Obama says gun lobby stokes fear of federal action

[Penny Lane 8,159]

(CNN) -- The gun lobby is "ginning up" fears the federal government will use the Newtown shooting tragedy, exactly one month ago, to seize Americans' guns, President Barack Obama said Monday.

At least part of the frenzy is little more than marketing, he implied.

"It's certainly good for business," the president said, responding to a question about a spike in weapons sales and applications for background checks after the massacre at Connecticut's Sandy Hook Elementary School left 27 people dead, 20 of them children.

"Part of the challenge we confront is that even the slightest hint of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area fans this notion that somehow, 'Here it comes, everybody's guns are going to be taken away,'" Obama said.

This week, the president is reviewing recommendations from a task force led by Vice President Joe Biden looking into ways to curb gun violence. Obama set up the group after December's carnage in Newtown and demanded reform ideas by this month.

Obama said he expects to have a fuller presentation later in the week "to give people some specifics about what I think we need to do," he told reporters Monday.

While the final recommendations have not been made public, Biden has said he's found widespread support for universal background checks and restrictions on the sale of high capacity magazines, which gun-control advocates believe contribute to more bloodshed at mass shootings.

Obama said he backs such measures as well as renewing the Clinton-era assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.

Passing any legislation may not be easy: The influential National Rifle Association, among other gun rights groups, has vowed to fight any new gun restrictions -- like an assault weapon ban, which the group's president David Keene predicted Sunday wouldn't make it through Congress -- tooth and nail.

Yet, as he weighs options, Obama said politics isn't his first concern.

"My starting point is to focus on what makes sense, what works, what should we be doing to make sure our children are safe," he told reporters. "I think we can do that in a sensible way that comports with the Second Amendment."

'This is about the safety of the public'

Gun control advocates, gun violence victims, the NRA, video game makers and others have met with the Biden-led task force, with their conversations ranging from the capacity of ammunition magazines to portrayals of violence in the media.

The vice president met Monday with congressional Democrats, talks that are "part of a larger outreach effort that will involve other members of Congress," a source familiar with the meeting told CNN.

In addition to new gun restrictions, the package proposed by Obama may include mental health provisions that could garner wider support. Some initiatives -- like how the government tracks how weapons fall into criminals' hands -- could be accomplished by executive order, Obama said.

Yet other measures would require approval of a Congress that, on many issues, has been hard-pressed to get anything accomplished -- even though the momentum to act in some way, be it by clamping down on guns or putting armed guards in schools, as the NRA has proposed -- is undeniable.

Mark Kelly, a former Navy pilot and astronaut whose wife, then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, survived a 2011 mass shooting that left six dead, said he and his wife both own guns and support the Second Amendment. Yet the couple is adamant that more must be done to curb gun violence, touting measures like banning high-capacity magazines and having universal background checks, which Kelly said a vast majority of the NRA's 4.2 million members support.

"This isn't really about the Second Amendment," said Kelly, who has formed a political action committee intent on pursuing reforms. "This is about gun safety, and it's about the safety of the public."

The retired Navy captain told CNN he believes the debate can produce "common sense solutions to this very serious problem."

People around the country are demanding nothing less in the wake of the Newtown shooting, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. He said Monday that more than 1 million people have signed a petition backed by his group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

"For many Americans, this is the straw that broke the camel's back," he said about the Connecticut school carnage.

Polling appears to support the contention.

A new Gallup poll released Monday shows 38% of Americans are dissatisfied with current gun laws and support stricter proposals. That is a 13 percentage point jump from a year ago.

The shift is most marked among men. The poll revealed a 17 percent increase in support for stricter gun control laws among men, compared to 10 percentage points for women. That may be because polling has shown women already tend to be more supportive of gun control legislation.

The increase spanned the partisan divide, but it was strongest with Democrats, 64 percent of whom said they favor additional regulations. That's up 22 percentage points from last year, Gallup reported.

Among Republicans, support rose by 12 percentage points, though that still only works out to 18 percent overall.

The poll of 1,011 adults was conducted January 7-10 and has a sampling error of plus or minus four percentage points.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/14/politics/gun-laws-battle/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Obama hates guns. Impeach him.

[JohnR! 5,495]

"Part of the challenge we confront is that even the slightest hint of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area fans this notion that somehow, 'Here it comes, everybody's guns are going to be taken away,'" Obama said.

That is an accurate statement. I have seen a lot of posts supporting the misconstrued notion that all guns will be confiscated, a common tale by the less aware of our political and constitutional system.

Fear sells, and the NRA is dispensing it by the buckets.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

That is an accurate statement. I have seen a lot of posts supporting the misconstrued notion that all guns will be confiscated, a common tale by the less aware of our political and constitutional system.

Yeah, that's the part that stood out to me as well. It's been proven on these forums time and time again.

[himher 634]

We will play the "who said this" game - hint none of these words were written in the last 200 years.

Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

The Constitution shall never be construed … to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.

To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Nobody's trying to take away your guns. Stricter gun control doesn't mean someone's gonna raid your gun cabinet.

[himher 634]

The new law passed in New York giving currently legal owners 1 year to get rid of all magazines that hold >7 rounds or face criminal charges is not a form of confiscation?

Yeah, that's the part that stood out to me as well. It's been proven on these forums time and time again.

Edited January 15, 2013 by himher

[JohnR! 5,495]

The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed

That has been my point from the onset. The fearmongers have little, if any, knowledge of our Constitution and spread their fears as though they were imminent reality.

Again, fear sells...

[Penny Lane 8,159]

The new law passed in New York giving currently legal owners 1 year to get rid of all magazines that hold >7 rounds or face criminal charges is not a form of confiscation?

It is not preventing someone from being armed, is it? No.

I think it's ridiculous to use the second amendment and say that it allows you to have however many and whatever kind of guns you want. Just because it's in the constitution doesn't mean that rules and regulations to control the situation are anti-American or whatever other nonsense people are throwing out there.

Maybe you could have whatever you want in 1791, but it's 2013 now and guns are a bit different today than they were when this was put into place. With changing times and changing technology, rules must also be changed to reflect them.

You can still have your gun. You can still protect your home with it. You can still go hunting with it. But you don't need to be carrying military style weapons around. Sorry.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Evylin

[JohnR! 5,495]

The new law passed in New York giving currently legal owners 1 year to get rid of all magazines that hold >7 rounds or face criminal charges is not a form of confiscation?

It is no different than prohibiting an individual from acquiring a nuclear weapon, the Constitution notwithstanding.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

That is an accurate statement. I have seen a lot of posts supporting the misconstrued notion that all guns will be confiscated, a common tale by the less aware of our political and constitutional system.

Fear sells, and the NRA is dispensing it by the buckets.

The fear started when elements of Diane Feinstein's bill were released. From what I've read it will stop the sale of the majority of current firearms that are popular today, keep owners from transferring them and then when the original owed dies they must be returned to the state.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Usui Takumi

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The new law passed in New York giving currently legal owners 1 year to get rid of all magazines that hold >7 rounds or face criminal charges is not a form of confiscation?

No one wants to ban anything.. Then the next 5 posts will be all about banning assault weapons.. The point at which I stopped reading was when Barry said sensible gun legislation, but yet thier first move is to ban weapons used in less than 1% of gun crime...

If he wants sensible gun legislation then he needs to start talking sense,

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

It is not preventing someone from being armed, is it? No.

I think it's ridiculous to use the second amendment and say that it allows you to have however many and whatever kind of guns you want. Just because it's in the constitution doesn't mean that rules and regulations to control the situation are anti-American or whatever other nonsense people are throwing out there.

Maybe you could have whatever you want in 1791, but it's 2013 now and guns are a bit different today than they were when this was put into place. With changing times and changing technology, rules must also be changed to reflect them.

You can still have your gun. You can still protect your home with it. You can still go hunting with it. But you don't need to be carrying military style weapons around. Sorry.

what is a military style weapon and why is it more dangerous than a non military style weapon. ?

[himher 634]

I didnt ask that question. I asked if it is a form of confiscation.

Since you didn't answer the question I guess the answer is evidently yes, you know it is yes, and then you wonder why people are concerned about confiscation.

It is not preventing someone from being armed, is it? No.

I think it's ridiculous to use the second amendment and say that it allows you to have however many and whatever kind of guns you want. Just because it's in the constitution doesn't mean that rules and regulations to control the situation are anti-American or whatever other nonsense people are throwing out there.

Maybe you could have whatever you want in 1791, but it's 2013 now and guns are a bit different today than they were when this was put into place. With changing times and changing technology, rules must also be changed to reflect them.

You can still have your gun. You can still protect your home with it. You can still go hunting with it. But you don't need to be carrying military style weapons around. Sorry.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The new law passed in New York giving currently legal owners 1 year to get rid of all magazines that hold >7 rounds or face criminal charges is not a form of confiscation?

Yeah, New York is showing everyone why there should be a fight over 10 round magazines. The ultimate goal is to get to zero and they will continue to legislate the number down.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Usui Takumi