Jump to content

Welcome to SECTalk.com

Welcome to SECTalk.com -- The Home of 6 Straight National Titles!

You are currently accessing our site as a guest which means you can't access all of our features such as social groups, sports betting, and many more. By joining our free community you will have access to all of these great features as well as to participating in our forums, contacting other members, and much more. Registration only takes a minute and SECTalk.com is absolutely free, so please join today!

If you have any problems registering or signing in, please contact us.


Obama to support ban on Assault Weapons and High Capacity Mags

- - - - -

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
249 replies to this topic

#1
Dawgfan4life24

Dawgfan4life24
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    10,640
  • Age:
    27
  • Joined:
    Oct 2011
  • Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,727
http://firstread.nbc...take-shape?lite

Obama's push on gun violence begins to take shape





By Michael O’Brien , NBC News
Follow @mpoindc

President Barack Obama would actively support an impending proposal next year to reinstate a ban on assault weapons as part of the wide-ranging effort the president promised to initiate in response to mass shooting incidents this year.
The contours of Obama’s plan to address mounting gun violence begun to take shape in the nation’s capital as the White House started to outline some of the specific measures the administration would favor as part of its new initiative.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said that President Barack Obama supports the thrust of California Sen. Dianne Feinstein's forthcoming legislation to reinstate a ban on assault weapons, which expired in 2004. Carney said that the president was additionally willing to consider limiting the capacity of ammunition magazines and closing a loophole allowing individuals to purchase firearms at gun shows without a background check.

The press secretary's comments offered the first glance into what policy specifics might make up the president's vow to initiate an effort to address gun violence, which he made during a vigil for victims of last week's elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn.
A steady trickle of pro-gun Democrats have begun to express their willingness to consider reinstating the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004 without any serious efforts for renewal. West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin -- whom Obama called Tuesday -- appeared in a 2010 campaign ad shooting a copy of the environmental cap-and-trade bill; now, Manchin said every option should be "on the table."

The shooting in Newtown, according to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., served as a "tipping point" in a long-dormant debate over gun control in the nation's capital. While Obama has voiced support for reinstating the assault weapons ban in the past, his administration might throw its weight behind such an effort.
But Carney emphasized that new gun rules would only compose a portion of a more comprehensive effort to adress mass casualty events. The press secretary emphasized, for instance, that improved mental health services were an important element in any effort.
That component has been one which Republicans, who are generally loath to support efforts to rein in gun rights, have emphasized in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting.

"I think we need to look at school safety. Mental health, obviously, seems to be a big part of what happened here," Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, R, said Tuesday on MSNBC. "And once we have the facts, make prudent, reasonable decisions."
He said limits on firearms might make sense, but only if evidence would demonstrate those tighter rules would be effective. On that count, McDonnell said all the facts had yet to be gathered.
Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston, R, made a similar point in a separate interview on MSNBC.
"Yes, put more gun control on the table, but don't forget the mental health element," he said.
But no senior Republican had yet emerged to endorse -- or really, even address -- the prospects for any legislation to restrict access to assault weapons or high-capacity magazines. Because the House will remain in Republican control for at least the next two years, bringing any such proposal to a vote without the blessing of the GOP leadership would be difficult, if not impossible.

Posted Image

Georgia Bulldogs 5-1 (3-1)

Posted Image


#2
Hothotz

Hothotz

    Fire Richt

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    6,682
  • Age:
    27
  • Joined:
    Aug 2012
  • Location:
    Georgia
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,306
Won't matter, It will never pass in the house.

#3
Dawgfan4life24

Dawgfan4life24
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    10,640
  • Age:
    27
  • Joined:
    Oct 2011
  • Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,727
Way to go you liberal Posted Imageing idiots. Now this motherPosted Imageer is trying to take away our rights. Lets not focus on fixing the economy for the looming fiscal cliff issue. Lets Posted Image with guns because some sick piece of shit shoots up a school. That will help. Now only criminals and gangsters will have assualt weapons and we will have 9 mm. Look for many more civilian deaths now they criminals know they dont have to worry about an AR15.

Posted Image

Georgia Bulldogs 5-1 (3-1)

Posted Image


#4
OmahaBound

OmahaBound

    Boston Strong

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    6,491
  • Age:
    32
  • Joined:
    Jan 2005
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    1,447
I think Obama just lost the SECTalk vote.
Posted Image

"I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied.....Learn to swim"

#5
Large Marge

Large Marge

    Ask me about Loom

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • Posts:
    2,693
  • Age:
    22
  • Joined:
    Sep 2012
  • Location:
    Columbia, SC
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    2,181
Laws only stop honest people.
Posted Image

#6
TheRealBrave

TheRealBrave

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    25,195
  • Age:
    23
  • Joined:
    Nov 2008
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    6,750
Didn't some guy in China just knife 22 kids? I hear they're trying to ban long kitchen knives in the UK as well due to all of the stabbings... people are gonna kill and maim each other regardless.
Posted Image

It's Chubb time... no homo

#7
JDawg

JDawg

    I'm from the LANDMASS

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    11,588
  • Joined:
    Mar 2005
  • Location:
    Mississippi
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    7,275
Any weapon used in an assault is considered an assault weapon, media.  Come up with a better term, please.

Assault crow bars!  Assault pepper spray!  Assault machetes!

FIRE EVERYONE


#8
JDawg

JDawg

    I'm from the LANDMASS

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    11,588
  • Joined:
    Mar 2005
  • Location:
    Mississippi
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    7,275

View PostLarge Marge, on 18 December 2012 - 02:32 PM, said:

Laws only stop honest people.

And they only abide to law-abiding people.  Get it?

FIRE EVERYONE


#9
nova

nova

    Intergalactic planetary bulldawg!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    8,599
  • Age:
    31
  • Joined:
    Dec 2009
  • Location:
    Huntsville, AL
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,939
CT already has an AWB.  It worked fantastically didn't it?

#10
jthomas666

jthomas666

    This Space for Rent

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    6,423
  • Age:
    51
  • Joined:
    Dec 2006
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,192

View PostTheRealBrave, on 18 December 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

Didn't some guy in China just knife 22 kids? I hear they're trying to ban long kitchen knives in the UK as well due to all of the stabbings... people are gonna kill and maim each other regardless.
You left out a slightly relevant detail--all 22 kids survived.

That said, the assault gun ban will go nowhere, as has been mentioned.  A cynic might say that Obama is simply going through the motions to appease the base.  More likely he is supporting them in hopes of generating a legitimate discussion on the relevant issues.

I don't see a big issue w/ high capacity magazines, though I'm certain that it is an affront to many of you, either because you're preparing for the zombie apocalypse or just because you're a :lanekiffin:ing lousy shot.

ETA: Personally, I'd prefer a review of our mental health system, as well as a look at how that system interfaces with background checks.  For instance, we know the guy applied to purchase a gun but was rejected.  Was he rejected because of a history of mental illness?  If so, should such an application trigger some sort of alert?

Edited by jthomas666, 19 December 2012 - 09:32 AM.

Posted Image

Testimonials:

"very fair, very funny, very condemnatory"  -- Harlan Ellison
"That dumbass with the Kermit avatar" -- razorhead


#11
GoldenRebel

GoldenRebel

    A Proud Swayze Crazy

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    20,691
  • Age:
    26
  • Joined:
    May 2007
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    9,827
It will never pass. Hes trying to boost or economy through scare tactics. Consumption spending is about to hit an all time high through gun sales lol

#12
nova

nova

    Intergalactic planetary bulldawg!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    8,599
  • Age:
    31
  • Joined:
    Dec 2009
  • Location:
    Huntsville, AL
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,939

View Postjthomas666, on 18 December 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

I don't see a big issue w/ high capacity magazines, though I'm certain that it is an affront to many of you, either because you're preparing for the zombie apocalypse or just because you're a :lanekiffin:ing lousy shot.

As long as the same restrictions are levied on police I'm fine with it as well.

Probability says that if I'm in a self-defense situation, it will be all alone.  Generally when the police interact with criminals, it's in groups of at least two.  Therefore if a magazine restriction doesn't interfere with my self defense whilst all alone, then logically it can't interfere with the police operating in packs.

Same goes for any AWBs.  If those weapons are so dangerous and only useful for slaughtering large gropus of people, then that's the last weapon that should be in the arsenal of those who's purpose is to serve and protect.

View Postjthomas666, on 18 December 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

ETA: Personally, I'd prefer a review of our mental health system, as well as a look at how that system interfaces with background checks.  For instance, we know the guy applied to purchase a gun but was rejected.  Was he rejected because of a history of mental illness?  If so, should such an application trigger some sort of alert?

That whole system needs review.  It's all predicated on the only way someone is truly "mentally ill" is if they've been involuntarily committed.  At the same time it completely rules out any possibility for treatment and recovery, once deranged always deranged if you will.  There have been a couple cases where family members had people committed for severe eating disorders and they've since been unable to purchase firearms.  I'm sorry but the recovered anorexic is not a threat to society.  The guy wandering the street talking the voices in his head just might be even though he's never been committed...

Edited by nova, 18 December 2012 - 03:18 PM.


#13
KnoxvilleDawg

KnoxvilleDawg

    ALL HAIL LORD MERLIN

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • Posts:
    4,507
  • Age:
    33
  • Joined:
    Jan 2010
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    1,915
I want all of these mass killings to end. It saddens me to no end that this CONTINUES to happen more than once a year.

All of the cases need to be reviewed extensively and all parties must come to the table and attack this from every angle to put an end to it. This has become absolutely as big of a safety concern in my mind as an Al Quaida terrorist attack. R's need to be willing to go to the table with D's and THE MAGNIFICENT ONE and actually all sides must be willing to compromise for once.

The commonality in these shootings is assault weapons, therefore a ban on assault weapons should absolutely be explored. There are several other (and I think better) avenues to begin to go down though than a knee-jerk ban on guns after something like this. Review, discuss, compromise, and when advantages and disadvantages of several options have been weighed, then go down the path you think is best. If after careful review and discussion, people believe a ban on assault weapons should be pursued, then go for it. I am just against a knee-jerk reaction of what everyone thinks is the magic solution for a problem that I believe lies much deeper than guns or no guns.

SECTalk Hater's Club Inspiration

Formerly known as Meo Stansbury

#14
GoldenRebel

GoldenRebel

    A Proud Swayze Crazy

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    20,691
  • Age:
    26
  • Joined:
    May 2007
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    9,827
Guy kills 20 kids with a glock and sig 9mm.   Ban assault weapons.

#15
Dawgfan4life24

Dawgfan4life24
  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    10,640
  • Age:
    27
  • Joined:
    Oct 2011
  • Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
  • Cash:
    1,000
  • High Fives:
    3,727
Gun trust papers are in the works. My credit card is about to get loaded up.  @nova this shouldnt chance the accessablity of supressors will it?

Posted Image

Georgia Bulldogs 5-1 (3-1)

Posted Image