Obama sets January deadline for gun proposals
WASHINGTON (AP) - Spurred by a horrific elementary school shooting, President Barack Obama tasked his administration Wednesday with creating concrete proposals to reduce the gun violence that has plagued the country.
"This time, the words need to lead to action," said Obama, who set a January deadline for the recommendations. He tasked Vice President Joe Biden with leading the effort and vowed to push for implementation of the policy proposals without delay.
The president, who exerted little political capital on gun control despite a series of mass shootings in his first term, bristled at suggestions that he had been silent on the issue during his first four years in office. But he acknowledged that the Friday's deadly shooting had been "a wake-up call for all of us."
Twenty children and six adults were killed when a man carrying a military-style rifle stormed Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., Friday morning.
The president also called on Congress Wednesday to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and to pass legislation that would close the gun show "loophole," which allows people to purchase firearms from private dealers without a background check. Obama also said he wanted Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity ammunition clips.
"The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing," Obama said. "The fact that we can't prevent every act of violence doesn't mean we can't steadily reduce the violence."
The president's announcement Wednesday underscores the urgency the White House sees in formulating a response to the Newtown shooting. The massacre has prompted several congressional gun rights supporters to consider new legislation to control firearms, and there is some concern that their willingness to engage could fade as the shock and sorrow over the Newtown shooting eases.
Obama said it was "encouraging" to see people of different backgrounds and political affiliations coming to an understanding that the country has an obligation to prevent such violence.
Appealing to gun owners, Obama said he believes in the Second Amendment and the country's strong tradition of gun ownership. And he said "the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible."
"I am also betting that the majority, the vast majority, of responsible law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war," Obama said.
Obama also tasked the Biden-led team with considering ways to improve mental health resources and address ways to create a culture that doesn't promote violence. The departments of Justice, Education, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security, along with outside groups and lawmakers, will all be part of the process.
Biden's prominent role in the process could be an asset for the White House in getting gun legislation through Congress. The vice president spent decades in the Senate and has been called on by Obama before to use his long-standing relationships with lawmakers to build support for White House measures.
The president challenged the National Rifle Association, the country's most powerful gun lobby and key backer of many Republican politicians, to join the broader effort to reduce gun violence as well.
"Hopefully they'll do some self-reflection," Obama said of the NRA.
The NRA made its first comments since the shooting on Tuesday, promising to offer "meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again."
Obama said that while taking the necessary steps to reduce gun violence would take commitment and compromise, he said it could be achieved if Washington summons "even one tiny iota of the courage of those teachers, that principal in Newtown summoned on Friday."
"This time, the words need to lead to action," said Obama, who set a January deadline for the recommendations. He tasked Vice President Joe Biden with leading the effort and vowed to push for implementation of the policy proposals without delay.
The president, who exerted little political capital on gun control despite a series of mass shootings in his first term, bristled at suggestions that he had been silent on the issue during his first four years in office. But he acknowledged that the Friday's deadly shooting had been "a wake-up call for all of us."
Twenty children and six adults were killed when a man carrying a military-style rifle stormed Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., Friday morning.
The president also called on Congress Wednesday to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and to pass legislation that would close the gun show "loophole," which allows people to purchase firearms from private dealers without a background check. Obama also said he wanted Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity ammunition clips.
"The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing," Obama said. "The fact that we can't prevent every act of violence doesn't mean we can't steadily reduce the violence."
The president's announcement Wednesday underscores the urgency the White House sees in formulating a response to the Newtown shooting. The massacre has prompted several congressional gun rights supporters to consider new legislation to control firearms, and there is some concern that their willingness to engage could fade as the shock and sorrow over the Newtown shooting eases.
Obama said it was "encouraging" to see people of different backgrounds and political affiliations coming to an understanding that the country has an obligation to prevent such violence.
Appealing to gun owners, Obama said he believes in the Second Amendment and the country's strong tradition of gun ownership. And he said "the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible."
"I am also betting that the majority, the vast majority, of responsible law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war," Obama said.
Obama also tasked the Biden-led team with considering ways to improve mental health resources and address ways to create a culture that doesn't promote violence. The departments of Justice, Education, Health and Human Services, and Homeland Security, along with outside groups and lawmakers, will all be part of the process.
Biden's prominent role in the process could be an asset for the White House in getting gun legislation through Congress. The vice president spent decades in the Senate and has been called on by Obama before to use his long-standing relationships with lawmakers to build support for White House measures.
The president challenged the National Rifle Association, the country's most powerful gun lobby and key backer of many Republican politicians, to join the broader effort to reduce gun violence as well.
"Hopefully they'll do some self-reflection," Obama said of the NRA.
The NRA made its first comments since the shooting on Tuesday, promising to offer "meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again."
Obama said that while taking the necessary steps to reduce gun violence would take commitment and compromise, he said it could be achieved if Washington summons "even one tiny iota of the courage of those teachers, that principal in Newtown summoned on Friday."
Most shootings are from stolen guns.. Not people that have them.. People that own guns should have have them in a safe that no one can get to.. Its just move control from the government..
Crap...crap .. .... crap. Read the statistics... be educated. Although ABSOLUTELY HORRIFIC, the violence when it comes to said situations has gone down. @ Postmortem...hooray!! Yes, personal responsibility and morals are needed. If the bad guys want guns..they will get them, regulation or not, why can the innocent not be able to have such a right to protect ourselves????
Nobody needs guns. Just like nobody needs alcohol. Ban them both.
 @poopstainmonkey Until someone breaks into your home and you have no way to defend your self. Lets talk about closing the boarders and when we have this under control we could talk about guns.
 @poopstainmonkey I seldom drink. Maybe a couple beers a year. However, even if I didn't drink at all, I'd want the freedom to choose. Same with guns. Besides, it's not a question of banning guns or not. In order to do that, it would take 2/3's of Congress and 3/5th's of the States to amend the Constitution to do so, and that will never happen. Even if it did, it could never be enforced.
 @Postmortem  @poopstainmonkey The feds tried banning alcohol back in the '20's & '30's. This noble experiment called Prohibition did not work as intended. All it did was to succeed in creating a black market for alcohol sales. You could still get your hand on booze, either from the 'rum runners', organized crime, 'shiners', or even make it in your own bath tub. 'Turf' wars broke out, violence soared. Prohibition was finally repealed because it did not work.
So, banning booze did not work, it was still readily available.
Banning guns will not work, because they will still be readily available, not to mention, because at that time only criminals would have guns, while law abiding citizens pay the price because the government says ''we know what's good for you'.
Here is a quote from that ant-gun zealot Dianne Feinstein in 1996, and her need to arm herself - âI know the urge to arm yourself, because thatâs what I did. I was trained in firearms. When I walked to the hospital when my husband was sick, I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out I was going to take them with me. I guess it is ok for the elite to pack, but nobody else can?
What is needed is personal responsibility and morals. You can't legislate either one of those.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Â
 @Nocturnal Daydreamer Yeah, I think we've all got that part. Historically Arms have been restricted, and recently many of those restrictions have received the blessing of the Supreme Court, so do you have a point, or were you just reminding yourself what the 2nd Amendment said?
 @JTesla  @Nocturnal Daydreamer "Historically arms have been restricted"? When? What restrictions? Can you name them all?
Yes lets rush right into further limiting the 2nd amendment, lets not take some time and look at the cause of the crime lets just go right for gun restrictions that will do absolutely nothing to curb gun violence. Way to go El Jefe you continue that history of anti-gun BS. One anti-gun communist apoints another anti-gun communist to head up the task force to curb gun violence nothing can possibly go wrong here. And in case you didnt know the 1994 gun ban had 0 effect on crime.
 @Jeremy I heard it stopped Columbine, and Kip Kinkel.
 @poopstainmonkey  @Jeremy That picture you have up is scaring me.. That is the same mask that the Clackamas Town Center shooter had on.. Maybe i should turn you into the state for some kind of illness.
Never let a crisis go unexploited. Oh no, say it's not Joe! I demand a recount.
The story of the attack has changed to support the politicians intended path. The original story said he left the rifle in his car and used handguns. The police found it in the trunk. Now they are saying he "stormed" the school with an assault rifle?Â
someone is lying!
 @roaddancer Yes, it's a conspiracy between the media, the administration, the Connecticut state police, and the local police --- or ---- there was some misinformation in the immediate aftermath that is now being corrected.
'Obama sets January deadline for gun proposals' ha! ha! ha!  Yeah, like that is gonna happen. Especially with the boy wonder, a.k.a V P Joe Biden in charge. Give it a week and it will go away. obozo and his crew don't have the time for this, as they would rather waste time on figuring out how to tax people who make over 250k per year.Â
Obama sets January deadline for gun proposals -
Â
And a year or two that will read Obama sets January deadline for gun forfeiting.
Just remember criminals and crazies are looking forward to stricter gun laws....... less chance of someone shooting back at them.
@kramr No. Criminals just don't think that far ahead, They don't form some Machiavellian scheme to prevent others from having guns, their bravado or stupidity doesn't allow for it. They are most likely opposed to limitations on guns because even though they see themselves as above the law, they will still default to the path of least resistance when it comes to gun procurement. The more people who sell, or to steal from, the better.
 @kramr Soon enough, the criminals and crazies will have the monopoly on gun ownership,
thanks to more feel good laws.
What we really need is a ban on gun control.
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku  @Mipsfer A majority? I seriously doubt that. Got a link to an unbiased (as in not leaning left or right) to a website that says this or this just your typical spewing of unproven conjecture?
 @kramr Didn't the last two crazies shoot themselves? Are you saying they shot themselves to avoid being shot?
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku  @Max Quinn  @kramr Pot meet kettle.....
It is easy to say that if there were no guns that these children and teachers would still be alive today, as well as others that have been killed by gun violence. We might even say that we would not be afraid that these terrible things could happen and we would not feel the sorrow in our hearts that we feel now. Â
Â
I for one do not feel that the banning of assault rifles or high capacity clips would have prevented the tragedies of last week. These horrible people would have still done these unthinkable acts even if they could have only stolen a handgun, a shotgun, a knife or what ever else could be used as a weapon. That being said, these resent events could have turned out differently if a different weapon was used, maybe or maybe not.
Â
Not having access to assault rifles will not prevent these people form committing these acts of horror, it only removes the assault rifle from the act.
Â
We all need to work harder at trying to identifying the real cause behind these acts. Â Â Â
 @commonsense Let us be a bit more precise in our use of the term "assault rifles" so as not to falsely inflame emotion. An assault rifle is one that a military ground unit would use to attack a defended position - in other words, a rifle capable of automatic fire. An AR-15 is not an assault rifle, it is a semi-automatic rifle. While it may superficially resemble M-4 and M-16 assault weapons, the AR-15's internal mechanism of action is not capable of automatic fire.
 @commonsense Imagine a shooting rampage in which the crazy guy's gun jams. He doesn't break into a knife store. He doesn't get his car and start running over people standing in the parking lot. He doesn't start punching people. He stops killing them because his gun won't work.
Â
These acts have multiple causes and the ready availability of high-powered firearms is one of them. There has to be a discussion of how to try to keep these weapons out of the hands of insane people. It doesn't have to be about banning them, but the guns have to be part of the discussion.
 @Max Quinn  @commonsense He stopped because  someone with a licensed handgun  confronted him and spooked him into finishing his suicide.Â
Â
 @roaddancer It's in the news, smart guy. http://www.katu.com/news/local/Mall-shooting-Man-comes-face-to-face-with-the-shooter-183116661.html.
Â
Why, the link was right above the comments section!
Â
Try the google - you can find a few stories detailing the shooter's movements.
 @Max Quinn  @commonsense Did you talk to his ghost about it? Were you there? Get serious..
Â
 @roaddancer  @Max Quinn  @commonsense Not true. He got the gun working again, confronted someone in a hallway and decided not to shoot the person. Nick Meli had nothing to do with it.
I am sorry I do not believe that the high powered firearm is any part of the cause, they are just the tool that is perceived to do the most damage. If a high powered firearm is not available they will chose the next most destructive thing.
My point is not that assault weapons are a necessity, which is subjective based on your beliefs, they are only slightly more destructive than other guns.
The use of an assault rifle on defenseless children and adults is not any less deadly than any other modern firearm. Â Â
@Max Quinn  Since you have all the answers, I wonder why you havent run for office. We should all just bow down to your superior intellect.Â
 @scared_citizen You forget who we are talking about. The next terrorist like Timothy McVeigh will think of another way to make a bomb - still no reason to make it easy, but someone like that will think of something.
Â
Adam Lanza wasn't a terrorist. He was mentally ill, as are all these mass shooters. There's no reason to assume that if he can't get a semi-automatic gun that he's has the capability to devise another weapon for mass killing. In fact, if there are so many options out there, why do these guys always choose semi-automatic firearms?
@Max Quinn  You continue to miss the point. If someone is intent on harming people (even in mass quantities), they will find a way. The government can not (of course they will try) regulate and control everything. Ban dynamite, someone will use fertilizer, ban fertilizer, someone will use drums of gasoline, ban guns, someone will use cars, and on and on.....
Â
If I had dynamite, fertilizer or an Uzi, I would never do those atrocious things. Its people who use them for bad intent. The idea would be to control the evil and mentally disturbed individuals who would do these things. Of course, that is a lot harder than blaming the guns.
 @scared_citizen  Especially when you consider that the feds monitor and regulate the sale of fertilizer (the main component in the bomb) and it hasn't happened since.
@Max Quinn @kramr "At 9:02 a.m. on April 19, 1995, a 5,000-pound bomb, hidden inside a Ryder truck, exploded just outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. The explosion caused massive damage to the building and killed 168 people, 19 of whom were children."
Â
No gun needed, fairly recent example. 'nuff said.
 @kramr Hey, kramr, """"""two things""""""":
Â
1) Spare me the Bath School disaster story. It was done with dynamite. Instead of linking to it, take a moment to look up the regulations you need to go through to legally obtain explosives and add up the number of school bombings we've had lately.
Â
2) Jared Laughner had an extended magazine. When it ran out, he went to change it, and during that pause unarmed people tackled him and stopped the rampage. So yes, I think 10 round magazines could have made a difference.
@Max Quinn @commonsense   """"" Lanza had a gun capable of firing 45 rounds a minute and several 30-round magazines""""
Â
Seeing magazines can be swapped out in literally one second or so, do you really think a 10 round magazine would make that much difference when shooting small children.
Just a reminder the deadliest attack at a American school DID NOT USE GUNSÂ as the hardware for killing
 @commonsense I guess I'm thinking of the guy in China who attacked a school with a knife. He wounded 22 people but killed none (and I do know that people have been killed in knife attacks).
Â
The knife didn't cause him to attack the school anymore than the gun caused Lanza to attack a school. But the effects were drastically different. Lanza had a gun capable of firing 45 rounds a minute and several 30-round magazines. That's a factor in the body count and you can't deny that. Any discussion of what to do now has to include how to keep guns like that away from people like him.
 @commonsense The real cause is existence of evil people who empowered by 'gun free zones'.
If they band assault rifles, does that include the .50 cal sniper style rifles you see at gun stores for around $5000? Just curious, since they can be considered hunting rifles and could pick people in a public place off from a distance. I think they are semi-automatic too?!?
Time to buy some gun stocks (no pun intended)
Â
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/guns-out-of-stock-at-wal-mart-as-magazine-prices-surge-on.html
 @TimBurr Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are the best gun salesmen since Janet Reno and Bill Clinton.  BTW, I bought all of my semi-autos in 1995 during the assault weapon ban.
Â
Â
@TimBurr And those stock prices are down, it's like a Christmas sale from Wall Street.
 @JTesla  @TimBurr Soon to rebound in preparation for the next 4 God awful years......just like the last 4 years.
Under Obama/Biden, you'll need to join a Mexican Drug cartel if you want to keep your guns.Â
 @Hellbilly Act fast before the loophole closes, otherwise you might be furious.
 @TimBurr The only holes that should be closed in this matter are Obama/Biden's pie holes.  And I could really live with out their contrived crying.
Great idea........ Lets put a crazy man in charge of looking into why crazy people do crazy things !!!