Obama Calls For More Gun Control

[webfact]

Obama calls for more gun control

CHICAGO: -- U.S. President Barack Obama has again called for the introduction of strict gun control in the United States.

newsjs

He said this during a speech on Friday at the school in Chicago, where a month ago, 15-year-old Hadiya Pendleton, who performed at his inauguration, was shot dead.

The President Obama stated that over the past year 65 children were killed in Chicago.

Obama said his administration has developed a package of measures to tighten gun control, in particular a ban on the possession of semi-automatic weapons and restrictions on the number of rounds that can be held in a cartridge.

Obama called on Congress to approve his initiatives.

Source: http://english.ruvr....re-gun-control/

-- THE VOICE OF RUSSIA 2013-02-16

[Jingthing]

Even if he can pass this, it will be too little, too late, and he probably can't pass even this. I reckon Americans are just stuck with certain unpleasant things. Absurdly high gun violence rate paired with absurdly high incarceration rates. Isn't that exceptional?

[submaniac]

Really?!?!?! Why are we using the "Voice of Russia" to report on United States news. Their stuff is usually crap.

in particular a ban on the possession of semi-automatic weapons

What he ACTUALLY wanted to do was ban possession of semi-automatic weapons which mimic military weapons (i.e. like the AR-15). Big difference than what is reported as a ban of ALL semi-automatic weapons would include a ban of many hunting rifles and virtually all semi-automatic handguns (eg all non revolvers). This is what I mean by crap.

Furthermore, Obama (if you're somehow reading an expat forum on living in Thailand), prior to your election victory you made a promise to all us gun owners that you weren't going to take away our guns. You are liar, and if I had known I would have voted for Romney instead.

Edited February 16, 2013 by submaniac

[Yabiaomer]

Like many things this Empty-suit said, there is an expiry-date for this statement as well ...

Who's taking this man seriously? Nobody

[Jingthing]

Really?!?!?! Why are we using the "Voice of Russia" to report on United States news. Their stuff is usually crap.

Well this story isn't far off. He did call for a vote on gun control in a strong way in his recent State of the Union address. No spin there.

[submaniac]

^^ I edited to refer to the error in their reporting.

[Jingthing]

The timing is right for a try at some limited gun control efforts anyway. Perhaps the universal background checks thing might have a chance. If not now, maybe never. I know many Americans get excited about what they think the 2nd amendment means, but in my opinion, it doesn't mean what they and the NRA thinks it means.

Edited February 16, 2013 by Jingthing

[keemapoot]

Believe it or not, that big windbag, Bill O'Reilly articulated what I thought to be the most intelligent approach to gun control I've heard the other night on Letterman. He proposed registration for all guns and owners, and federalizing all gun crimes with a mandatory 10 year sentence, even for unregistered guns. That still allows everyone to own guns legally, but makes unregistered gun holders big criminals. Federalizing the crimes puts into effect a massive enforcement apparatus too. It preserves Americans rights to own guns, but solves much of the problem.

[submaniac]

Bill O'Reilly articulated what I thought to be the most intelligent approach to gun control I've heard the other night on Letterman.

There's just something "not right" with this statement.

[webfact]

if you have issues with the sources we post you can complain to support [at] thaivisa [dot] com

[Morden]

How about the Washington Times, then, if Russian reports aren't to be relied on?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/15/obama-cites-his-absent-father-gun-control-plea/

I don't which is the more tragic, the gun violence or the intransigence of many Americans to the killing of young children. I can't understand why, in the face of the Sandy Hook massacre, many of the open gun law lobby have failed either to show sympathy or to acknowledge that something must change. They have emphasised the part played by mental illness but that's nowhere near enough to deal with the problem.

The Dorner incident shows that concentrating solely on mental illness doesn't prevent gun crimes. Dorner's ridiculous arsenal of semi-automatic rifles surely indicates that the permitted types of gun and the ease with they can be bought is a big part of the problem.

[Albacore]

"...the number of rounds that can be held in a cartridge."

It's bad enough when clip is used interchangeably with magazine, but "number of rounds held in a cartridge" is just absurd and clearly shows a lack of though or research given to this article.

Also rather ironic is that Chicago already has firearms restrictions much tougher than any federal restrictions being pondered, yet the firearm homicide rate there is astronomical.

[submaniac]

Dorner's ridiculous arsenal of semi-automatic rifles surely indicates that the permitted types of gun and the ease with they can be bought is a big part of the problem.

This is not correct. Dorner was a POLICE OFFICER. He graduated LAPD police academy, got his POST cert, and was on the street as a police oficer. California has very stringent firearms law. Colt AR-15's are specifically banned for civilian ownership, any assault weapon (defined as a semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip and detachable magazine) is banned for civilian ownership, and Dorner's .50 caliber BMG rifle (any rifle in this caliber) is banned for CIVILIAN ownership. He managed to procure his arsenal because he was a police officer, and police are exempt from the firearms restrictions.

Not that they would want this information published, but most likely the firearms that he possessed, the transfers were actually processed through the LAPD. (The LAPD has their own gun store in the academy, and they most likely did the FFL transfer to him as alot of his stuff a normal FFL would not want to transfer.)

"...the number of rounds that can be held in a cartridge."

It's bad enough when clip is used interchangeably with magazine, but "number of rounds held in a cartridge" is just absurd and clearly shows a lack of though or research given to this article.

Oh yes, another mistake I didn't catch...the "cartridge" is actually "A cartridge (also called a round, a shell or ammunition) packages a bullet, propellant (usually either smokeless powder or blackpowder) and a primer within a metallic, paper, or plastic casing that is precisely made to fit within the firing chamber of a firearm." (From wikipedia.)

Edited February 16, 2013 by submaniac

[webfact]

Obama pushes gun control in personal speech in Chicago

By Amie Parnes

CHICAGO: -- President Obama on Friday underlined his call for Congress to allow a vote on gun control by traveling to Chicago, his hometown and the city with the second-highest murder rate in the country.

“Too many of our children are being taken away from us,” Obama said in an intensely personal speech delivered in his old neighborhood that focused on the concerns of the urban poor.

Obama discussed the hardships of being raised by a single mom and the importance of fatherhood, and his speech included nods to gun control and other proposals from his State of the Union address meant to help the poor move up to middle-class lives.

Full story: http://thehill.com/h...eech-in-chicago

-- THE HILL 2013-02-16

[Morden]

Dorner's ridiculous arsenal of semi-automatic rifles surely indicates that the permitted types of gun and the ease with they can be bought is a big part of the problem.

This is not correct. Dorner was a POLICE OFFICER. He graduated LAPD police academy, got his POST cert, and was on the street as a police oficer. California has very stringent firearms law. Colt AR-15's are specifically banned for civilian ownership, any assault weapon (defined as a semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip and detachable magazine) is banned for civilian ownership, and Dorner's .50 caliber BMG rifle (any rifle in this caliber) is banned for CIVILIAN ownership. He managed to procure his arsenal because he was a police officer, and police are exempt from the firearms restrictions.

Not that they would want this information published, but most likely the firearms that he possessed, the transfers were actually processed through the LAPD. (The LAPD has their own gun store in the academy, and they most likely did the FFL transfer to him as alot of his stuff a normal FFL would not want to transfer.)

He was an EX-police officer. Presumably, that makes him a civilian, subject to civilian law.

[Morden]

Obama pushes gun control in personal speech in Chicago

By Amie Parnes

CHICAGO: -- President Obama on Friday underlined his call for Congress to allow a vote on gun control by traveling to Chicago, his hometown and the city with the second-highest murder rate in the country.

“Too many of our children are being taken away from us,” Obama said in an intensely personal speech delivered in his old neighborhood that focused on the concerns of the urban poor.

Obama discussed the hardships of being raised by a single mom and the importance of fatherhood, and his speech included nods to gun control and other proposals from his State of the Union address meant to help the poor move up to middle-class lives.

Full story: http://thehill.com/h...eech-in-chicago

-- THE HILL 2013-02-16

He's showing more understanding of the social issues connected with gun violence than many of the NRA hangers on, one of whom told Piers Morgan that the 2nd Amendment entitled her to own a tank.

[submaniac]

He was an EX-police officer. Presumably, that makes him a civilian, subject to civilian law.

Yes...and no. Yes in that he was terminated from the LAPD and was not with a job and hence not a police officer with a Department. POST cert means he is certified as a Police Officer (POST is the certification for Police in California). http://www.post.ca.gov/home.aspx With a POST certificate, he could have been hired at another police agency. It's like a doctor. If you have a medical license but no job at a particular hospital, you are still nonetheless a doctor. Despite being fired, he was a certified police officer and could have been hired at another department. However, as most departments check with your previous police employer, chances of getting hired are slim to none. (He should have quit before he was fired, which is what most LAPD due when their facing termination.)

Furthermore, the guns he purchased when he was a cop are still his. The cost for firearms is not cheap, and his arsenal was several thousands of dollars. They do not make you turn it in when you are fired because it is a large investment and he theoretically could have been hired at another department.

Edited February 16, 2013 by submaniac

[Morden]

He was an EX-police officer. Presumably, that makes him a civilian, subject to civilian law.

Yes...and no. Yes in that he was terminated from the LAPD and was not with a job and hence not a police officer with a Department. POST cert means he is certified as a Police Officer (POST is the certification for Police in California). http://www.post.ca.gov/home.aspx With a POST certificate, he could have been hired at another police agency. It's like a doctor. If you have a medical license but no job at a particular hospital, you are still nonetheless a doctor. Despite being fired, he was a certified police officer and could have been hired at another department. However, as most departments check with your previous police employer, chances of getting hired are slim to none. (He should have quit before he was fired, which is what most LAPD due when their facing termination.)

Furthermore, the guns he purchased when he was a cop are still his. The cost for firearms is not cheap, and his arsenal was several thousands of dollars. They do not make you turn it in when you are fired because it is a large investment and he theoretically could have been hired at another department.

Thanks for the explanation. That seems to something else that should be up for review. I can't see why even a cop with a job needs those guns. In fact, should cops not be limited to official issue weapons and otherwise be subject to civilian law?

[SouthernMan3]

Even if he can pass this, it will be too little, too late, and he probably can't pass even this. I reckon Americans are just stuck with certain unpleasant things. Absurdly high gun violence rate paired with absurdly high incarceration rates. Isn't that exceptional?

Hey man, at least he's trying.......

[Jingthing]

Even if he can pass this, it will be too little, too late, and he probably can't pass even this. I reckon Americans are just stuck with certain unpleasant things. Absurdly high gun violence rate paired with absurdly high incarceration rates. Isn't that exceptional?

Hey man, at least he's trying.......

Of course. I'm not blaming him for the culture and the power of the NRA. As I said, if not now, never. The best political opportunity for action that I've ever seen.

[submaniac]

I can't see why even a cop with a job needs those guns. In fact, should cops not be limited to official issue weapons and otherwise be subject to civilian law?

I think I mentioned on a previous post that my ex gf is an LAPD officer. She called me after dorner had shot capt quan's daughter. I have LAPD kma-367 plates on my car ( plate holders cops give to friends and family to prevent other cops from issuing a traffic citation). Dorner said on page 9 of his manifesto that he would shoot anyone with those plates and she called to warn me to remove them.

Anyways to answer your first question, the cops do need them. USA is not England. Before the LAPD didn't issue ar15 assault rifles generally and only swat (special weapons and tactics) had them. Google the north Hollywood shoot out. Things changed after that. The criminals don't care that the guns they have are illegal. Two bank robbers took ak47s And made them into fully automatic rifles. They also made body armor into a full suit. The LAPD when they reached the scene were helpless. The cops only had handguns which could not pierce the robbers body armor. The criminals had ak47s which could pierce the cops body armor. The cops were pinned down and helpless as none of their handgun runs did anything to stop them. The only LAPD with assault rifles were swat but it took time for them to be deployed. The cops on the scene resorted to commandeering ar15s from local gun shops so they could stand a chance. After that incident, the LAPD took steps that there were more assault rifles available to their cops. So that's why dorner had one.

Two in regards to whether they should be issues by the department, they are not. The way it works is that he department has a list of firearms that they authorize to be used on duty. The individual police officer chooses his/her weapon depending on personal taste. For example a glock 40 caliber double stack magazine (meaning the bullets are side by side) has a very big grip. A female cop may have smaller hands and may prefer a single stack pistol like a .45 . A cop with big hands may want the doublestack. A cop who is on patrol may want a big gun because it is open. An undercover cop may need a smaller more concealed weapon. Because if the variants, the cops choose their own weapon from the list. The cops get like $1200 a year for equipment so they buy the guns they want and the guns are theirs. The cops also buy heir own bullets and the cost is tax deductible.

The depts do issue guns if he cop doesn't have their own. But the ones issued are usually garbage so the cops buy their own.

Quite frankly if the cops weren't allowed to choose their own they would be outgunned on the street.

[Morden]

I can't see why even a cop with a job needs those guns. In fact, should cops not be limited to official issue weapons and otherwise be subject to civilian law?

I think I mentioned on a previous post that my ex gf is an LAPD officer. She called me after dorner had shot capt quan's daughter. I have LAPD kma-367 plates on my car ( plate holders cops give to friends and family to prevent other cops from issuing a traffic citation). Dorner said on page 9 of his manifesto that he would shoot anyone with those plates and she called to warn me to remove them.

Anyways to answer your first question, the cops do need them. USA is not England. Before the LAPD didn't issue ar15 assault rifles generally and only swat (special weapons and tactics) had them. Google the north Hollywood shoot out. Things changed after that. The criminals don't care that the guns they have are illegal. Two bank robbers took ak47s And made them into fully automatic rifles. They also made body armor into a full suit. The LAPD when they reached the scene were helpless. The cops only had handguns which could not pierce the robbers body armor. The criminals had ak47s which could pierce the cops body armor. The cops were pinned down and helpless as none of their handgun runs did anything to stop them. The only LAPD with assault rifles were swat but it took time for them to be deployed. The cops on the scene resorted to commandeering ar15s from local gun shops so they could stand a chance. After that incident, the LAPD took steps that there were more assault rifles available to their cops. So that's why dorner had one.

Two in regards to whether they should be issues by the department, they are not. The way it works is that he department has a list of firearms that they authorize to be used on duty. The individual police officer chooses his/her weapon depending on personal taste. For example a glock 40 caliber double stack magazine (meaning the bullets are side by side) has a very big grip. A female cop may have smaller hands and may prefer a single stack pistol like a .45 . A cop with big hands may want the doublestack. A cop who is on patrol may want a big gun because it is open. An undercover cop may need a smaller more concealed weapon. Because if the variants, the cops choose their own weapon from the list. The cops get like $1200 a year for equipment so they buy the guns they want and the guns are theirs. The cops also buy heir own bullets and the cost is tax deductible.

The depts do issue guns if he cop doesn't have their own. But the ones issued are usually garbage so the cops buy their own.

Quite frankly if he cops weren't allowed to choose their own they would be outgunned on the street.

Thanks for the additional information.

Specially trained police officers in the UK also have appropriate fire power. However, the guns are supplied by the police force according to the job in hand. They must also practice at a range and show that they are still competent. If a policeman wants his own gun for personal use, he applies for a licence the same as anyone else.

You indicated that officer in the US could buy their own guns within an approved range 'for use on duty'. Dorner had no duty. It seems irresponsible that a sacked officer should be allowed to have the arsenal that Dorner had.

[submaniac]

Well what could they do? If he hadn't been an LAPD cop he wouldn't have been allowed to purchase. But he did purchase legally as he was a cop. If you tried to arrest him for having illegal weapons the defense would have been I obtained these weapons legally when I was a cop. He bought them legally because a cop is a exception and at the time he qualified to purchase because he was a cop. He cannot be arrested for illegal possession. Even when fired, he wasn't required to turn them into LAPD since these were the weapons he owned. He bought them (with his stipend) but they were legally his and registered to him. he was fired from lapd but could have found a job at another department. like a car mechanic has his tools, a cop has his. Nothing that could be done really except if he was deemed mentally unstable then the guns could be impounded.

[Chicog]

The timing is right for a try at some limited gun control efforts anyway. Perhaps the universal background checks thing might have a chance. If not now, maybe never. I know many Americans get excited about what they think the 2nd amendment means, but in my opinion, it doesn't mean what they and the NRA thinks it means.

The NRA know exactly what it means; however that's not how they portray it.

[Chicog]

Believe it or not, that big windbag, Bill O'Reilly articulated what I thought to be the most intelligent approach to gun control I've heard the other night on Letterman. He proposed registration for all guns and owners, and federalizing all gun crimes with a mandatory 10 year sentence, even for unregistered guns. That still allows everyone to own guns legally, but makes unregistered gun holders big criminals. Federalizing the crimes puts into effect a massive enforcement apparatus too. It preserves Americans rights to own guns, but solves much of the problem.

Doesn't do anything about the Adam and Sandy Lanzas though, does it?

[Chicog]

"...the number of rounds that can be held in a cartridge."

It's bad enough when clip is used interchangeably with magazine, but "number of rounds held in a cartridge" is just absurd and clearly shows a lack of though or research given to this article.

Also rather ironic is that Chicago already has firearms restrictions much tougher than any federal restrictions being pondered, yet the firearm homicide rate there is astronomical.

Because they can be legally purchased over state borders. What's the point in having any laws if people can just drive them in?

[Chicog]

Dorner's ridiculous arsenal of semi-automatic rifles surely indicates that the permitted types of gun and the ease with they can be bought is a big part of the problem.

This is not correct. Dorner was a POLICE OFFICER. He graduated LAPD police academy, got his POST cert, and was on the street as a police oficer. California has very stringent firearms law. Colt AR-15's are specifically banned for civilian ownership, any assault weapon (defined as a semi-automatic rifle with a pistol grip and detachable magazine) is banned for civilian ownership, and Dorner's .50 caliber BMG rifle (any rifle in this caliber) is banned for CIVILIAN ownership. He managed to procure his arsenal because he was a police officer, and police are exempt from the firearms restrictions.

Not that they would want this information published, but most likely the firearms that he possessed, the transfers were actually processed through the LAPD. (The LAPD has their own gun store in the academy, and they most likely did the FFL transfer to him as alot of his stuff a normal FFL would not want to transfer.)

"...the number of rounds that can be held in a cartridge."

It's bad enough when clip is used interchangeably with magazine, but "number of rounds held in a cartridge" is just absurd and clearly shows a lack of though or research given to this article.

Oh yes, another mistake I didn't catch...the "cartridge" is actually "A cartridge (also called a round, a shell or ammunition) packages a bullet, propellant (usually either smokeless powder or blackpowder) and a primer within a metallic, paper, or plastic casing that is precisely made to fit within the firing chamber of a firearm." (From wikipedia.)

But it fits the definition of "3. A small modular unit designed to be inserted into a larger piece of equipment" so it's diversionary to discuss such semantics.

[submaniac]

A cartridge is the ammunition. The magazine is what stores the ammunition. It's common knowledge. When I read this all it makes me think is this person knows nothing about guns.

[marstons]

Obama pushes gun control in personal speech in Chicago

By Amie Parnes

CHICAGO: -- President Obama on Friday underlined his call for Congress to allow a vote on gun control by traveling to Chicago, his hometown and the city with the second-highest murder rate in the country.

“Too many of our children are being taken away from us,” Obama said in an intensely personal speech delivered in his old neighborhood that focused on the concerns of the urban poor.

Obama discussed the hardships of being raised by a single mom and the importance of fatherhood, and his speech included nods to gun control and other proposals from his State of the Union address meant to help the poor move up to middle-class lives.

Full story: http://thehill.com/h...eech-in-chicago

-- THE HILL 2013-02-16

He's showing more understanding of the social issues connected with gun violence than many of the NRA hangers on, one of whom told Piers Morgan that the 2nd Amendment entitled her to own a tank.

Don't what's more anti social owning a tank or Piers Morgan. Obviously the will of the people is to own guns, then so bi it. Obama seems incapable of passing wind let alone bills

[Morden]

Well what could they do? If he hadn't been an LAPD cop he wouldn't have been allowed to purchase. But he did purchase legally as he was a cop. If you tried to arrest him for having illegal weapons the defense would have been I obtained these weapons legally when I was a cop. He bought them legally because a cop is a exception and at the time he qualified to purchase because he was a cop. He cannot be arrested for illegal possession. Even when fired, he wasn't required to turn them into LAPD since these were the weapons he owned. He bought them (with his stipend) but they were legally his and registered to him. he was fired from lapd but could have found a job at another department. like a car mechanic has his tools, a cop has his. Nothing that could be done really except if he was deemed mentally unstable then the guns could be impounded.

You mean that a collection of weapons from handguns to semi-automatic assault type rifles is similar to a mechanic's tools?

I must accept, I suppose, that the present laws allow a sacked copper to keep a collection of military type guns. My suggestion is that it's wrong.