Start A Petition

The Likely Recommendations of Obama's Gun-Control Task Force

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: gun control, Newtown Massacre, gun violence, children, news, government, ethics, media, lies, politics, americans )

- 1985 days ago -
Universal background checks and a ban on high-capacity magazines are on the table

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Jae A (316)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 3:58 pm
Of course ''univeral background checks' are a good thing but that isn't to say who might 'snap' after buying a firearm but it's better than nothing in that department. The ban on high capacity magzines would be the biggest step in the right direction. Grandfathering in those who already own them...mistake in my opinion. That will make them move valuable as to dollar worth..thus theives will out in force to steal them for those who will not have sense enough to keep their ownership secret etc....and or not in a extremely safe or other very strong lock box that isn't easy to open by anyone of the owner...thus it will not take very long before the majority of them end up in the wrong hands ...and many will die in the process of trying to hold on to theirs. Owning a firearm , doesn't mean you are guarenteed to win a 'shoot out'. That being said...I do believe what they are doing is at least on the right long as the 'ban' is a part of the final deal.

Ruth R (246)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 4:52 pm
What I Was Trying To Explain. BETTER THINK,
5:02 the latest correction and maybe the last to my thought at this time on gun control may be a distraction. There are other issues: how to uproot the causes of the misuse and the use of weapons in the first place???
Do we remember the fight for freedom and the steps to downfall that took place before the natzi's tried to take over in world war two?
correction. Are we pawns in a behind the scenes system that would like people to think that they do not have to defend them selves and their loved ones -- from people who could and would if they could get these weapons -- and defend themselves and others from -- A partly good and partly excellent government system-- if the government turns against the civilians?
Do we remember the fight for freedom and the steps to downfall that took place before the nazi's tried to take over in world war two?
If I was about to get shot any where -- by some person who either planned it, or did not -- I sure would be grateful if some other person {without getting injured and without getting killed} stopped that gun from from going off. Guns are not the only kind of weapons that I would need to be defended from.
The real useful conversation is about how to keep people happy, whole, healthy and sane -- so that people will not misuse weapons of all kinds. Then the actions need to taken -- that help people stay healthy, whole, sane and happy, and at peace. THE GUN ISSUES IS A NON-ISSUE. PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS AND HAVE ALWAYS MADE WEAPONS OF ALL KINDS.
This conversation needs to change it's course -- because it is a distraction from the real subject: The cause of the misuse of guns and weapons.
If you would like to have a peaceful conversation: Many countries have no gun rights --and less deaths and injuries to guns 1A. they have many other kinds of weapons and ways to fight. , 1. They are at the mercy of other who get a hold of "better" weapons -- if trained and self-controled civilians do not have those better weapons. 2. They are at the mercy of those who are taking over the good in the government system. 3. They are at the mercy of the corrupt people in the government system or behind the government system --for example -- raw milk and organic produce being taken by government officials and dumped and trashed.

When the governments and/or the eu and/or the un have FEAR-- HAS AWE AND RESPECT FOR THE PEOPLE, THEN THE PEOPLE HAVE FREEDOM.

Where are the petitions from the people who would like -- freedom of choice of the kind of weapons they have -- and keep the government regulations out of this matter and/or to a minimum???
Are we being used like pawns in a system making us to think that we do not need weapons --- when that government -- by nature -- may or may not be taking all the power from the people that it possibly can ???
If you go and ban those weapons -- there will be another kind of weapon -- by those who you took it away from.
If you keep petitioning and writing about gun control, you miss the true matter -- that of addressing:
1. What is the true purpose of weapons -- needs a list and to be peaceful conversations.
2. How to help people use weapons for the only the correct reasons.
3. how to stop the misuse of weapons.
4. The self-control and respect and honor of self defense -- peaceful or not --
without or with weapons.
5. Since when did government intervention mean that the government will not be used against the civilians -- to take away a means of their own self -defense -- gun or other weapon?

Ruth R (246)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 4:52 pm

Ruth R (246)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 5:05 pm
Oh well.

pam w (139)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 6:29 pm
Paranoia should NOT be allowed to justify the regulation of assault weapons!


pam w (139)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 6:30 pm
I didn't say what I meant there.

Paranoia (and it abounds here) should Not be allowed as justification AGAINST the regulation of assault weapons.

Carol H (229)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 6:34 pm
noted, thanks Cal

John C (75)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 6:44 pm
I own them. Not as young as I used to be. I can't light matches anymore. I also own a fire extinguisher. That doesn't mean that I intend to burn down the house.
I don't believe that guns are a much of a problem the immaturity of our people.

In the 9th century every able bodied man was REQUIRED to report to the village green after Church on Sunday for target practice. They used long bows then. They were accurate to 600 yards. The French hated them. They would cut off the fore and middle finger of such people to reduce the threat level. When they survived they would hold up these two fingers to them to show that they were not yet safe. Richard Nixon used the same symbol but the populace assumed what he meant by that.

If every citizen could report to a range to qualify as law enforcement does, to be evaluated by proficiency, as well as mental state, half of the fear could be diminished in 5 years. The problem is raising a generation of indiscriminate killers. Not citizens. The problem will not go away no matter the laws passed. Such will resort to arson or bombs such as Northern Ireland.

We take too much for granted.

By all means legislate a ban on assault rifles, I know of no weapon one cannot suffer assault from.Or a limit on the purchase of ammunition. How will that protect the population from those who make their own?
How will any of this protect our children from someone how would steal the weapons of their parents and shoot them before they attack us? This is not a gun problem. I agree that something must give here. I have one's that go to school as well.

Alexandra Rodda (180)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 10:27 pm
It is a gun problem That shooting could not have been done with a long bow.
There should be no assault weapons in the general population. If we were to be invaded by Martians, the government could distribute assault weapons if they would be effective. Until then, what is the reason to have an assault weapon?

Fran C (7)
Thursday January 10, 2013, 11:24 pm
Alexandra got it in one. There's nothing else to say.

Robert O (12)
Friday January 11, 2013, 12:17 am
Thanks Cal.

Past Member (0)
Friday January 11, 2013, 4:30 am
Could have come up with these ideas without any meetings, and without the delay there would still be some feelings about the subject. But I am still not certain how thangs would have turned out differently had someone walked into a school with 5 pistols with 6 shots in each. Would the shooter be overcome by a rush of grade schoolers trying to protect themselves?

Kenneth L (314)
Friday January 11, 2013, 4:53 am
Just to get off topic, to Ruth R., well if Jesus is your Savior and therefore he try to be Christ-like since when did he walk around with weapons to 'protect' himself from others?
Anyway, you are just copying and pasting your diatribe (hardly ever use that word, fits here though) onto all gun article threads you find.
You say the true issue is "how to keep people happy, whole, healthy and sane -- so that people will not misuse weapons of all kinds." So I would ask the obvious question: "Should Ruth R. then own a gun? Is she 'happy, whole, healthy, and sane?"

Kenneth L (314)
Friday January 11, 2013, 4:58 am
first sentence should be "well if Jesus is your Savior and therefore he told others to try to be Christ-like, since when did he walk around with weapons to 'protect' himself from others?"

Pamylle G (461)
Friday January 11, 2013, 6:06 am
A promising beginning: universal backround checks, studies....but a ban on assault weapons is essential. No one needs one to hunt or defend one's home, which are the only reasons for an ordinary citizen to require a firearm.

Arielle S (313)
Friday January 11, 2013, 8:39 am
Not nearly enough for me but it's a start - Yes, all weapons kill but assault weapons kill a LOT in a very short time. There is no need for them in a sane household.

lee e (114)
Friday January 11, 2013, 8:49 am
I don't think anyone will want to hear me rant on about our domestic terrorist organization the NRA - or the poor excuses that people have from a mis-interpreted 2nd amendment - or the fact that the amendment itself mentions Regulations - and that is our responsibility - I don't undersstand how under any circumstances an assault weapon should be in the hands of a civilian - nor any clip that contains more than 8-10 bullets in a pistol for ones protection (which is already conceding more than 8-10 bullets in my belief system!) - if "sporting" is the issue (and I don't know how many calories are consumed with such a blood-thirsty sport!) - go to the rifle range and rent one for the hour - otherwise they should be banned!

Arielle S (313)
Friday January 11, 2013, 9:01 am
YAY, Lee!!!

Jae A (316)
Friday January 11, 2013, 11:21 am
As for protecting ones self against an army of any kind...get real ! A drone can take you and your entire house out with little effort or even a live person as back up, if they want.... so chill on that over rated paranoia. . . unless you just like having a false sense of security and little else in reality.

Am I a firearm owner. Yes. Why?....good question...but I'll have to get back with ya on that once I figure it out myself :-). Maybe due to almost always having one since a youngster ...humm..whatever... I still believe that military firearms something I nor any private citizen should have access to.

More innocent lives are taken due to firearms than those saved by them in this country. Homocides are common daily events..

Military style weapons in the hands of civilians.....well we read about that more and more with all the mass murders taking place...but when was the last time you heard of a civilian using one in self defence against an entruder ? Ever wonder how many assault firearms are stolen each week that are now in the hands of the 'bad people' out to commit crimes with them or to sell them to drug cartels and or street gangs.

A hand gun with up to 10 rounds is more than enough to defend ones self against an intruder...or rifles with only one round if wanting to hunt and kill a deer or rabbit for 'the sport of it' ! Common sense is what it takes to see that military firearms have one use only..rapid fire to kill as fast and as many living creatures as possible in seconds.

Common sense should also tell us all that Gun Controls are needed and hopefully the restrictions will tighten more and more as people come to their senses about the NRA being lobbiest for firearms dealers , not lobbiest for family/property protection.

Install a security alarm system first off..then think about owning a hand gun is one feels they want/need one. Get the priorities straight if protection and fending off intruders is a concern. A firearm for someone sound asleep isn't worth anything..but an alarm system that not only wakes one but in most cases will stop intruders from entering in the first place would just seem the logical first step to home safety/ my opinion.

Background checks...sure...finger printed at time of purchase....even better...end the selling of guns at 'gun shows'......excellent........ban on military firearms ...fantastic. Bring recommendations into law...a good place to start.

Joanne Dixon (38)
Friday January 11, 2013, 12:56 pm
Ruth and John have a point, which I might express as saying every citizen needs access to the means of revolution, but they fail to see that guns are no longer the means of revolution. The means of revolution today include the internet, Care2, the Occupy movement, Anonymous, Wikileaks, and the like. This is not an exhaustive list - I would be interested to know what others would add to it. The NRA no longer supports the means of revolution. The NRA has become one with the corruption which needs to be revolted against. The proliferation of guns is standing in the way of the revolution. Let's get them out of this conversation - and outlawing assault weapons for all outside of a military combat zone would be a good place to start. But we need to redirect the conversation.

Mary Donnelly (47)
Friday January 11, 2013, 2:01 pm
Thanks Cal--great post and comments.

Julian Robert Gonzalez (112)
Friday January 11, 2013, 4:20 pm
I hope you gun control advocates become and suffer the hardships the government will impose on you. Look up Democide. The real problem is drugs the schools pushing down our kids throats. Fact on reported, all the mass shooters were given drugs. 3 videos. 1st tells reason for 2nd Amendment. 2nd tells of Deliberate dumbing down of America. Please note at the 10.26 mark about drugs. The last talks about Democide. To know it is true remember how peaceful demonstrators were treated during occupy movements. Think about that only 100 times worse.

Rockney V (3)
Friday January 11, 2013, 5:39 pm
Thank you Julian Gonzalez.
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Such is the case now..
The first thing Hitler did to over power Germany was to take away all firearms from every citizen.
The Japanese did not land ashore on mainland USA as they knew at that time nearly every Citizen of the USA owned firearms.
As a Society, we need to find out WHY these people & children are killing on a large scale.
The problem is not the firearms or even high capacity magazines: Time to find out why our Society is cultivating such people.

Winnie A (179)
Friday January 11, 2013, 5:40 pm
Keeping guns near you only gives a false sense of security and puts you in harms way.

Lois Jordan (63)
Friday January 11, 2013, 6:39 pm
Noted. Well, I was pretty horrified today to read an article, (not in The Onion), stating that Obama was considering the option to place armed police at schools. Now, he's beginning to sound like that nut Sheriff Joe up in Phoenix. I will fight that "tooth-and-nail."

Scott haakon (4)
Friday January 11, 2013, 8:19 pm
Guns modern guns are the hallmark of free peoples. All ballots not backed by bullets are just streams of paper or data. The concept that people will have any means of truly changing for the better is a pipe dream. What is better? Each of us has an idea of better than may not agree with out neighbor. Each of us want a modicum of control of out lives. Yet we bow before many bosses. We surrender our rights because of false promises. WE surrender our privacy and not even know it. We by our silence insure our demise.

Lynn Squance (235)
Friday January 11, 2013, 11:42 pm
The 2nd amendment, US Constitution adopted 15/12/1791 (almost to the day 221 years before Newtown):

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The way I read the 2nd amendment, the intention of the writer was to give Americans in the new country the right to bear arms as a 'well regulated militia' to protect the state, there being no army as such for national security. Further, that weapon would have been a single shot musket at the time.

I did some reading and SCOTUS disagrees with me (hey I am not a solicitor). "In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia[1][2] and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

One does not need an assault rifle with a 30 bullet clip to protect the home.

Sensible gun control that is not unlike getting a driver's license: registration of fire arms; licensing, training, written and practical testing , health requirements, liability insurance, detailed background checks, and periodical license renewal and weapon inspections should be a must.

Combine that with an assault rifle ban and a ban on large ammunition clips should help matters. People don't need assault weapons. And if you're going to say that some one might attack the US, then you really are paranoid. Gun control works well in many other countries. It is time Americans got over their fixation with the 2nd amendment.

lee e (114)
Saturday January 12, 2013, 9:53 am
Thanks Lynn - this is an amendment that is in desparate need of "amending" to update itself - there is no excuse to run with the "right to bear arms" in this day and age -- if "revolution" were to be the excuse -- please - if the army were to be let loose on the citizens - an assault weapon would be of no avail -- the mega 5 consservatives in the Scrotus - have made more than once misinterpreted the Constitution to advance the corporate agenda it espouses!! To the detriment of "we the people" and democracy itself!

Ruth R (246)
Monday January 14, 2013, 8:04 pm
My guess is that my earlier comment does not belong in the context of these comments. That it belongs in another setting. I have no strong stand and view on gun control.

My sorrow is great over the loss of the children's lives at the school, and to the loss of other lives due to the misuse of guns.

Ruth R (246)
Monday January 14, 2013, 8:37 pm
I have no comment on this issue at this time. I have requested that all the previous comments be removed. Only the following can be said:
I grieve with those who grieve at this time. I am sad for the tragic loss of life with - due to many reasons. in the USA due many storms, and many thoughts of violence that need to be thoughts of kindness one towards another -- like giving one person at a time some hope, and/or some food, and/or a pair of shoes, or a safe place to live, choosing to give a good needed gift to a man, women and child in need. giving one person after another comfort and courage to do a good thing.
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.