Obama taps Biden to craft new policies to curb gun violence in wake of shooting

[Phurfur 70]

WASHINGTON – President Obama will tap Vice President Biden to lead an administration-wide effort looking at gun control and other measures in the wake of the Connecticut school shooting last week

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/19/obama-to-launch-effort-led-by-biden-to-create-new-policies-in-wake-school/#ixzz2FW5mX8Wt

 

 

“You don’t ever want a crisis to go to waste; it’s an opportunity to do important things that you would otherwise avoid.” - Rahm Emanuel

[The Elevator Killer 497]

So the guy who is constantly shooting himself in the foot is in charge of curbing gun violence? Yeah, this is going to end well.

[Bruce Benedict 0]

I don't care for this.

 

I liked American politics better under GWB, when the vice president did real and important work, like plotting 9/11, and leading America into a bogus and illegal war so he could award his revolving door Board cronies at Haliburton and KBR no-bid reconstruction contracts post-Shock-and-Awe.

 

All this mamby-pampy talk of saving children's lives has no business in serious politics.

[The Elevator Killer 497]

I don't care for this.

 

I liked American politics better under GWB, when the vice president did real and important work, like plotting 9/11, and leading America into a bogus and illegal war so he could award his revolving door Board cronies at Haliburton and KBR no-bid reconstruction contracts post-Shock-and-Awe.

 

All this mamby-pampy talk of saving children's lives has no business in serious politics.

 

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Forming a "commission" is a good way for Obama to placate the mindless, bed wetting, anti gun base and get this issue off the front burner. Anything that comes from it, 18 months from now will be ignored just like Simoson Bowles.

 

By then the bedwetters will be distracted by other shiny things. It also gives the escaped mental patient Biden something to play with besides Legos.

[DankNuggs 305]

Forming a "commission" is a good way for Obama to placate the mindless, bed wetting, anti gun base and get this issue off the front burner. Anything that comes from it, 18 months from now will be ignored just like Simoson Bowles.

 

By then the bedwetters will be distracted by other shiny things. It also gives the escaped mental patient Biden something to play with besides Legos.

He wants this issue on the front burner... its an easy optics issue. Forming commission is all liberal govt types know how to do...

 

 

"How do we fix the issue"

 

"Dunno"

 

"Lets hire some more people and stick them in a room"

[BudBro 118]

this is what joe biden said in 2008....

 

“I guarantee you Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey,” Biden said to voters during a campaign stop in Castlewood, Virginia on September 20. “Don’t buy that malarkey. They’re going to start peddling that to you.”

 

Biden informed the crowd that he was the proud owner of two guns.

 

“If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem,” Biden added, referring to Obama.

 

obama taps biden is about all that is believable about any of this.

[Phurfur 70]

Q. Why isn't there any talk of violence in movies and video games being the cause for these shooting? It would seem more logical.

 

A. This is about gun control stupid.

[MDC 5,915]

So ... why shouldn't we be looking at legislation to curb gun violence?

[tikigods 76]

So ... why shouldn't we be looking at legislation to curb gun violence?

 

I think the bigger issue is facing the facts that no matter what the government does, you cannot stop someone determined to harm people. I'm about the states making their own laws around guns...just like they can do now. It really is a states' rights issue.

 

I can see the argument that people in LA don't need handguns but where I live we have a big culture of hunting. Telling the rednecks of NH that the federal government is going to "take away their guns" will send them over the edge. Considering we're the first primary in the nation, no one wants to upset that base of voters.

 

On the other hand, we are people that cling to our Bibles and guns. We're not a very religious state. It's very libertarian here. No sales. No income tax. Town meetings to set budgets and school budgets. No helmet laws for motorcyclists. No seat belt laws for people over 18. The state pretty much leaves us alone.

[hoytdwow 202]

I think the bigger issue is facing the facts that no matter what the government does, you cannot stop someone determined to harm people. I'm about the states making their own laws around guns...just like they can do now. It really is a states' rights issue.

I disagree with the second part of your statement. If states pass differing laws, then I can just go to a different state and buy the gun I want, come back home and blow people away. Also, I know it's not possible to stop everybody who wants to hurt people from doing so, but that is just not a valid reason for doing nothing. Yes, some people will still commit these acts, but others will be stopped.

[tikigods 76]

I disagree with the second part of your statement. If states pass differing laws, then I can just go to a different state and buy the gun I want, come back home and blow people away. Also, I know it's not possible to stop everybody who wants to hurt people from doing so, but that is just not a valid reason for doing nothing. Yes, some people will still commit these acts, but others will be stopped.

 

True. You can come over into NH and try and buy a gun. We still have a waiting period.

 

Interesting story about this. My grandfather passed away back in June of 11. He had an arsenal of weapons...stuff dating back to the Crimean War. I had to literally jump through a ton of hoops to transport them (no kidding) three focking miles to the NH border from Lowell to Nashua, NH. It cost me about $200 dollars in permits.

 

It only confirms why I refuse to live Massachusetts.

 

But then again, I could have just put them in my trunk (illegally) and drove to wherever and used them for crimes.

[MDC 5,915]

I think the bigger issue is facing the facts that no matter what the government does, you cannot stop someone determined to harm people.

 

True and I'd never suggest and outright ban on guns but we could do some things to reduce violence. Registering gun owners and barring people with a criminal or mental health history for starters. We should absolutely hammer people for straw purchases. I'm not going to pretend to know a ton about assault rifles but I can't really see the non-military need for that kind of high capacity weapon.

[tikigods 76]

True and I'd never suggest and outright ban on guns but we could do some things to reduce violence. Registering gun owners and barring people with a criminal or mental health history for starters. We should absolutely hammer people for straw purchases. I'm not going to pretend to know a ton about assault rifles but I can't really see the non-military need for that kind of high capacity weapon.

 

I agree. They definitely need to close loopholes in gun show purchasing.

 

Assault weapons are fun to use at shooting ranges or on old cars. You'd be surprised how much fun range shooting is. You'd also be surprised what a 50 cal can do to the human head.

[TheBlade 3]

So ... why shouldn't we be looking at legislation to curb gun violence?

We already have legislation in place to curb gun violence. It's focking illegal to shoot somebody, except in very specific circumstances, and violators go to jail for a long time.

 

In Florida we have 10-20-Life. Use a gun in committing a crime and you get 10 years. Shoot during said crime and you get 20. Hurt somebody by shooting said gun in said crime and you get life in prison. These are mandatory sentences.

[MDC 5,915]

We already have legislation in place to curb gun violence. It's focking illegal to shoot somebody, except in very specific circumstances, and violators go to jail for a long time.

 

I just mentioned 3 specific things we could do to prevent these kinds of mass shootings.

[cbfalcon 824]

I just mentioned 3 specific things we could do to prevent these kinds of mass shootings.

 

What Blade is saying is we don't need less gun violence. We already have a law saying it's illegal to kill people. Beyond that, whatever happens happens. We've done enough.

[NewbieJr 540]

We already have legislation in place to curb gun violence. It's focking illegal to shoot somebody, except in very specific circumstances, and violators go to jail for a long time.

 

In Florida we have 10-20-Life. Use a gun in committing a crime and you get 10 years. Shoot during said crime and you get 20. Hurt somebody by shooting said gun in said crime and you get life in prison. These are mandatory sentences.

So you don't think they should try to make it more difficult for people with criminal records and/or mental illness issues to purchase guns?

[Blitzen 0]

Banning humans would be more effective than banning guns.

[Bad Santa 24]

I just know this is leading to a remake of the shakest gun in the west with Biden playing Don Knots role and Obama in Tim Conways.

[TheBlade 3]

I just mentioned 3 specific things we could do to prevent these kinds of mass shootings.

But that's not what you said in the post I quoted.

 

If you'd like to retract or change that post, I'm fine with that.

[TheBlade 3]

What Blade is saying is we don't need less gun violence. We already have a law saying it's illegal to kill people. Beyond that, whatever happens happens. We've done enough.

False.

 

He mentioned a law to curb gun violence. I pointed out said law(s) already exist, and carry rather stiff penalties.

 

Additional laws "to curb gun violence" is a way too broad of a statement, and therefore misguided from the onset.

 

Nice spin, though.

[NewbieJr 540]

Is there anyone here, wordplay aside, who has a problem that they are going to discuss ways of possibly curbing gun violence?

[TheBlade 3]

So you don't think they should try to make it more difficult for people with criminal records and/or mental illness issues to purchase guns?

I didn't say this, either.

 

I have no issue with a database being formed and checked as a part of the gun background check so long as checks and balances are in place to prevent abuse.

 

Laws already exist to prevent convicted felons from owning or possessing a firearm. Society doesn't view misdemeanors similarly, but I would consider a banning for certain misdemeanor convictions, but I think this one needs to be pretty narrowly based.

 

This discussion aside, these laws would still not do anything to"curb gun violence" as MDC alluded to.

[MDC 5,915]

But that's not what you said in the post I quoted.

 

If you'd like to retract or change that post, I'm fine with that.

 

I'd rather invite you to go fock yourself.

[Bad Santa 24]

I'd rather invite you to go fock yourself.

 

No invite for me?

 

 

I guess this is just another party I'm going to have to crash.

[TheBlade 3]

Is there anyone here, wordplay aside, who has a problem that they are going to discuss ways of possibly curbing gun violence?

Ok, now I'm asking you a question. Since study after study has shown no correlation between gun violence and strict gun laws, and there is evidence to show a negative correlation between violence in general and a lack of lawful gun ownership, if you take my guns, how do you keep me as a peaceful citizen safe since it hasn't worked anyplace else??

[TheBlade 3]

I'd rather invite you to go fock yourself.

Of course you would because you're a pvssy and a lemming.

 

Feel free to reinsert your head back in your @as.

[cbfalcon 824]

Ok, now I'm asking you a question. Since study after study has shown no correlation between gun violence and strict gun laws, and there is evidence to show a negative correlation between violence in general and a lack of lawful gun ownership, if you take my guns, how do you keep me as a peaceful citizen safe since it hasn't worked anyplace else??

 

The trick is....

 

I've seen study after study that shows plenty of correlation between gun violence and stricter gun laws. And I've seen studies that shown there is less violence in areas without gun ownership.....And you've seen the opposite. And neither study is false. Both sides have tons of facts on their side.

 

So in the end it's simply going to be about thinking logically and using common sense. But what is logical to one man is illogical to the next. So it'll just be a matter of which side has more people behind it.

 

My prediction is we will see something like the assault weapon ban that was in place from 1994-2004 put back into effect. Public sentiment will lean that way.

[Greedo 13]

Gun laws don't at all seem to be the issue that needs addressing here. Unless all 50 states do it the same way, people will get guns wherever it's easiest. In the CT case, the shooter didn't even have to buy a gun, just borrowed his mom's guns.

 

We have a structure in place to remove offending shooters from society, though most of them, fortunately, kill themselves and save us the expense and hassle.

 

Is there anything we could have done, as a society, to keep these nutballs from flying off the deep end? And can we do anything before they act? These seem like the better questions to be asking, though they might have uncomfortable answers, or no good solutions.

 

- Video games and movies' impacts on impressionable kids

- Poor parenting

- Mental issues requiring removal from society

 

These three issues might bear more discussion than any discussion of gun control.

[BudBro 118]

The trick is....

 

I've seen study after study that shows plenty of correlation between gun violence and stricter gun laws. And I've seen studies that shown there is less violence in areas without gun ownership.....And you've seen the opposite. And neither study is false. Both sides have tons of facts on their side.

 

So in the end it's simply going to be about thinking logically and using common sense. But what is logical to one man is illogical to the next. So it'll just be a matter of which side has more people behind it.

 

My prediction is we will see something like the assault weapon ban that was in place from 1994-2004 put back into effect. Public sentiment will lean that way.

i'm sure the million or so babies that were killed this year would rather we shove our public sentiment up our collective roe v wade a$$es. you can't cry foul and want gun control over this while you look the other way at abortion. sorry.

[cbfalcon 824]

i'm sure the million or so babies that were killed this year would rather we shove our public sentiment up our collective roe v wade a$$es. you can't cry foul and want gun control over this while you look the other way at abortion. sorry.

 

They are different topics. Not related whatsoever.

 

Or is your argument is "We have to eliminate all death. Otherwise why bother eliminating any of it?"?

 

[TheBlade 3]

The trick is....

 

I've seen study after study that shows plenty of correlation between gun violence and stricter gun laws. And I've seen studies that shown there is less violence in areas without gun ownership.....And you've seen the opposite. And neither study is false. Both sides have tons of facts on their side.

 

So in the end it's simply going to be about thinking logically and using common sense. But what is logical to one man is illogical to the next. So it'll just be a matter of which side has more people behind it.

 

My prediction is we will see something like the assault weapon ban that was in place from 1994-2004 put back into effect. Public sentiment will lean that way.

And I'll concede that you're probably correct whether I agree with it or not.

[BudBro 118]

They are different topics. Not related whatsoever.

 

Or is your argument is "We have to eliminate all death. Otherwise why bother eliminating any of it?"?

 

they're only different because you support one and want the other changed. either way, innocent children die. don't get bucked off your high horse.

[Greedo 13]

they're only different because you support one and want the other changed. either way, innocent children die. don't get bucked off your high horse.

 

Your definition of "children" is not universally shared.

[MDC 5,915]

Of course you would because you're a pvssy and a lemming.

 

Says the guy who responded to my suggestions like a preteen twat.

[TheBlade 3]

Says the guy who responded to my suggestions like a preteen twat.

You made a statement so broad as to be utterly ridiculous, I call you on it, and I'm a twat?

 

Riiiiiight.

[MDC 5,915]

You made a statement so broad as to be utterly ridiculous.

 

I named 3 specific things that should be done to curb gun violence, you didn't address any of them.

[BudBro 118]

Your definition of "children" is not universally shared.

intellectual honesty is not the strong suit of communists, eh?

[Phurfur 70]

So ... why shouldn't we be looking at legislation to curb gun violence?

 

 

So you are OK with all other violence? Why not curb all violence why just gun violence?

 

Each year more people die in drunken diving accidents than are murdered by guns.

 

Why anyone would want to live in a world where only Law Enforcement and criminals have guns is beyond me.