Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Obama Calls for Gun Control on Anniversary of Navy Yard Shooting

Obama Calls for Gun Control on Anniversary of Navy Yard Shooting

The Second Amendment is not an “American tradition.”

The White House chose to commemorate yesterday’s one year anniversary of the shootings at Navy Yard by calling once more for a rollback of the Second Amendment.

From the White House website:

One year ago, our dedicated military and civilian personnel at the Washington Navy Yard were targeted in an unspeakable act of violence that took the lives of 12 American patriots. As we remember men and women taken from us so senselessly, we keep close their family and friends, stand with the survivors who continue to heal and pay tribute to the first responders who acted with skill and bravery. At the same time, we continue to improve security at our country’s bases and installations to protect our military and civilian personnel who help keep us safe. One year ago, 12 Americans went to work to protect and strengthen the country they loved. Today, we must do the same – rejecting atrocities like these as the new normal and renewing our call for common-sense reforms that respect our traditions while reducing the gun violence that shatters too many American families every day.

If I didn’t know any better, I’d think that Obama’s foundering administration is trying to use the deaths of “12 American patriots” as a springboard for another gun control debate—just in time for November.

Last week, Senate democrats proved that they believe their party’s last best hope for maintaining their majority is to whip up the base with pointless debate on flashpoint issues. The ongoing mission of Harry Reid’s majority is to cover for a President that neither values the freedoms he so flippantly writes off as “traditions,” nor understands what those freedoms have cost the very members of the military victimized by the attack on Navy Yard.

The White House’s statement purporting to honor the victims of mass shootings claims to “reject atrocities” like the shooting at Navy Yard, but in truth proposes an atrocity of a completely different nature—the gutting of the Constitution in the name of whatever perverted definition of “common sense” that pervades the minds of both the Executive and the majority in the Senate chamber.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Humphrey's Executor | September 17, 2014 at 9:31 am

As I recall, the shooter in that case used a common pump action shotgun, plus a weapon he got off one of his victims.

Screw these anti-American tyrants!

“… renewing our call for common-sense reforms that respect our traditions …”

Let’s start by get an POTUS who doesn’t need two hands and a full staff to help him find his ass.

PersonFromPorlock | September 17, 2014 at 10:15 am

The Democrats haven’t yet figured out that ‘gun control’ hurts them.

JimMtnViewCaUSA | September 17, 2014 at 10:21 am

The proper lesson to be learned from the event, of course, would include a jaundiced gaze at Islam.
Not disarming law-abiding citizens.

Ms. Miller hit the nail squarely on the head. This has nothing to do “safety” or even gun control. It is all about politics. The Democrat base is a conglomeration of special interest groups, many of which are single issue oriented. The actions of the current President and Democrats in the Congress are forcing the Democrat political class to rely much more heavily on their base, than they did since 2006. This is simply more pandering to that base, for short term political gain.

Democrat politicians have no real interest in gun control, as long as the right people are armed. They have no real interest in immigration reform, except as a means to swell the ranks of Democrat voters. They have real interest in environmental issues, unless they can line their pockets. They have no real interest in women’s or racial issues, unless they generate votes for them. Every Democratic administration since Harry Truman, has promised these special interest groups the moon, to secure their votes, then ignored them later, when they were no longer needed.

It is just election year politics as usual.

I just heard that the ATF is going to require disclosure of nationality and race on firearms applications.They are a little behind the times – every time I visit the doctor I am asked to provide my race.

    Sanddog in reply to davod. | September 17, 2014 at 11:11 am

    For the last two years, ATF form 4473 has required the buyer to disclose race and ethnicity. For question 10a you must declare that you are either: Hispanic or Latino…. or Not Hispanic or Latino. Question 10b then asks you to declare your race. It’s caused a bit of irritation in my town with one gentleman remarking: “According to the government, I’m a white Hispanic, just like George Zimmerman”.

    It would probably be more useful to ask if you are regular

Coupla thangs…

1. There is ZERO chance of passing gun control legislation, and Barracula knows this

2. Pres. ScamWOW and Ol’ Walleyes Clinton are about to face the specter of some really good, meaty Benghazi hearings and revelations

3. The entire foreign policy debacle of the Obamic Decline is coming home…to roast

4. They are VERY interested in taking peoples’ eyes off the ball, and in throwing their loony base some red meat

Around 10 thousand Americans are murdered every year by an armed individual, mostly gang or government-related. Around 2 million Americans are murdered every year by an armed abortionist. As a matter of principle, their concern for human rights is selective. I think Obama and the gun control lobby has an ulterior motive.

    Phillep Harding in reply to n.n. | September 17, 2014 at 4:43 pm

    Please. “Murder” is a legal term for illegal and intentional killing of a human.

    Ragspierre in reply to n.n. | September 17, 2014 at 6:11 pm

    Not to belabor a point, buy any killing of another human being is a homicide. Sometimes it is a criminal homicide.

    Every abortion of a living child is a homicide.

      tphillip in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2014 at 9:43 pm

      “Not to belabor a point, buy any killing of another human being is a homicide. Sometimes it is a criminal homicide.

      Every abortion of a living child is a homicide.”

      **ACTUALLY** homicide is defined by individual states, and if you use Google you can find the legal definition of all 50 states.

      For example, in 5 seconds I got this from New York (http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article125.htm):

      Homicide means conduct which causes the death of a person or an unborn child with which a female has been pregnant for more than twenty-four weeks under circumstances constituting murder, manslaughter in the first
      degree, manslaughter in the second degree, criminally negligent homicide, abortion in the first degree or self-abortion in the first degree.

      I leave it as an exercise to the reader unable to use Google to look up the rest of the terms, as defined and how an abortion may or may not be a homicide, by legal definition.

      Google…..It’s just too damn hard for some people to use.

The Second Amendment is indeed an American tradition. With the threat posed by belligerent Indians, British, French, Spanish/Mexicans, and run-of-the-mill criminals, early Americans lived in perilous times. While the urban population may choose to wait for the second responders (e.g. police), the rural population could ill-afford to be equally naive.

    Amendment 2 was not put in place for fighting crime and hunting. It was put in place as a check on tyranny.

    Our founders made sure have those weapons to kill politicians should we decide they need killing.

Common sense gun laws? we have plenty of those already. Obama and his ilk just have to politicize every issue they can, just cant help it. It is in their DNA.
The common sense thing to do is kick these Socialist Democrats to the curb as fast as we can.

    Bruce Hayden in reply to tsewr. | September 17, 2014 at 1:03 pm

    “Common Sense Gun Laws” are, essentially, anything that the majority determines. Who could complain about Common Sense Gun Laws, until all of a sudden you find that they include banning semiautomatic rifles and carbines that merely look like military weapons, or requiring gun locks in locations where that could be fatal, or banning lower penetrating hollow point bullets (that are typically required by most urban police forces for their officers partially for that reason). Etc.

    You rarely see a gun control debate with gun grabbers where the “Common Sense Gun Laws” slogan isn’t trotted out. But, that is just the problem – the Bill of Rights was, to a great extent, enacted to protect the rights of the minority from the majority. And, the problem here is that Common Sense Gun Laws are whatever the gun grabbers think that they can get away with.

    Phillep Harding in reply to tsewr. | September 17, 2014 at 4:45 pm

    If all we had were “common sense” gun laws, we would have about 98% of the current gun laws repealed.

Oh, he can go to hell !

Personal feelings about this one, as was on the floor and end of the building where the shooting started. No personal cell phones allowed in the building, only guards armed. No recourse but to get people out, assisted by combat veterans who knew what to do but couldn’t, no defensive weaponry (unless shooter allergic to office supplies). NOT new normal, families and co-workers still grieving. cheap political rhetoric, easy to spout, then forget. Damned politicians.

I do find it interesting that the left is now calling the rights enshrined in our Bill of Rights “traditions”. It is, of course, an attempt to lessen the importance and reach of such, since traditions can be changed with a bit of prodding, but Constitutional Rights require amendments to the Constitution. Not that they aren’t willing to go there too, as evidenced by the amendment that every Dem in the Senate essentially voted for last week that would give Congress the power to determine what was fair in elections (thus, protecting their incumbency).

Bring it on. Every time they have brought this BS up in the last decade it goes against them. This once again shows just a shocking disconnect between the Democrats and the US.

They literally tried to stand on the bodies of dead children in Newton and they STILL couldn’t make any headway.

This is a losing issue for them. But just like immigration, Obama is so isolated in his little liberal bubble that he thinks that Americans support it.

Gun rights is not a losing issue for the left. Gun rights legislation is, but not the issue as a public ‘discussion’. As an issue it is highly valuable – especially as a desperately needed distraction seven weeks before the midterms.

Obama is just throwing out chaff, hoping the right reacts and is distracted from Benghazi, ISIS, Iran nukes, ISIS, VA, IRS, ISIS, and ISIS.

Don’t forget the side effects of his rhetoric. Priming the judiciary on things currently being appealed (Baca, Peruta) is as important as priming the electorate.

Someone should tell Obama that the 2nd amendment is legal in “all 57 states”. He doesn’t seemed to be up to speed on “American Tradition”.

Gun control is not about guns, it is about control! This is the same man who publicly stated at the University of Chicago, “I don’t believe anyone should be allowed to own a gun.”

Equating a provision of the Constitution with a “tradition” is no more – nor less – than a ploy to minimize the legal importance of the Constitution and prepare people for his next phone and pen attempt to establish new law by fiat, more the actions of a dictator than the titular head of a democratic republic. While he is not the first to do this the legality of these Executive Orders needs to be examined in relation to the Constitutionally mandated separation of powers.

Laws are supposed to be written, debated, and passed by Congress, not the Executive; the only action allowed at that level is to sign the bill into law or veto and return it to Congress. Most emphatically laws are not to be written by a GS-9 in, for instance, the EPA, approved by his/her supervisor, and then published in the Federal Register where, if not challenged within a specified time, they become de facto laws that can be enforced by agencies as if they were originated in Congress as the Constitution requires.

We have things to fix if we want to reclaim our republic! This mid-term election will be a bellwether of our success, or a harbinger of our abject failure.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend