Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: I am very disappointed in Obama's new gun BAN proposals

Posted 5 years ago on Jan. 18, 2013, 7:15 a.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

What follows is cut directly from the WhiteHouse site.
It seems to go back to the "1994 gun ban"

It & this ( from my reading ) does not ban the possession & ownership
it bans the manufacture - no wonder the nra is fighting so hard for their manufacturers.
The problem is not clearly defining "assault weapon"
The problem is defining "ban" to include possess

We need to do more to prevent easy access to instruments of mass violence. We also need to provide law enforcement with additional tools to prevent gun violence, end the freeze on gun violence research, make sure health care providers know they can report credible threats of violence and talk to their patients about gun safety, and promote responsible gun ownership. GET MILI TAR Y-STYLE ASSULT WEAPONS AND HIGH-CAPACI TY MAGAZINES OFF THE STREETS A 2010 survey by the Police Executive Research Forum found that more than one-third of police departments reported an increase in criminals’ use of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines since the prohibition on high-capacity magazines and assault weapons expired in 2004. To protect law enforcement and enhance public safety, we must redouble our efforts to:
Reinstate and strengthen the ban on assault weapons:
The shooters in Aurora and Newtown used the type of semiautomatic rifles that were the target of the assault weapons ban that was in place from 1994 to 2004. That ban was an important step, but manufacturers were able to circumvent the prohibition with cosmetic modifications to their weapons. Congress must reinstate and strengthen the prohibition on assault weapons.
Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds:
The case for prohibiting high-capacity magazines has been proven over and over; the shooters at Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora, Oak Creek, and Newtown all used magazines holding more than 10 rounds, which would have been prohibited under the 1994 law. These magazines enable any semiautomatic weapon to be used as an instrument of mass violence, yet they are once again legal and now come standard with many handguns and rifles. Congress needs to reinstate the prohibition on magazines holding more than 10 rounds.
Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets:
It is already illegal to manufacture and import armor-piercing ammunition except for military or law enforcement use. But it is generally still not illegal to possess or transfer this dangerous ammunition. Congress should finish the job of protecting law enforcement and the public by banning the possession of armorpiercing ammunition by, and its transfer to, anyone other than the military and law enforcement.

Note the use of the word "possession" in the last paragraph - missing from the other paragraphs

We need to reduce the number of guns
$1,000 annual registration fee for semi-auto guns
$10,000 fine + 1 year in jail for owning a gun illegally
$1,000 fine + 1 month in jail for owning a large magazine illegally
gun buyback



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 5 years ago

There you go.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Is it possible that the current problem with guns used in crimes is enforcement, budget, and staffing? If 90% of all gun crimes are committed with Illegal Guns ... then I'd say there are a lot of Illegal Guns that are not being policed within communities.

So, is it possible that we have enough Gun Laws already?

Just like most Laws that Congress Passes... often there is little monitoring, and follow-up to see if there is proper staffing, proper budget, proper tracking, proper data collection....

If you read some of David Cay Johnston's books, Free Lunch and Prefectly Legal... the IRS doesn't collect data, or suffient data to spot wealthy people that avoid taxes or under report income.

And if you look at Financial Laws, bank Regulations, Corporate Regulations.... you will probably find that Enforcement, Budget, and Staffing are missing.

So, lastly, I'm sure you have looked at the 2nd Amendment... I guess you interpret ... will not be infringed as the wrong part of the sentense to look at. But is your reason for Gun Ban, 1) Public Safety 2) Anti-Gun Culture 3) Emotional response to the Idea of Guns 4) Believe the Rhetoric, Find the Anit-Gun Message Truthful.

It is a democracy in some ways. So it is valid to just trust the messages in the media.

But what is the whole Picture. We export Arms, Weapons, Military Training, ... we drop bombs on foreign families we have never met, we train our young people to kill and make decisions to kill. Who is to say in 20 years Congress won't drop bombs on US Families? It is disgusting how we dehumanize people and sell weapons to tyrants. We are not a progressive society.... much the opposite.

In fact, we should ask why are we different from the Third Reich. Why are our leaders any different from the Leaders of Iran. Dick Cheney was the Vice President of the USA... Is he so different from Mussilini or the Leaders of the Third Reich. Did he shoot his buddy to threaten him or what it... a hunting accident?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago


learn as much as you can about the numbers that prove what the solutions are

demand a plan:


alex jones – without his straight jacket!

multi-millionaire gun manufacturer wayne lapierre who works for koch brothers & gets paid over $1,000,000 / year


find your congresspeople
VP Joe Biden, Gun Panel, 1600 Pennsylvania Av, Washington DC 20006


Dear ............................:

[ Y.O.U.R...I.N.T.R.O...H.E.R.E ]

While some people may want to confiscate guns, I don’t.
Here is a much more feasible approach.
It will not solve all gun problems, but it will
reduce the number of guns
and that will reduce the number of dangerous people who have access to guns -
and isn't THAT our real goal?

My proposal - for a NATIONAL gun law for all guns & owners:
My four points are SIMPLY based on seeing a logical parallel between cars & guns.

Please consider advocating these four steps below to help America with our 11,000+ gun disasters:

all gun owners must be licensed & tested with all guns they own and pass a written test.

If you own a motor cycle, a dump truck, and a car - you are tested in each.
Require a written gun test - to guarantee the owner's understanding of gun laws thus
being forced to know the law - via the test – also means the police know who you are - and you may be less likely to commit a crime or be careless storing your guns

every year, you must prove that you have gun liability insurance &
be background checked and prove that your gun is properly locked when not used.

Insurance should be at least as high as car insurance [ I would like at least $1,000,000 ]
You must prove your car insurance.
Require an annual back ground check ( with fee ) to verify your suitability to own guns.
Every gun must be locked in a gun case or have a trigger lock.

as the owner of a gun, you are legally responsible for what is done with it.

You are required to report if your gun is missing within 48 hours,
The owner will be much less likely to leave a gun accessible to a family member or thief.

every gun must be registered and tested & a sample fired bullet stored by the police

Knowing that your gun & its bullets are so easily traced will make you think before using it.

additionally -

Gun fees [ licenses fees & registration fees & fines ] should be
high enough to create a very substantial gun buy-back program

Penalties must be very high in money & jail time -
especially after the first offense

No citizens ( except dealers & collectors ) need more than a small number of guns

Gun fees should be higher for more guns & for bigger guns.

The nra will fight against this –
but will be balanced by the insurance companies fighting for it

But the nra may be in favor of this when the gun companies understand that gun owners
can get paid to turn in their old gun and will be able to buy a new gun -
with an INTEGRATED lock .

If we legalize drugs, we will clear out jail cells to fill with gun law breakers and
free up police "time" for real crime investigation

We WILL get higher compliance and lower opposition if we use high fees & buyback.

Take a position of reducing guns, like assault weapons such as semi-automatic rifles -

rather than punishing a gun nut who spent $10,000 on an armory.

LBJ proposed a gun plan similar to the above 4 point plan


Some real 2011 / 2012 gun statistics:

Americans own almost half of all civilian owned guns in the world.
Per 100,000: America: 88,880 guns owned ; 2.97 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: England.…: 6,200 guns owned ; 0.07 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Austrailia: 15,000 guns owned ; 0.14 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Canada…: 30,800 guns owned ; 0.51 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: France….: 31,000 guns owned ; 0.06 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Japan……..: 1,000 guns owned ; 0.08 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Israel……..: 7,300 guns owned ; 0.90 homicides Per 100,000

The above link is to England police statistics - see table D19

Is the nra & its trolls claiming that we will fail, where England & Australia succeeded in reducing gun deaths substantially by legislation?

Statistics clearly prove that the number of guns adds to the risk of homicides.

More complex is the effect of gun laws and restrictions.

When Australia had a massacre in 1996 when 35 people were killed, gun laws were substantially strengthened and a major buy-back was instituted.
There has not been an incident in Australia since then.
Of course, they did not have the benefit of the nra.

In 2011, there were 11,000+ gun homicides in America
In 2011, there were 35 gun deaths in England

For 2011, the average Murder Rate in Death Penalty States was 4.7,
while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.1

For 2011, the murder rates were highest in red state regions:
Per 100,000: South 5.5 Midwest 4.5 West 4.2 Northeast 3.9

The 1994 gun "ban" did NOT ban assault weapons.
It banned the MANUFACTURE of assault weapons.

Scalia - yes that Scalia - has ruled the AR15s are NOT “protected” by Article 2
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that there are "undoubtedly" limits to a person's right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, but that future court cases will have to decide where to draw the line. That link could be between you and an bushmaster.
During an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," Scalia was asked whether lawmakers have the right to ban high-capacity gun magazines without violating a person's constitutional right to bear arms. "We'll see," Scalia said, suggesting that future court cases will determine what limitations on modern-day weapons are permissible.
"Some limitations undoubtedly are permissible because there were some that were acknowledged at the time" the Constitution was written, Scalia said. He cited a practice from that era known as "frighting," where people "carried around a really horrible weapon just to scare people. That was, I believe, a misdemeanor."
"So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed," Scalia said. "What they are will depend on what the society understood were reasonable limitations at the time."
The conservative justice notably authored the Supreme Court's 2008 opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, which ruled that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to bear arms. The court ruled that "the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."
Scalia pointed out that that the Second Amendment "obviously" doesn't apply to weapons that can't be hand-carried, and modern-day weapons like "hand-held rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes" weren't factored in at the time of the writing of the Constitution.
"My starting point and probably my ending point will be what limitations are within the understood limitations that the society had at the time," he said. "They had some limitations on the nature of arms that could be borne. So we'll see what those limitations are as applied to modern weapons." Ultimately, Scalia said, any new gun restrictions will have to be weighed "very carefully"

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Hm... that is a lot to consider. I have to make a couple of admissions before I start.

1) I'm still not confident in my position on guns. The reason is that that data the supports gun ownership has been gathered for 30 years by the pro-gun side. And I have heard the many simple reasons for gun ownership. The best arguments for smart-responsible ownership of guns have already been part of our culture at least back to my grandfather. Well, actually I think I can eventually come up with some additional smart rules for gun ownership, but I have some kind of block based on the one side being so pro-gun that no flexibility is apparent.
2) To be clear about #1 above, what I mean is there can be some improvement in gun laws. I see those good ideas coming from me rather than media or government and surely not the NRA.
3) Pessimistically, I think weapons will destroy our country someday. I think eventually the US will destroy itself, whether or not gun control will change or shorten the time till the end ...I'm not going to guess.

Principal-wise, the best argument for gun control is the belief that we will destroy our country. I missed that in my first post.

I'm guessing that your principal for gun control is that the Patriarch Antonin Scalia say gun control is okay constitutionally and that weapons present a danger.

Question Authority. The supreme court is aiding and abetting the corporate RICO Violations especially through the Civil Rights Legislation passed in the 19th Century, Citizens United Ruling.

Question Authority: Obama, Eric Holder & Congress are aiding, Abetting, and engaging in Conspiracy to obstruct justice, destroy evidence, and engage in RICO Violations by not pursuing Financial Crimes. 90% of Gun Crimes are committed with Illegal Guns, and this is a Violent Country which will continue to have many Homicides even after Gun Bans.

Question Authority: The Creel Commission was set up to enslave the public with propaganda and public relations. The outcome of issues in the media, in Washington DC, will not solve any of the 800 pound Guerrillas that are destroying the Nation Today, NOW.

So where is the logic, how does it flow? How can you know what Presidential or Congressional Issues are important?

Well... lets think for ourselves and try to find the most important Principals before we tackle a problem.

Where will criminals get weapons like rockets and machineguns? Other criminals in the Military or by stealing from the US Military.

The Culture of Violence in the USA ... is greatly advanced by the corporate wars we engage in around the world. Some of the people trained in the US Military join gangs and teach others in the USA. And what better way to De-Humanize Killing, than by saying it is okay to have a kill list, conduct drone strikes in a country we are not at war with, and destroy Afghanistan & Iraq. By the way ... we will never show the human cost of war on TV... destruction of economies, family businesses, family cohesion, family homes, drinking water, electricity, rape of refugees, murder of refugees, ...oh and the sectarian violence we never take responsibility for that.

Here is another 800 pound Guerrilla, President Obama never takes responsibility for the Ethic & Moral fight for Justice. As black men get the book thrown at them for drug possession, get their lives documented so they can never get good jobs ... the President is acting like the Magician In Chief. Don't look at the Sub-Prime Fraud ... look over here at Gun Control. Don't look at Exporting Violence overseas ... Look over here at Gun Control.

Look where I live, if your gun is used in a Crime you do get in trouble. You have responsibility already. But Eric Hold doesn't have any Responsibility for Prosecuting Financial Fraud or Fast N Furious.

Sorry I know I am confusing the Issue for you. How can you not see what a sham the President of the USA is?

6.18.1962C-7 RICO – “Racketeering Activity” Defined “Racketeering activity,” as defined by the RICO statute [federal law], includes any acts that involve or that may be charged as any of a wide range of crimes under state or federal law.

Guilt of RICO Offense by Aiding and Abetting. A defendant may be guilty of a substantive RICO offense by aiding and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2.

So, perhaps my over-riding principal to follow could be ... in politics, follow the money, follow the conflict of interest, follow the gifts, follow the RICO Violations, .... And don't watch the Theater on TV, Cable, or Radio

And probably ... we should read report of kids, women, elderly that have defended themselves with guns. Criminals target the weak. Criminals will repeatedly on separate occasions harass, intimidate, abuse, and rape women they see as vulnerable. Could be that a woman with a gun can stop the cycle of abuse in her own home....

But, I sort of feel like this country will destroy itself with weapons eventually. I hate to be a cynic. But I do believe that government become corrupt and then abuse the people protected by their power.

If Obama is not a puppet, or a shill, or being blackmailed, or threatened by a secret army of the USA .... then he is far worse than I can imagine. This is far more pressing than gun control.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

Yeah- I know we, here ( and I more than most ) are pushing this issue very hard.
And yes - there are many issues much more important -
just two are jobs & war.
But there is little we can do in the next few weeks on jobs & war.
If Gabby Giffords' new PAC can get funds, if representatives got thousands of pro-gun control letters - we might cut down that 11,000 number by cutting down the number of guns - as GB & AU have done.


  1. I am not against owning guns - I just want them all registered & owners licensed.
  2. I do not admire Scalia - but he could be a fifth vote to support strict controls.
[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33674) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Number 1 - I don't care if they are registered - I care that they are properly secured when not in use.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

I think you are right that locking the guns is most important - but - by far - the hardest to achieve.
I know I am patting myself on the back, but I really believe the car = gun logic is pretty solid as a rationale
[ ever seen a car without a lock ? ]

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33674) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Nope - built in and provided with every model that I have ever seen. So. Why not guns? Makes perfect safety sense.

[-] 1 points by sportsman128 (1) 5 years ago

See this is what your forgetting, guns don't kill people stupid people kill people. I've never seen a gun walk into a room and kill someone. The main problem with today's world when it comes to guns is the lack of education when it comes to them. Twenty years ago there were the same type of guns out there but there wasn't severe shootings like there are today. This just goes to show if parents actually took the time to teach gun safety to their kids alot of this could have been prevented.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

The Sandy Hook murderer was well trained & gun educated -
by his first victim - HIS MOTHER

seriously ? you did not know that ?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

specifically, which of the last four massacres would have been stopped by education? and how?
please tell me that you know that wayne is a blood drenched liar

[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

Penalties will end up like any other in this system- if you have money, you get off. If you dont, you get the max.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

I assume a rich drunk driver is more likely to get away with it than a poor one,
but I do not want to legalize drunk driving.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33674) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Sure - look at mittens in France. He damn near died - although he was able to give interviews while in a coma - I guess.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

I think not too many people know this story.
But I thought he was uninjured & there was one death

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33674) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Depends on whether you are getting the truth or not - He was up and speaking directly after the accident(?) but according to other sources he was in a coma at that time - yep even with pictures showing him awake and responding to conversation ( the lights are on but your not home - your mind is not your own.....) - Hmmmmm. Miraculous - Hey?


[-] -2 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

How 'bout this one? All convicted of mass murder will be drawn and quartered and die a long, slow, media-induced circus death. Only a really sick individual would want to celebrate the life of someone like this by approving his or her continued existence.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

Only a really sick individual would support toorture

[-] -1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

Mass murders need to be made aware that the media circus they have invited through their heinous acts will NOT be an enjoyable, comical, experience. I want them to die long, slow, extremely painful public deaths. Anything short of that is far too much tolerance; it's inhuman.

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

In case you havent noticed, this administration made torture illegal
The primary goal of the American justice system is NOT vengance
Sadly, the majority of Americans a re pro-death penalty - so we have it.
I am against it. It has been proven that we have executed the innocent.
It is also a fact that states that have the most guns have the most murders & the most executions.

What is a summary of Wales gun laws & murder statistics?

[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 5 years ago

In case you havent noticed, this adminstration is full of shit.

They killed Americans abroad. Gitmo is still open, with people with no hope of getting out. Gun running still rampant. Secret bases all over the place.

[-] 1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

Are you really that foolish? I don't live in Wales; I'm a Welch Englishman, an Irishman, a German - I live in NY! I'm only traveling incognito because I've been banned from this site, repeatedly, for not supporting the criminal antics of the Obama administration and its party.

Do you know what Joel Rifkin is doing right now? He's lying on a bunk reading his umpteenth book; he gets one hour of gym class every day, and he has a very active social live (of course, it does not include any women, but apparently, he never liked them very much anyway).

There is NO justice in America's criminal justice system.

Three hundred and fifty years ago, three men committed the repeated gang rape of a teenage girl. For their actions, one was sentenced to have one nostril slit, severely whipped, and then committed to the jail at Boston; after his recovery he was transported to Salem where the other nostril was slit, he was severely whipped again, and committed to jail for recovery. His co-defendants were also severely whipped and committed to the jail for recovery. All three were sentenced to life without parole - they were to wear a two foot rope around their necks for the remainder of their lives, and were to never to venture beyond the bounds of their immediate communities again.

This is "justice" and it's very effective. Too much tolerance of those who wantonly victimize others is "inhuman"; it's despicable.

And that's the difference... we used to have a much healthier respect of just law and the value of people, in a manner, that we today cannot even envision.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

"There is NO justice in America's criminal justice system."
tell that to bernie madoff & rajat gupta the dozens convited for insider trading

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33674) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

I think Bernie was fortunate - and am in awe that he got a good pounding for his crimes.

[-] -1 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

I say a "frontal labodomy" will also solve the problem.