require congressional approval. That sets the president on an immediate collision course with the Republican majority of the House, as well as pro-gun Democrats.

"For these politicians, the votes aren't there," said Dr Stephen Halbrook, a legal expert on the second amendment who has presented cases on gun controls before the US supreme court.

It also pits the White House directly against the National Rifle Association, the most powerful pro-gun lobby that is staunchly opposed to almost all of the proposals on the table.

In an attempt to dilute the NRA's influence by widening the debate as far as possible, Biden has spoken to a wide range of organisations over the past week, including law enforcement bodies, gun control groups and leading gun retailers such as Walmart. The NRA and the umbrella group of the gun industry, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, were included in the conversations.

A poll by the independent Pew Research Center shows broad support for some of Obama's gun proposals, with 85% in favour of tightening up a loophole to prevent sales at gun shows unless there are the same background checks as for licensed dealers. About 80% favour laws to prevent people with mental health problems buying guns, according to Pew.

The poll, conducted between January 9 and 13, also found a majority - 67 % - in favour of Obama's plan for a federal database to track gun sales, while 55% supported a ban on assault weapons.

Pew's research suggests strong public support for the National Rifle Association's proposal to post armed guards in schools, with 64% in favour and 32% against.

The NRA was widely derided in parts of the media after making the proposal in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting, but it appears that on this issue at least it is closer to the public mood. The poll showed only 40% in favour of teachers and school officials having guns and 57% against.

As they seek to build political momentum for change, Obama and Biden can draw on the support of Newtown itself, where the 14 December tragedy occurred. The town's police chief, Michael Kehoe, joined the chorus for reforms, telling NBC that he backed demands for a ban on military-style assault weapons similar to a federal prohibition that lapsed in 2004.

A new non-profit group comprising local people from Newtown, called Sandy Hook Promise, was also launched on Monday. Its mission is to support moves to prevent further gun tragedies.

"Sandy Hook Promise is committed to making Newtown be remembered as the place where we came together as a community and as a nation and decided we must do everything we can to prevent tragedies like this from happening again," the group said.

In New York, a state which already has some of the most restrictive gun controls in place, a deal was reported to have been thrashed out over the weekend that would see a further tightening of the regulations. The deal would see the size of gun magazines being reduced from the current 10 bullets to just seven, and introduce additional restrictions on ownership of assault weapons.

The measures have been aggressively pushed by Andrew Cuomo, governor of New York state, who wants to see New York act as a role model to other state legislatures across the country. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

-37 # EgoSum01 2013-01-15 12:40
They took people’s jobs to China to save us from unions, but I still had a job, so I said nothing.

They took people’s sons to war to save us from terrorism, but I was not in the military, so I said nothing.

They took people’s pensions to save us from depression, but I still had a pension, so I said nothing.

They took people’s guns away to save us from ourselves, but I didn’t own a gun, so I said nothing.

But one day I decided to say something, and then they took me, and by that time no one dared say anything.
+2 # CAMUS1111 2013-01-15 13:53
+13 # noitall 2013-01-15 14:07
Sort of true though. I'd like to take guns away from most of the crackpots that have them in this country but aside from that, its interesting how that is the one issue where Obama hears the People's cry. But when we protest the rape of our environment, our food, and our health by greedy 'extractors', pharmaceutical and chemical companies, the weapons come out against those protesting peacefully. How about getting the drones out of the sky (instead of considering arming them for domestic use), the rubber bullets out of police guns, tear gas and mace off of their holsters and assault rifles out of their hands. They're trying to maintain PEACE among those practicing their constitutional rights for kripes sake! Back us, OBAMA, on things that empower the people not just these things that give the (rightfully) paranoid elite fear of American People! Theirs (the elite) is an armed and aggressive attack on our life, our health, our future in this one-time democratic Republic.
+16 # bmiluski 2013-01-15 14:52
Dear Sweet one wants to take your gun away. Why can't you people get that through your heads?
+20 # bmiluski 2013-01-15 14:57
And by the way, since the expiration of the gun ban in 2004, the number of shootings per year has doubled, and the number of victims per year has nearly tripled. Three of the bloodiest four years shown here occurred since the expiration.
+13 # DaveM 2013-01-15 12:47
We have had several recent Presidents who legislated via Executive Order and "signing statement" (a certain Bush comes to mind). They were quite rightly criticized for doing so. This is not the act of the leader of a democratic republic. It is the modus operandi of a dictator. It was when any prior President did it and it is now.

Reading between the lines of what is advocated here, at least part of it involves a national registry of the "mentally ill". This means an end to privacy as far as medical records are concerned. And just what will be done with these records?

Will anyone who has gone to a grief counselor or been sent to detox be denied the right to buy a gun? Will everyone who has ever been on antidepressants (by some estimates, 40% of the population) be regarded as a potential danger to society?

It is only one step from this to a call for "something to be done about those people" (never mind that the "mentally ill" are less likely to commit a violent crime than the general populace). The crumbling remnants of decaying state asylums stand as a lesson of what happened when this call was raised before (more Americans died in psychiatric hospitals between 1946-1989 than did during World War II).

How sure are you that you are not one of "those people"? How sure are you that someone will not decide that "something ought to be done" about you?
+6 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-15 17:31
I seriously doubt your statement that the "mentally ill" are less likely to commit a violent crime than the general populace." And my reason for thinking this way. I do think Bush and Cheney are mentally ill. Basis for my conclusion or suspicion. Invaded Iraq based on the big world-wide lie. Killed 500,000 people- civilians, including military service personnel to take over Iraqi oil and oil contracts. Cheney could not think his way through Yale to gain a diploma. How many times did he flunk out only to have his wealthy friends and family get him reinstated. And, I would also include Colin Powell, Mr. "Chicken Little" as being mentally ill for giving the "go ahead" to the infamous war. Why is Colin Powell, Bush and Cheney not in an insane asylum for the mentally ill? These three POS are responsible for far more needless deaths than all school murders combined.And where is the American citizen's outrage against these horrible bastards? There will be fewer and fewer outrages as the Republicans re-write history books being handed out to school children. I again quote George Bernard Shaw: the longer I'm here, the more I think this planet is used as an asylum for the insane."
+1 # Michael_K 2013-01-15 22:54
Quoting Eldon J. Bloedorn:
I do think Bush and Cheney are mentally ill. Basis for my conclusion or suspicion. Invaded Iraq based on the big world-wide lie... And, I would also include Colin Powell, Mr. "Chicken Little" as being mentally ill for giving the "go ahead" to the infamous war.

This is fascinating.Bus h and Cheney, and Colin Powell are mentally ill, on the basis of their criminally insane actions, BUT Obama is very rationally engaging in and expanding upon the very same crimes? Your ability to selectively deny reality is indeed awesome!
-1 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-16 00:00
Your ability to deny the truth of Bush, Cheney and Colin Powell being war thugs, criminals wanted in certain countries around the world for war crimes is interesting. Which is to say,your reasoning goes something like this, "mommy, little Joey broke my favorite doll." Mommy, "what did you do to Joey?" Little girl, "I broke his arm." So, now,none of the parties can be called bad" Which is to say, "you know that Bush, Cheney and Powell are like Obama. Since Obama is doing the same thing as Bush, Cheney and Powell, so what's your point? Two wrongs make a right. Now that Obama is just as crooked in some ways, well that clears Bush, Cheney and Powell.But not Obama"

Why not take the courage and stick to the issue. Bush and Cheney are wanted in certain countries, to be arrested for war crimes as I write this missive to you. Certain Eastern U.S. states, if Bush Cheney leave the airplane, set foot in that state, they will be arrested for war crimes. You can check this out on your computer.

You have selected non-reality. No courage to face the Bush, Cheney, Powell war crimes as truth. "'cause you knows da why? Well, da Obama da man is da just as da rotten."

Some ways, Obama is a war criminal. I do not deny this fact. Can Bush, Cheney, and Powell be charged and quite possibility convicted in certain foreign countries
for war crimes? No question they could and would. Could Obama be charged and convicted in certain countries for war crimes? Probably.
0 # Michael_K 2013-01-16 13:50
Your ability to rationalize your favoured evil is AWESOME! I blame the American Education apparatus.
+3 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-16 16:23
Your reasoning is that Obama's wrong doing clears Bush, Cheney, Powell. I quote to you from George Bernard Shaw:"never wrestle with a pig. You will get dirty and the pig loves it."
0 # Michael_K 2013-01-17 00:25
Your reading comprehension cannot possibly be so poor as you pretend it to be. Far from saying that Obama's egregious sins would somehow exonerate his fellow criminals who preceded him, my point is that he should be tried in an International Court of Justice and hang from the same gallows as those other blood-covered miscreants.

A consistent application of indignation for identical misdeeds would be a welcome change from the scoundrelly supporters of both major parties.
0 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-17 11:36
Please take the time to understand what I said. Your position is that "if Bush, Cheney and Powell did what they did, criminal acts against society, so what?" Your view, "Obama is no better so Bush Cheney and Powell are cleared of all wrong doing." Take the time to understand what I said. I do not like to wrestle with a pig. And I'm not saying you are a pig. I'm not on this board to put people down. Let's share understanding, OK?
-2 # Michael_K 2013-01-17 13:30
Once again, you misstate my position. I guess your reading comprehension really is THAT bad! I have to say it's awesome..not in a good way.
0 # Michael_K 2013-01-19 18:04
One last time... you say "Your position is that "if Bush, Cheney and Powell did what they did, criminal acts against society, so what?" Your view, "Obama is no better so Bush Cheney and Powell are cleared of all wrong doing."

That is NOT my view, on the contrary! Not only do you get it wrong, radically and comically wrong, but then you aggravate your case by insisting. It's as if you stamped your own forehead with a most unflattering assessment of your intellect. That's what those 2 "thumbs down" are equivalent to.
+6 # DaveM 2013-01-15 12:49
I will add:

I do not know whether the Constitutionali ty of Executive Orders has ever been challenged. I do understand that they have their place. But my understanding is that the Constitutional authority is limited to actions taking during a grave national emergency. Anything else is a violation of the Separation of Powers.
+35 # Bookmark 7 2013-01-15 12:51
I think the President should move forward with restrictions that are within his authority. Continue to stress that all guns are not in jeapardy of being taken away...but no one needs a semi-automatic weapon f/protection or for hunting.
+40 # LeeBlack 2013-01-15 13:33
If someone needs a 30 round clip for hunting - he/she is not a real hunter. If someone needs a 30 round clip to protect their home from burglars/thieve s they really aren't capable of handling a gun.

If you think you need automatic weapons to protect yourself from a government takeover you are paranoid.
0 # 4yourinformation 2013-01-15 14:25
You don't understand. You CAN use a semi-auto for hunting. There are even nice granddaddy wood stocked semi-auto rifles (Browning BAR). You probably will only use ONE round and may need one more for a follow up shot in case you didn't quite get a heart or lung in a deer. You probably will have maybe 5 rounds total in a magazine, even in a 20 or 30 round clip. We don't use 30 rounds to hunt. I have these clips in case the SHTF in a world where the environment, energy and economic structures are precarious. The SHTF day is probably a ways off...I HOPE. However, the NYT has shut down its environment desk. I guess it's already too late to affect climate change to them. I'm afraid they're right. This shale oil nonsense is just the last of the recoverable fossil petroleum left. I know many other lefty/libs like me that are just as armed and getting ready with gardening skills and community organizing to stave off the worst of a nation that took all of its post WWII wealth and built the biggest monument to sprawl in the world. The dumbest damned thing we could do in a finite fossil fuel world. Thanks to that stupid plan, we are not locally prepared to sustain ourselves when the last of the cheap energy goes away, as it is every day. Ironically, this recession is holding down consumption for a while longer. No magic bullet technomagic will save us at this point. Thank our "leaders" for this mess.
-1 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-16 22:57
Thank our "leaders" for this mess.
0 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-16 22:49
You make sense. Now how are you going to convince the "old white Southern male" Republicans which usually also includes the Tea Baggers of your logic? I've been around for 72 years. I've not in my life time seen as much hatred as I now see in the Republican Party particularly toward the working man, Afro-Americans and Mexicans. Only possible exception, the Joe McCarty era which I "endured" while living in the state of Wisconsin.
+9 # letsfixit 2013-01-15 13:54
Most pistols are semi auto. Believe you mean assault weapon.
+21 # David Starr 2013-01-15 13:29
Both the NRA and the Pentagon, as well as the CIA, should be put on a tight leash, given the general thinking of its leaderships where violence is merely the equivelant of playing "Cowboys and Indians."
-40 # Aliazer 2013-01-15 13:49
I guess Mr. Obama is planning to honing his "decree" issuing propensities for future eventualities.

As I recall, Hitler as well as other tyrants began the same way:Initially being elected democratically while gradually becoming tyrants, ruling by decree!!!
+7 # DPM 2013-01-15 14:46
If our other elected officials would do the job for which the People, not the corporate "persons", elected them, a president, this one or others, would not be able to rule by decree. Don't want that to happen? Tell your senators and representatives to legislate for the people of this country instead of the "persons" of the money!
+11 # bmiluski 2013-01-15 15:00
So you're calling Ronald Reagan, the lord and saviour of the repugs Hitler because........ As the assault weapon ban vote neared, Reagan — who as president had signed 1986 legislation loosening restrictions on guns — wrote a letter with former Presidents Ford and Carter to the House of Representatives urging them to vote in favor of the ban.

“We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style assault weapons. This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety,” the letter said.
-15 # MidwestTom 2013-01-15 14:03
The FBI reports that 96.5% of gun homicides are from pistols, not rifles, and the so-called assault rifles make up less than 5% of the rifle inventory in this country. The last school shooting, ( I think that it was in California ) was with a shotgun, should we try to ban them too? There is no way that the Newtown shootings could have been stopped without someone else having a gun.
+8 # John_Fisher 2013-01-15 16:38
"There is no way that the Newtown shootings could have been stopped without someone else having a gun."

The shootings could have been stopped IN ADVANCE had he been denied access to legally purchased guns or if he had been helped effectively with his issues.
-3 # Michael_K 2013-01-15 22:57
Actually, no. The weapons were procured quite legally by his mom. Not that reality matters at all in influencing your world-view.
+4 # Dion Giles 2013-01-16 01:07
Reality is that the deranged hater could get hold of a combat weapon because the laws are lax enough to allow his "responsible" mother to lay in an armoury. Hopefully Obama will be able to deprive the gun freaks of combat weapons. He'll be looking for public backing.
+3 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-15 19:44
Tom, get your facts straight. "There is no way the Newtown shootings could have been stopped without someone (else)having a gun." Suppose the person who did the criminal act, the shooting did not have a gun. Would that not have resulted in "no shooting?" If assault rifles make up "less than 5% of the rifle inventory in this country," what is your point? The point is this. Massive murders can occur with an assault in a minimum amount of time. An NRA sportsman this afternoon said, "a deer hunter who needs an assault rifle to kill a deer is most likely a lousy shot (LOL) and should not be permitted, licensed to use this kind of weapon." (He may kill more than just a deer-perhaps some of his fellow hunters.) Well, that is a refreshing angle on this issue.
-12 # MidwestTom 2013-01-15 14:05
Please research what has happened inn Australia after they took away guns, and required that those kept must be kept under lock and key. All categories of crimes increased substantially.
+6 # reiverpacific 2013-01-15 19:29
Quoting MidwestTom:
Please research what has happened inn Australia after they took away guns, and required that those kept must be kept under lock and key. All categories of crimes increased substantially.

Where DO you get this crap.
It's the exact opposite, as a few Aussie posters on RSN will confirm and have done already. And they also hav Universal health care to fix any wounds without bankruptcy looming!
0 # Dion Giles 2013-01-16 00:31
OK, Joe Biden HAS researched it. Arising from his inquiry, University of Sydney public health researcher Philip Alpers has made a study of Australian gun ownership and showed that although gun ownership has crept back since Prime Minister John Howard in 1996 put an end to a series of gun massacres by standing up to the gun freaks it has been according to strict laws that preclude accumulating combat weapons directed to massacre and insurrection. Also, per capita gun ownership is still well below the level of the massacre era.

The rules governing firearms in Australia since Howard faced down the gun freaks are set out at Worth studying as it WORKS. That's why Joe Biden is looking into it. Much better than inventing data as Midwest Tom has done. Gun homicides per capita in Australia are a small fraction of open-slather America's.

Obama is moving against combat weapons which could enable an insurrection followed by a coup and in some quarters are intended to. See and
+3 # reiverpacific 2013-01-15 14:15
These Congressional cockroaches -with apologies to the wee beasties at the comparison- (including some blue-dog Dems -again with apologies to any blue pooches) are utterly in the pockets of the NRA lobby and their thuggish leaders; they'll never pass anything anti-murderous. Or ANYTHING proposed by Obama come to that.
It's all in the name of self-defense after all innit?!
Wish they'd do like the soldiers who massacred Big Foot's band at Wounded Knee and fire in a circle -that would take care of quite few of them -but with the NRA leaders in the middle as armed targets. Even that might not change their empty minds but it would thin their ranks.
Just writing down some delicious mind pictures.
0 # Douglas Jack 2013-01-18 20:57
reiverpacific, I generally like your posts. This one kind of gets swallowed up by frustration with the violence we abhor, but it is an interesting analogy for America today. Are America's paranoid supposed-defend ers locked in a circle of death firing at each other to the tune of 30,000 gun deaths per year. Nancy Lanza seems to fit the stereotype, armed, trained & finally murdered by the son she could do no more than share her paranoid fantasy with. As paranoid gun owners raise their families on negative fear instead of proactive cultural building of the positive so many young & others are accidentally & intentionally killed by advanced weapons. Your mind pictures have some sad truth to them.
-17 # kerryle00 2013-01-15 14:16
Seems to me, that many of the so-called progressives on this website would prefer a Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin to Jefferson.
+5 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-15 19:54
Your right to be heard does not mean that you have a right to be taken seriously.
0 # eric_frodsham 2013-01-15 14:45
No need to tighten up on gun laws, we need a strong 2nd amendment. Time to focus on the real social problems that lead to such incidents. If Obama really wants to do something about guns then quit fighting wars.
-19 # aaheart 2013-01-15 15:32
Just how rock solid are the facts about the children who died? Their parents were only shown photographs from ME Carver's "great" photographers. Evidence from the crime scene was only brought out under the cover of night. Closed coffins, locked. What DO we REALLY know?

Obama and Bloomberg have jumped to the conclusion that Adam Lanza killed his mother and 26 others, but do we know that on the basis of evidence or speculation by law enforcement?

According to sources who have discussed the case with local police, the press releases were coming in from Washington DC. Is that connected to US AttorneyGeneral Holder's visits with Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy to discuss the new gun control strategy, Project Longevity two weeks before Sandy Hook became news?

We are being rushed to face new gun control legislation while being stonewalled about what really happened. That's not how participatory democracy in a constitutional republic is supposed to work.
+5 # reiverpacific 2013-01-15 19:32
Quoting aaheart:
Just how rock solid are the facts about the children who died? Their parents were only shown photographs from ME Carver's "great" photographers. Evidence from the crime scene was only brought out under the cover of night. Closed coffins, locked. What DO we REALLY know?

Obama and Bloomberg have jumped to the conclusion that Adam Lanza killed his mother and 26 others, but do we know that on the basis of evidence or speculation by law enforcement?

According to sources who have discussed the case with local police, the press releases were coming in from Washington DC. Is that connected to US AttorneyGeneral Holder's visits with Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy to discuss the new gun control strategy, Project Longevity two weeks before Sandy Hook became news?

We are being rushed to face new gun control legislation while being stonewalled about what really happened. That's not how participatory democracy in a constitutional republic is supposed to work.

Oh Gawd!
And what evidence do we have that you are a real person and not an FBI, CIA, Fox, Stalinist, Fascist, Tea Party, Zionist, Heavy Metal, Sci-fi channel, Dr Who, Star Trek or Baby-Doc plant.
+2 # Douglas Jack 2013-01-15 19:51
aaheart, The focus of your comment is some kind of Sherlock Holmes mystery novel. You are isolating Sandy Hook Elementary killing of 20 children & 8 adults (including himself) as if it isn't an atrocity in itself from 30,000 gun deaths per year every year. Doesn't this all strike you as a USA emergency?

To give you a point of comparison for your "Constitutional Republic", during the entire American Revolutionary war between 1775 and 1782 25,000 American revolutionary troops died from gun & sabre battle injuries plus about 5,000 British & allies died from battle injuries for a total of 27,500 deaths from battle. The whole revolutionary war was fought so white males could engage in unimpeded colonial genocide against First Nations, continue worldwide economic plunder & perpetuate slavery. Have you no shame? !!!!!!!! The whole world is shocked at your attitudes of not caring about death & injury.
0 # Douglas Jack 2013-01-15 21:35
Ooopss 25,000 American + 5,000 British 1775 - 1782 is equal to the deaths per year today.
+1 # Eldon J. Bloedorn 2013-01-15 21:32
Well, at least you admit facts, "children who died." Why not do your own research and check with the local mortuaries in that town? Any funerals right after the shootigs? You have a right to be heard, but that you cannot assume you have a right to be taken seriously. How to you know the coffins were closed? And locked? Were you there at the mortuariies? Did you check each and every coffin? Did you take the time to check school attendance records to see what records there were of children registered to attend school before the murders? What do the school attendance records look like after the shootings? Anyone missing? Anyone dead?
+11 # Regina 2013-01-15 15:47
I guess we're fortunate that the American Automobile Association has not gone on a rampage for "freedom of car ownership" a la NRA on guns. AAA happily conforms to all the laws on car registration, driver training and testing, and traceable records for vehicles, owners, drivers, ticketable offenses, and accidents. You can't buy an unrecorded car at auto shows or directly from another owner. So we have a working model of how we should treat guns and ammunition. Use it!
-4 # Dion Giles 2013-01-15 15:56
Ominous forces are laying in combat weapons to target the elected national administration. Obama.

The TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party, which now controls the Guarantee Of Privilege (GOP) Party, saw a chance in 2010 to capture Congress and reduce the hated Obama to one term by making the country ungovernable. If that didn't work there was always insurrection.

A professor of constitutional law, Professor Adam Winkler of UCLA, outlined the risk of insurrection at the time. See

Well, to the astounded horror of the latter-day Rebs the plan to oust Obama in 2012 didn't come off. So back to insurrection. Hence the panic when there's a threat to their means of carrying it out.

But hang on. A band of gun freaks against the might of the US armed forces? They'd be squashed wouldn't they? Well, not if there were enough highly placed allies to stand the armed forces down at the critical moment. It's happened before, remember. September 11 2001.

And there's a very ominous group joined at the hip to law enforcement and the military. Explore their Web site at A lot or libertarian rhetoric but that's the sugar coating. Their attack is on gun control.

Obama knows the coup risk and is trying to forestall it.

Out of space but happy to explore this further.
+2 # Dion Giles 2013-01-15 16:56
More on the Oathists. They masquerade as libertarians, pledged to oppose, with their guns, any bid by the national government to act outside the constitution. Robust defenders of the Bill of Rights. Except that the Bill of Rights has been shredded since the bent judges installed Bush – Patriot Act, NDAA, TSA, DHS, an entire alphabet soup of violations and violators. And nary a pop from the barrels of the gun freaks. Too busy wasting children, college students, movie audiences, restaurant customers, shoppers, volunteer firemen – everyone but the tyrants!

The Oathists’ Bill of Rights talk is the sugar coating – their aim is obvious from their web site: building firepower and protecting it from anyone who threatens what they’re up to.

Their libertarian rhetoric is part of the act. Government has a responsibility to refrain from violating citizens’ rights, and to protect citizens from others violating their rights. Libertarianism is about preventing the national government from protecting the citizen from the States, and all government from protecting the citizen from every other violator of citizens’ rights. Like gunned-up murderers.

The idea of MORE guns to protect citizens is a nonsense. Who would feel safer in an aircraft if anybody and everybody could take guns on board?
0 # Billy Bob 2013-01-16 16:16
Great comments.
+2 # Diareo Knabo 2013-01-15 16:12
Guns need to be taken out of society! This NONSENSE of needing such for 'protection' is just that -- NONSENSE!

There ALREADY is a well trained (hence 'regulated') militia, it's called LAW ENFORCEMENT! The POLICE! THAT is part of the US Second Admendment of the US Constitution's 'well regulated militia'! Nothing more, nothing less!

Guns DO kill! Especially assault weapons and those other weapons into the wrong hands! AMERICA DOES NOT NEED GUNS IN ITS SOCIETY! America ALREADY is THE MOST violent country on Earth! God of all the 200+ countries, it is the USA that needs guns circulaing within the public arena the absolute LEAST!

America, as a friend puts it, is a 'SICK CAT'! Too many 'bloody uncles'! (bloody= violence, uncle = Uncle Sam, the 'mascot of America).

PLEASE STOP AND RESIST the NRA! They have been an absolute EVIL in your country! THEY ALONE have been directly responsible for the on-going school massacres, and the violence in general of American "culture"!


-1 # Douglas Jack 2013-01-15 17:58
THE RIGHT TO 'BARE-ARMS' (may surprise you)
We all have a problem with human insecurity, coward-aggressi on cycles, isolation, one-side thinking & technology-enha nced aggression which in Sandy Hook elementary destroyed the lives of 26 in just 20 minutes before Adam's suicide. The key is taking responsibility for every part of the whole cycle. Both left & right agree that; we need to go deeper than 'arms'. We need to decide where our 'feet' are headed.

The 'Right-to-bare- arms' or each of us rolling up our sleeves to pitch-in for making the world a better place, each of us not bogged down in heavy body-armour & armaments. We need to liberate/empty our arms so they may fully embrace each other & the tasks before us. We need to liberate ourselves & our loved ones from the perpetual fear of scarcity through each in our own way contributing to an abundant world where people understand that mutual-aid is the greatest factor of human-society & evolution. Tell us about your own efforts.
-1 # Kathymoi 2013-01-15 18:42
I'm so unimpressed.
0 # Douglas Jack 2013-01-17 20:18
Kathy, Responsibility to those caught in paranoid fantasies often doesn't make an impression. Its time to take responsibility for life, love, the real world & people with which we are all inter-dependent .
+3 # hoodwinkednomore 2013-01-16 10:19
I voted for Obama. I appreciate the man, etc. etc. but in this issue for him to be 'cracking down hard' is a little hypocritical when he's got kill lists, Guantenamo, and drones routinely killing scores of innocent children and their 'teachers'

Buy back all guns and munitions, bombs and fighter planes, melt everything, and build monuments honoring all the victims of our amazingly barbaric regard for all living beings! Build Peace Departments everywhere, refurbish our 1,000+ military bases worldwide into Peace Centers...then see what kind of life unfolds for future generations

The 'right to bear arms' was a ploy to uphold slavery, one of the most heinously violent institutions imaginable.
+1 # Douglas Jack 2013-01-17 12:58
Hoodwinked I like your post but we don't need more monuments. Maybe by Peace Departments you might mean cultural involvement, mutual-aide, creating ecological livelihood, including war-reparations , taking responsibility for all the damage we've done to a hundred million people in North America & billions of people worldwide for over 250 years & becoming real human beings once again.
0 # Diareo Knabo 2013-01-21 13:54
I'm 'well armed'! I've got two of them! A right arm and a left arm, natural and organic! These are the only arms I really ever will need! They have served me well throughout my life. I don't 'shoot' these arms, I HUG people with them!

now, how about a NEW and FRESH motto?


Sound better? Yes? No? Maybe? Try LOVE for a change, much better than arms! Again, arms are for HUGGING, not shooting!

Thank you!

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.