Moreover, our investigation made clear that so-called "good guys with guns" do not stop public shooting rampages.
Here's an analogy folks, I ask you to think of this: You folks in Chicago, want me to get castrated because you're families are having too many kids. It spells out exactly what is happening here! You want us to get rid of guns...
If the slaughter of 20 babies does not capture and hold your attention, then I give up, because I don’t know what else will.
You say enough times, ‘the government is going to take my guns, I’ll stand up to them, I’ll shoot them,’ and the government will take away your f**king guns. That’s just the way it goes if you act crazy like that.
There isn’t any amount of gun regulation or gun executive orders that will solve the problem of identifying people who could potentially do this and making sure they get the help and their families get the help so they don’ t do this. I’ve said it all along that this is wrong headed...I think it is an agenda driven by something other than school shootings.
Regardless of our position on gun ownership, we all have a moral obligation to reduce the broader epidemic of gun violence in this country.
In the past, many elected officials have been reluctant to support stronger gun laws, but I hope that the recent tragedies across America -- from Connecticut to Colorado -- will spur bipartisan passage of common sense proposals like mandatory background checks for gun purchases and a ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazine clips.
It is rather telling that the day after Republican Members read the U.S. Constitution on the House floor -- a bid to encourage the whole body to recommit to the principles we're sworn to defend -- the President of the United States is today holding a press conference detailing his plans to attempt to weaken the 2nd Amendment -- a foundational provision of that very same foundational document.
However, the best way to deal with crime is not to limit the availability of firearms to law-abiding citizens...
President Obama is targeting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens instead of seriously addressing the real underlying causes of such violence.
As an attorney, citizen, and your member of Congress, I will not stand for new attempts to further restrict your constitutional rights. Any law that seeks to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens from owning firearms is a step towards an out-right ban on firearms.
As a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights, I reject this threat from the White House and am prepared to introduce legislation to repeal any executive order that infringes on our right to keep and bear arms.
My thoughts simply were that regardless of what argument somebody might make about having the right to own and possess a gun, there was no common sense reason for someone to have an assault weapon.
The calls for increased gun control after the Newtown shooting are...an emotional reaction.
With regard to the regulation of fire arms, first, the intent to protect one's loved ones is an honorable one, but simply put, guns are too easily accessible.
I don't know if there's anything Lindsey Graham can do in the Senate to stop mass murder from somebody that's hell bent on doing crazy things.
I agree with President Obama that we must take meaningful action.
We’ve got thousands of retired police officers, veterans, and the like who were saying, ‘We’ll volunteer and do whatever we have to do to make the NRA’s dream a reality.
As President Obama said so poignantly, the killings stir in each of us the powerful instinct to keep our children safe. We know, of course, that we can't always succeed. But there's nothing more important than doing all we can to try.
The United States...has by far and away has the highest firearm homicide rate in the world.
The only way to stop an armed man is with another armed man.
The tragedy at Sandy Hook came about because we turned a blind eye to the carnage our lax gun laws bring us.
[I'm] not convinced that more gun laws and restrictions are going to provide the security the country is looking for.
[S]aying that we can't talk about the policy implications of tragedies like this is over.
[I]t is time to take a close look at two gun-related issues—assault weapons and large ammunition magazines.
We have much more violence perpetrated with guns in our society...because we don’t have any reasonable regulation of acquisition of guns.
So I can’t help wondering if the bullets of Sandy Hook Elementary will be for Obama what the snarling dogs and high-pressure fire hoses of Birmingham, Alabama, were for John F. Kennedy in 1963: the human tragedy that will force him to take a political risk, simply because it is right.
Want to know who’s to blame? Each and every one of us, gun owners and non-gun owners. Muffled outrage and wringing of hands are not enough.
I don’t know, why do you need that? You can have guns. Fifty percent of the households in this country have guns, so we’re never going to say you can’t have guns. But I honestly – and I’ve been around wildlife quite a lot – I’ve never seen a deer worth 30 rounds of ammo and an automatic rifle.
Perhaps now is a time for our elected officials to lead on the issue rather than be led by what the polls say.
We in this Congress have done nothing to protect the innocent lives of children gunned down in Connecticut.
The irreducible challenge the Second Amendment poses to gun restrictionists is that it does not bestow upon the people a right they previously lacked. It proscribes the government from infringing upon a right the people already have. It is not that the people are allowed to arm. It is that the government is disallowed to disarm them.
Weapons designed expressly to kill human beings, and then modified (wink wink) to meet the federal machine-gun ban, have no legitimate place in American society.
If I had been a teacher or the principal at the Sandy Hook Elementary School and if the school district did not preclude me from having access to a firearm, either by concealed carry or locked in my desk, most of the murdered children would still be alive, and the gunman would still be dead, and not by suicide.
No single law can prevent the action of a madman, but that is no excuse not to take action.
Hopefully (and probably), that's true, but the fact is that stigmatizing and alienating the homes that it could happen in does not help as much as, say, better access to mental healthcare, better support for the families of the mentally ill and, yes, better gun control undoubtedly could.
Arguments over the merits of gun control are made all the more difficult to navigate by the Left’s stubborn denial that we are already having a debate on the issue.
I hope and pray that the flood of sympathy and condolences offered to the victims and survivors of this unspeakable crime will ignite the dedication and ingenuity of our nation to end this scourge of violence.
In response to this wave of violence, which reaches far beyond this one tragic incident, we must commit ourselves to taking action to review and strengthen our national gun laws as we approach the beginning of a new year and a new Congress.
Maybe now, gun owners will speak out for common sense reforms that would save lives with little or no impact on law-abiding gun owners.
I think an assault weapon ban can be revived at the federal level. I think that is practical and feasible, especially with the kind of change in debate that I would anticipate.
I think most of us, realize that there are ways to get to rational gun control. There are ways to grapple with the obvious challenges of mental illness.
The children of Sandy Hook Elementary School and all victims of gun violence deserve leaders who have the courage to participate in a meaningful discussion about our gun laws - and how they can be reformed and better enforced to prevent gun violence and death in America. This can no longer wait.
We are long overdue for a serious national discourse on gun control.
How many more innocent people have to die senseless deaths until we enact stricter rules that address unfettered access to guns?
...I really want someone who advocates against gun control to balance the scales for me, to go ahead and try to explain to me why the inconvenience suffered by gun owners and prospective gun owners under much tighter restrictions on the purchase of guns and ammunition outweighs the death of children in their classrooms...
Number one, no citizen should be allowed to have an assault rifle. That’s clear.
Innocent people will continue to die in random shootings as long as our society places less value in human life than it does in the untrammeled right of all Americans, including homicidal psychopaths, to purchase any and all deadly weapons.
But we have the evidence of multiple occasions when mass shootings were prevented by civilians.
Put aside the well-armed drug cartels; average Mexicans don't let the country's laws get too much in their way.
But, still we can't lose sight of the shattered lives and loss that occurred there, we also have to remember the tragedy that happens around our country on a daily basis. Because both instances speak to the perilous state we're at when it comes to violence
Will O or R have the guts to stand up to the NRA now and pledge to seek ban assault weapons? If not, what else will it take?
To @barackobama, @mittromney, journalists: can we please have an honest and constructive dialogue about gun control? #theatershooting
The gun-control debate is an exercise in changing the subject.
In the end, that was the difference between growing up and becoming a lawyer, a mother and first lady of the United States and being shot dead at the age of 15.
In light of the tragic events that have led the nation and our President to reconsider our priorities with respect to addressing gun violence as it relates to the safety of our young people, you recently introduced a bill that would stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of assault weapons as well as large ammunition magazines, strips and drums that hold more than ten rounds.
The president wants to use Lanza’s horrific slaughter of 20 babies in a public school in Connecticut with a stolen gun as an excuse to restrict the freedoms of all law-abiding gun-owning Americans, any one of whom would have stopped Lanza in a heartbeat with a lawful gun, before the police could, had they been in that school.
While [President Obama's] proposals assume the answer is more laws and fewer guns, millions of other Americans want an increased ability to protect themselves and their families.
I was thinking, you know, because I saw you on the TV talking about the whole gun [control] thing, and I was talking to one of my friends and I said, ‘You know what? You should go get me a gun or me go with you to get a gun and then show how easy it is for me to get a gun.
I'm not comparing the president to Adolf Hitler. It's the thought of disarming citizens, and this has happened throughout history. What's the true intention of the Second Amendment? It was to protect us from a tyrannical government, God forbid.
I strongly support the President’s proposal announced today, which represents a comprehensive plan to keep guns out of the wrong hands, increase gun safety, and prevent future acts of gun violence.
If you have to get a license to drive a car in Maryland . . . you should have to be licensed in order to operate a firearm.
We need to ban those weapons that have the functionality that can kill a whole bunch of folks in just a few seconds.
The requests the president made of Congress today fly in the face of those rights, and demonstrate an increasingly reckless disregard for the Constitution and congressional authority. I will not support such measures.
...it is incumbent on Congress to act to amend the law to require background checks for all gun sales, reinstate the ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, and ensure that gun traffickers are held responsible for helping place guns into the hands of criminals.
I support the President's call--echoed by the law enforcement community--for a renewal of the ban on military-style assault weapons and new bans on high-capacity ammunition magazines and armor-piercing bullets. I also support closing the many loopholes that undermine the federal background check system intended to prevent potentially dangerous individuals from purchasing guns.
We know that the safe use and responsible ownership of firearms has time and time again safeguarded individual and public safety. In fact, guns are used more often to protect lives, not take lives.
Since our nation’s founding, Americans have had the freedom and right to bear arms. As a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, I do not believe that limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens will prevent future acts of violence.
I applaud President Obama for putting forward a comprehensive and responsible approach to alleviating gun violence.
While I recognize responsible limits on gun ownership, such as the long-standing prohibition of gun ownership by convicted felons and the mentally ill, I do not support laws that would infringe on law-abiding citizens’ constitutional right to own and possess a gun. The Second Amendment guarantees this right and protects against infringements on it.
I'm interested in doing something that will prevent the kinds of slaughters we experience too often...
The White House’s recent announcement they will use executive orders and executive actions to infringe on our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms is an unconstitutional and unconscionable attack on the very founding principles of this republic.
I will use every means at my disposal to combat the agenda of the Executive branch to undermine our Second Amendment rights. I will also fight any legislative action that is taken to implement more gun control.
In 1939 Germany established gun control [sic]; from 1939 to 1945 six million Jews, seven million others, unable to defend themselves, were exterminated... Hitler wrote ... that his agenda would not be possible unless the people were disarmed.
The time has come for elected leaders to pass sane, modern, common sense gun safety laws to protect our children and our communities.
As a state legislator in Massachusetts I supported an assault weapons ban thinking other states would follow suit. But unfortunately, they have not and innocent people are being killed. As a result, I support a federal assault weapons ban, perhaps like the legislation we have in Massachusetts.
The solution is to empower the good guys to be able to defend themselves.
Liberals are the first ones to call 911 if they are under attack. Why do they do that? It is because they want someone with a gun there.
Traditionally states that enact rigid, inflexible gun laws do not show a corresponding diminishment in crime. I think we need to be careful there. I think we need to look at how the mentally impaired get access to firearms.
A moment of silence it not enough.
I continue to disagree that increased gun control is going to resolve the issues of violence that we have in our society.
I have long supported reauthorizing the 1994 assault weapons ban, as well as other efforts to promote gun safety.
The states with the highest level of gun homicides — Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama — are among those with the highest levels of gun ownership.
Guns are not like alcohol and drugs, both of which we have tried unsuccessfully to prohibit. Many people have an intense desire for alcohol or drugs that is independent of what other people may do. But the need for a gun for self-defense depends on whether other people have them and how effective the protection and deterrence provided by the state are.
While there is no magic wand to prevent these kinds of occurrences, there is no time better than now to take steps to strengthen gun safety laws. Now is the time to heed President Obama’s call for ‘meaningful action’ to prevent tragedies like the mass shooting Friday at a Connecticut elementary school.
This will also require that "pro-Second Amendment" types drop their hyperboles and hypotheticals and contribute scientifically and meaningfully to one point of agreement: If a person wants to purchase a gun for the sole and only purpose of murdering someone, that person should not be able to get a gun, let alone thousands of rounds of ammunition.
Why is it that somebody need a magazine with twenty shots in it?
The human enactment of these repeated failures was played out in the most horrific terms imaginable on a bright Friday morning last week. We cannot let this happen again.
If we can’t get this thing done, I’m with the mayor of New York City, if we can’t get this thing done, I don’t know what kind of country we have.
In two weeks, the polling will go back down and the focus will be on the mental health system that let this individual free on society.
I have repeatedly voted for an assault weapons ban and will do so again as soon as we can get a bill to the Senate floor.
We guarantee that crazed man after crazed man will have a flood of killing power readily supplied him.
Before Newtown, it was only a matter of time before some zealot proposed letting citizens purchase Predator drones with Hellfire missiles.
I'm objecting to the court's absurdly blinkered reliance on history and its refusal to balance individual gun rights today against legislative findings regarding gun violence.
Strict gun-control laws do not stop criminals from committing evil acts, they merely infringe on the rights of law-abiding citizens who might be able to take action against evil if given the chance.
...having stringent gun control laws—or, in a dream world, no guns at all—doesn't mean people won't kill people. It does, however, mean that fewer people will be able to easily acquire guns with which to kill people.
You can, to be sure, name one or two things that might make a marginal difference: ban extended-capacity magazines, and require background checks for private sales. As a proponent of reasonable gun control that in some ways goes farther than current rules (I'd like to require that people pass a shooting and gun safety test before they can own a gun), these rules don't strike me as crazy.
Perhaps the horror of 20 children being killed in Newtown will finally push members of Congress to locate their spines and begin working to pass some sensible gun legislation.
What it will take is for the majority of Americans, and the majority of thoughtful gun owners and hunters, to agree that there must be reasonable limits on gun ownership and weapons.
The only item on the agenda of today’s antigun advocates that realistically could have prevented a psychopath from stealing his mother’s legally registered guns would be banning and confiscating the more than 300 million firearms in the United States.
The gun lobby has intimidated us for far too long.
“We need to be more realistic at looking at this policy. In our zealousness to protect people from harm we’ve created all these gun-free zones and what we’ve inadvertently done is we’ve made them a target.
I could ask you why should anyone want a Ferrari? [Bushmasters] are absolutely a blast to shoot with. They’re fast. They’re accurate.
A host of sensible laws have been proposed over the years that would make it harder for dangerous people to obtain guns, or which would ban the kind of guns that are good only for mass killing.
To argue that looking at gun control now, after so many shootings, is wrong would suggest that what we have in place is perfect.
But we can say that if the United States worked harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be many, many fewer atrocities like the one in Connecticut.
The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
Did Kasandra Perkins have a chance against an NFL linebacker’s murderous rage? Certainly not while unarmed.
In the coming days, Belcher’s actions will be analyzed through the lens of concussions and head injuries. Who knows? Maybe brain damage triggered his violent overreaction to a fight with his girlfriend. What I believe is, if he didn’t possess/own a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.
The United States stands out from the rest of the world not because it has more nutcases – I think we can assume that those people are sprinkled throughout every society equally –but because it has more guns.
Too many people in the media cannot seem to tell the difference between reporting the news and creating propaganda.
A moment of remembrance and peace. Courage required to disarm the gun lobby.
You too can buy a semiautomatic rifle much like the one reportedly used by the shooter in Colorado to kill at least 12 people at a movie theater. Is this a great country or what?
Let's put the threats in perspective. More people die from gun violence in the United States every 15 months than died in the Korean War.
In 1989 a shooter carrying an AK47 entered the Cleveland School yard in Stockton, California and rained death on five children and injured 29, including a teacher. As the State Senator representing Stockton, seeing the death and destruction wrought by this weapon in the hands of a homicidal individual, I supported the legislation still on the books of California to ban military assault weapons in the state. My support for bans on assault weapons and large capacity magazines and in favor of background checks and improved mental health services continues to this day.
While the courts are still sorting out Heller's implications, politicians should not assume that they have a free hand to restrict private gun ownership. Decades of case law interpreting and applying the other provisions of the Bill of Rights show that there are hard-and-fast limits on gun control.
One question to address: If the real problem is that guns can be purchased in other jurisdictions, then why are America's other major cities seeing such huge declines in their murder rates, despite the fact that nearly all of them are near states with relatively lax gun laws?
You and I are literally surrounded. The gun-grabbers in the Senate are about to launch an all-out-assault on the Second Amendment. On your rights.
[I]f we are going to see any meaningful new gun-control legislation, we must first see a major congressional push from the White House, not just an executive order to crack down on existing laws. Sadly, Obama's past actions suggest he'd prefer not to.
We applaud him for issuing executive actions to reduce gun violence.
I cannot support any action by the President to limit gun ownership for American citizens punishing law-abiding gun owners for the actions, however horrible, of one mentally ill individual
The President’s executive actions, as well as his legislative proposals, are cause for serious concern.
As President Obama said today, there is no set of laws – nor a piece of legislation – that will prevent every tragedy. Limiting Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens is not the appropriate reaction to senseless acts of violence. Congress – rather than the President through Executive Orders – should instead look for ways to protect the people that are in keeping with our constitutional rights.
“I will continue to strongly support the Second Amendment. In that regard, I oppose any effort to reinstate an assault weapons ban, add restrictions on accessories, restrict ammunition purchases or construct further limitations on the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens.
This President and the anti-gun lobby continue to ignore the fact that violence is driven by a number of different factors, and that experience has shown gun control does not curb violent acts.
President Obama’s gun control proposals are a radical overreach by a power-hungry executive branch that is committed to restricting the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans, without any concern for either the constitution or how this plan would actually work in the real world.
The Second Amendment exists to protect the grand American experiment in self-government. Call me a “Constitution nut,” but I’m crazy about allowing people to live their lives with the maximum freedom possible.
It’s a shame that it takes a tragedy to focus the attention of the entire nation and create the momentum that we need to see.
Vice President Biden would do well to read the 2nd Amendment and revisit the meaning of the phrase 'shall not be infringed.
I am in favor of outlawing assault weapons. I don’t believe you need to see them in the hands of civilians. I just don’t.
People who own and legally carry guns in America do so because they believe in the Boy Scout motto of be prepared.
Simply, new gun regulations will never change the sickness and depravity that drive someone to murder school children and teachers.
We must do a better job of screening those who want to purchase firearms and also invest more in mental health to better prevent gun violence.
These [shooters] are obviously cowards anyway and if someone starts shooting back, they’re going to take cover, maybe go ahead and commit suicide like most of them have.
Maybe this time will be different. Maybe the horror of first-graders gunned down in their school will shock us into action on serious gun control. I hope so, but I also know that our usual pattern is emotional catharsis that turns into inconclusive wrangling, until the next big issue distracts us, and gun control once more slips beneath the political horizon.
Advocates must pressure members to pass legislation swiftly reinstating the assault weapons ban and outlawing high-capacity magazines.
Mass shootings are actually down in this country compared to years past. There were a lot of them in the fifties.
I'm sure I would vote against anything that impacts, in a negative way, the Second Amendment.
I'm pushing for that action now before we have to mourn more innocent lives lost.
I think we ought to restore that assault weapons ban.
[N]one of us is powerless. It’s past time that we start a sensible dialogue about gun safety in our communities.
Few people besides the police and hunters should need guns.
More gun control might be good PR, it might make people feel better, but there are thousands of people killed annually by criminals who apparently don't pay attention to gun control.
You tweet defending the right to arm yourself to protect from crazies.And gun control advocates tweet back w/ threats that make your point.
Four adults are killed in Benghazi and the right-wing politicizes it endlessly. But 20 small children are slaughtered in Connecticut, and the nation is told to do nothing.
Sadly, they [gun-control advocates] will try to exploit this to make people less safe.