Up for Debate: Obama's gun control proposal

Wednesday, January 16, 2013 at 12:28am

What do you think about the President Obama's gun control proposal that he'll reportedly lay out Wednesday? What part of it do you agree? What part do of it you not?

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Up for Debate

97 Comments on this post:

By: Ask01 on 1/16/13 at 5:35

I actually agree with what I read in it's entirety.

While the truth is, no law will stop gun crime, severly limiting access to specific classes of weapons will reduce the scope of the possible carnage.

Provided law abiding citizens actually obey the law and don't provide criminals with easy access by illegally keeping these weapons so they can be stolen. Of course, if this were to happen, these would no longer be law abiding citizens, would they?

I can't wait to read the foaming at the mouth ravings of our local Future Felons of America as they pound away at their keyboards. (Of course, there are some whose comments I just scroll past, as they have nothing of consequence or intelligence to relate.)

That laugh filled moment will be delayed until I return from work.

Keep the trolls under the bridge and watch for droppings.

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 6:37

One more step toward dictatorship, perhaps? Master Obama has ignored the Constitution since he went in office through usurpation even though he claims he was a constitutional educator in college.

The only people that ignores laws are criminals. Master Obama will not stop criminals from getting guns and committing crimes. Time will tell.

By: Loner on 1/16/13 at 6:39

Good morning, Nashville.

These new gun safety measures are too little, too late...even so, getting this nominal attempt at reform passed by our beholden Congress is going to be a tough slog....the Tea-bagger infested GOP is in bed with the NRA and the GOP controls the House of Representatives. Those sleazy, money-hungry guys & gals take their marching orders from the self-centered special interests, like the guns & ammo manufacturers and their shills, not from we, the people.

The new proposals will do nothing to get the 300 million guns that are already out there off the streets.....and the wrong-headed, blood-stained, 2nd amendment remains intact....this is little more than grandstanding and political theater.....this is not serious gun control.....Obama is a master showman.

By: Loner on 1/16/13 at 6:52

Lots of right-wing sidebar ads on this online page....anti-Hagel, anti-Obama, pro-secession, pro guns & ammo crap etc. It's comforting to know that the right-wing A-holes who pay for these smear-job attack ads are making this free speech platform possible...though that was not their intent....there is a beautiful bit of irony in that.

By: Loner on 1/16/13 at 6:57

Let me start the gun safety cheering with this chant:


By: bfra on 1/16/13 at 7:00

Loner you have really lost it on this 2nd amendment. You are wrong!

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 7:03


By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 7:07

This is not a one solution answer to a very nasty problem. A better mental health program should be added to this new gun laws. The removal of the presented legal assault weapons and any gun clip over a reasonable amount should be included. These and other measures will go a long way into preventing such mass killings with guns.

If we are to leave it to the NRA and the gun dealers and manufactures, we will just keeping the guns coming. It won’t be too long before the number of guns in American will out number the population of Americans.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 7:09

Rasputin; drama queen, picture perfect, numb belligerence. Narcissistic, drama queen, craving fame and all its decadence.
Only a masochist could ever love such a narcissist like Rasputin .
Blair Waldorf-

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 7:10

The 2nd amendment must stay unless you're so willing to live under the control of Obama's dictatorship. Why is it okay for a select few to be armed but not the law abiding citizens of our nation?

I understand he now has 19 new executive orders prepared to gain more gun control.

Our biggest question should be [why is congress allowing all of this to happen]? Why are they so willing to accept Obama's executive orders without question?

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 7:19

The only ones gun laws have any effects over are law abiding citizens. No law has ever stopped a criminal. How many criminals have you ever known that bought a gun legally?

With the technologies of today, what would stop them from making many round clips?

What should you do do if two or three criminals break into your home and you're restricted to a 10 round clip... just run like hell so they can take your home over? I prefer to be prepared to defend my life and my home.

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 7:29

Ok, let’s break down his proposal (or at least what we know of it): first, a new federal assault weapons ban. If this is similar to the assault weapon ban that was already in place, Constitutionality is not an issue.

Second, banning high-capacity magazines. Again, that was also included in the expired assault weapon ban. It could probably be expanded as technology has improved. Again, Constitutionality not an issue.

Third, expanded background checks. This is targeted towards gun shows and other private sales (40% of gun purchases can be made without any background check). With rights come responsibility. As a society, we should demand this. With the second amendment, everyone has the right to own a firearm, but that doesn 't mean that everyone has the capacity to do so responsibly. To think that such a substantial portion of people can buy guns without such checks is insanity.

Think about that…it’s harder for someone to get mental health care than it is to buy a gun. If you don’t think that statement is troubling…perhaps, you need the former.

And, since background checks are required for the other 60%, again, Constitutionality not an issue.

So, what's the problem?

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 7:39

The comparison of people being killed by guns and cars is a childish attempt at rationalizing their paranoia.

People that say they are law abiding and speed at a higher posted speed down the highways and neighborhood streets endangering lives, are not so law abiding. Now are they?

Is Buck Yeager a law abiding citizen or a crazed paranoia man that should never have a gun?

By: Loner on 1/16/13 at 7:39

My opinion is "wrong"...?

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 7:44

The problem, gdiafante, is Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama in that office illegally. That should be our biggest concern; but then, after the responses from you and most of the others on this site, your usurper is your man for a dictator's power.

By: bfra on 1/16/13 at 7:44

Is this the next generation?

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 7:51

Should hammers also be restricted, dumba$$? After all, more people are being killed by hammers than guns so should they be taken off the market? How about baseball bats? Maybe we could leave softball bats on the field if they're that much softer.

No law has ever stopped a criminal from committing a crime, so what makes you think no more people will be gunned down because criminals have become law abiding citizens?

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 7:54

That question wasn't for you, yogi. It's for people who don't have their head up their ass (you know, people with the capacity to understand the issue).


By: Rasputin72 on 1/16/13 at 7:56

The people of Palm Beach seem to be rather ambivalent about gun control. Although I am sure that if the issue were put up for vote that 80% of them would vote for almost any measure of gun control.

The city of Palm Beach has only three bridges for entrance from West Palm Beach. A very well paid and well trained police force monitors especially at night what comes over those bridges in the way of "odd" vehicles. Guns do not seem to be an issue at all here.

Now in Nashville, I have five of my acquaintences and friends who have bought guns and even signed up for classes on how to use them just since the November elections.

Their reasoning is of course that civil war is on the horizon (much much to early for that) and that the core strength of Obamas people already have guns. That is probably true and will continue because of their lack of respect for the law no matter how tough it becomes.

Normally it is the productive and moral people who obey the laws and it is the vermin and uunderclass who spit in the face of the law.

I obviously have a plan that does not include guns and it is supported by knowing when to use my passport and my first class tickets and a financial plan thought out well in advance.

In the meantime I support any proposed laws that curb the sale of automatic assault weapons and hand guns.

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 7:59

Actually, raspy's plan is to mooch off of vulnerable women so that he doesn't have to work...unless you consider grifting as work, in which case you are productive.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 8:13

Either you are a bald face liar or you are full of crap. Take your pick old boy.

Normally it is the productive and moral people who obey the laws and it is the vermin and uunderclass who spit in the face of the law.

Rich People 'More Likely To Lie, Cheat And Break The Law'


By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 8:17

Spot on gdif. As a boy he was always the last to be picked at sports. However he was great at hide and seek. No one could ever find him, because they never looked for him. LOL

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 8:18

The previous ban was on purchase and sale, GD.

The new ban includes a proposal to ban ownership of certain items... confiscation.

Presumably my Glock 23 would be deemed illegal under the maximum 7 round rule and I would need to turn it over to an agent of the collective for which it would be legal for them to then have to help assure my compliance.

'assault weapon' has been such a catchy term. How long before that deer rifle gets the moniker of High Powered Sniper Rifle, I wonder? Who really needs a weapon that can drop a man at a 1/4 mile away, right?

By: Rasputin72 on 1/16/13 at 8:24

NEMO.......If you are Rat Nemovitz you probably remember me as your paper boy. If you are not Rat Nemovitz our paths have never crossed. I do not associate with the lower class even as a child.

If you are Rat Nemovitz, They should have sent you to reform school rather than the Samoan teenager.

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 8:26

Cite your source, Ben. I've read nothing about any proposal where the government would confiscate weapons. In fact...

Obama also said on Monday that the gun lobby was "ginning up" fears the federal government will use the Connecticut tragedy to seize Americans' guns. At least part of the frenzy is little more than marketing, he implied.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/16/politics/gun-laws-battle/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Looks like you're doing your part.

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 8:32

I guess my Smith and Wesson model 22A .22 caliber target pistol will be a new possession of the collective too with it's deadly 10 round capacity.

That's a shame... I bet I've taught a dozen people to shoot with that little guy.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 8:32

Ben have you seen the new Sting Ray.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 8:35

Fear is a good selling point and The NRA does it very well, gdia.

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 8:39

Wonder if my Springfield 187 .22 will make the cut? It holds 18 rounds, I think... but the magazine is not removable. Dad gave me that one for my 16th birthday.

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 8:40

I have, Nemo. I like the curves.

By: bfra on 1/16/13 at 8:41

Ben, yogi & raspy, great contestants for a liars tournament. They definitely know what a whopper is!

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 8:45

I'm just not sure what value my Model 23 will have without any magazines, gd.

I guess I could rack it back and load 'em in one at a time.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 8:48

Ben you are a good citizen and I think you might squeak by the mental test. lol I think that you would be able to keep the Springfield.

Yes I like the lines too and when not racing on the highway, it is gets good gas mileage.

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 8:48

Ya know, gdiafante, I always thought the guys in the Marines were a bunch of damn fools when I was in the Navy. I believe you're proving me right.

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 8:59

Got that source, Ben?

What kind of father would give a minor such a weapon...talk about irresponsible...jeez.

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 9:00

You were a squid? That explains so much...

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 9:02

By: Rasputin72 on 1/16/13 at 8:24
NEMO.......If you are Rat Nemovitz you probably remember me as your paper boy. If you are not Rat Nemovitz our paths have never crossed. I do not associate with the lower class even as a child.

If you are Rat Nemovitz, They should have sent you to reform school rather than the Samoan teenager.

Just how stupid are you Raspy old boy? Are you yogi stupid? If so then you have out done that moron by a long shot. What part of no I am not Nemovitz don’t you understand?

I also have never worked for you or any of you imaginary companies. So now go back dreaming that you can kiss your ass…old boy.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 9:03

You never know what Rasputin is going through, arrogant people disappoint me.

Captain Nemo-

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 9:03

I don't remember where I saw it, gd... but the limit they stated was 7 and they said the distinction of this proposal and the earlier ban was that they intended to ban possession of high capacity magazines not just sale.

My 13 round mag for my glock would certainly fail the cut.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 9:05

Raspy old boy, stop looking at yourself in the mirror and do something good with your life.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/16/13 at 9:08

They don’t make 10 rounds, Ben? If not maybe the gun manufactures will under the new law

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 9:09

I've only heard 10 but since the proposal (and that is all it is) hasn't been released yet, it's all speculation. But I find it hard to believe that Obama, who as readily acknowledged that the more hard-line the proposal, the less likely it is to gain support, would propose something that is (1) not really even supported by those who want more gun controls and (2) not likely to pass Constitutional muster.

I'm referring to mandatory confiscation (for those squids out there whose brain is the size of a pea).

By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 9:11

No, gdiafante, I was a squib, not a squid like you guys or did you intentionally just make a typographical error?

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 9:15


SQUID...idiot. See what I mean? lol

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 9:19

I was trying to think of precedent after I read the article last night, gd, and I couldn't come up with any.

If he proposes banning ownership of high capacity magazines (even 10 or greater) then that would be constitutionally challenged as would the limitation of our ability to trade in them via individual non-interstate transaction.

My understanding is that this is where he's going though.

Can't find that article so we'll wait for his presser to end the speculation.

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 9:21


By: yogiman on 1/16/13 at 9:22

You can look at this issue both ways, guys, but you can bet your a$$es if Barry get's it through and the people let's him pull it off, you've kissed the USA goodbye.

You should take the solid advice from the people of the nations that have advised us to keep our guns. And who would know more than the people of the nations that let their government take their guns from them? How many criminals have given up their guns? None.

How many nations have been put under absolute control by their government? All of them that gave their guns.

By: BenDover on 1/16/13 at 9:26

There's no doubt the states have the right to control it though, gd... so a simple administrative rule on interstate highway funds or medicare / Obamacare reimbursement is really enough to get whatever the fed wants anymore.

By: Moonglow1 on 1/16/13 at 9:26

Moonglow1: I agree with universal background checks and the ban on assault weapons. Obama should follow the gun control law passed on a bipartisan basis in New York.

Of course Tennessee is so beholden to the NRA we will come out behind the times as usual. The NRA is one of the first to sign up to hold their annual convention in Mayor Dean's new convention center when completed.

By: gdiafante on 1/16/13 at 9:36

DEVICE.—Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended
by section 110102(b), is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
‘‘(31) The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’—
‘‘(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar
device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has
a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted
to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
‘‘(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed
to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire

That's directly from the 1994 assault weapon ban.

Source: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-103hr3355enr/pdf/BILLS-103hr3355enr.pdf