A call to arms for 'common sense' gun control - CNN

[farminator3000]

Biden said that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown was conducted with "a weapon of war, and that weapon of war has no place on American streets." The shooter, Adam Lanza, gunned down 20 children and six adult staff members with a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle.

"Taking it off American streets has no impact on one's constitutional right to own a weapon," Biden said. He also noted that conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia "acknowledged that government has a right to limit certain weapons from being able to be possessed by American citizens."

He expressed his admiration for the Newtown families and said their presence has helped move legislation through the Senate Judiciary Committee and gives such gun control reform a "fighting chance."

"It takes an enormous amount of courage to be here," Biden said to the families. "And you say, well, what's the courage? Having lost a child, I understand that every time you show up at something that ranges from a memorial service, or to talk about the circumstances in which your child was lost, it comes back to you in a flash, as if they got that phone call yesterday. And I told you before, I don't know how you do it, but you do it. You do it."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/21/us/ny-biden-bloomberg/index.html

i'm not giving up...

[Paladin]

1. Bravo, Mr. Biden. Well said, as usual. (nt)

[appal_jack]

21. Neither common, nor sensible.

Authoritarian, drug-war-lovin' Biden is wrong about this issue, too. Banning the most popular long arms in America is neither a commonly-held belief, nor is it sensible policy.

If Biden really wants to advance a common sense policy that will have a tangible effect on reducing the crime rate, he should join the majority of Americans in supporting the decriminalization of marijuana. He should not be making inane doublespeak statements about how radically narrowing the Second Amendment is not really infringing on the Constitution.

Not to mention, he could be standing up for reproductive freedom, or lobbying the Senate to confirm a Consumer Protection head, or a Labor Secretary. Why the laser-like focus on a policy that has already been tried for ten years, and already failed?

-app

[Paladin]

23. Hey, If You Want LaPierre and Cruz To Speak For You On Guns, Have At It. (nt)

[chillfactor]

26. you are one sick dude.......

God forbid that the likes of you ever feel the devasting loss these parents and families did as the result of an assault rifle....

[appal_jack]

34. Pot, meet kettle.

You're calling me sick, when you can't even distinguish between a criminal and a tool? Newtown was indeed an unspeakable tragedy, but the problem was Lanza -the murderer. Yes, an AR-15 can take larger capacity magazines than some other guns, but would it have been any less a tragedy had he used a pair of revolvers and a pocketful of speedloaders? No, it would not.

Mr. Chillfactor, I think you need to chill, and then factor in some real world data. One can easily support the freedoms enumerated in the Second Amendment without supporting violent crime of any sort.

-app

[aikoaiko]

2. Biden should have called Lanza's rifle a 1994 AWB compliant firearm.

Because it was.

Its odd the Biden doesn't say that he voted for and supported the 1994 AWB that permitted the Lanza AR15 to remain legal to purchase and own. And that if the 1994 AWB had remained federal law, mother Lanza would still have been able to purchase it.

We know this because the police have said the rifle was legal to own even though Connecticut had a state level AWB that mirrored the federal law that expired.

[DanTex]

6. You mean, in order to highlight the differences between the 1994 law and the new proposal?

[aikoaiko]

10. Yes, the new law would make the Lanza rifle legal with a new grip

That's a very important distinction. Bravo, proposed AWB.

I will admit the AWB is much stricter on legally acquiring 11+ round magazines, but it doesn't explain why much of the law (and Joe Biden for that matter) focuses on the trivial accessories that made the rifle a so-called assault weapon.

[farminator3000]

8. no, you should have mentioned that lanza's gun is part of the new AWB

or maybe how guns that are basically military should be class 3.

probably something about the NRA would be worth mentioning here, also?

[aikoaiko]

11. Lanza's rifle with a new grip would be compliant under the new AWB.

And that's why the part of the AWB that banned weapons by name and "evil features" is not a good law.

[farminator3000]

13. only if you already own one?

it is one of the ~150 guns banned from future manufacture and sale in the new AWB

of course its a good law, look at MA, CA, DC, and now NY.

DC appeals court declared DC's ban constitutional.

of course it isn't perfect, but the better it gets, the closer it is to passing.

[aikoaiko]

18. No, you could buy the rifle with a different grip.

All you would have to do is change something cosmetically and change the name.

[BlueStreak]

3. Is that headline some sick pun or are CNN really a bunch of idiots?

[font size="6"]"A call to arms[/font] for 'common sense' gun control"

We can't even talk about limiting gun violence without using a pro-gun, militant, violent reference?

[kudzu22]

5. I was thinking the same thing. n/t

[DanTex]

7. Pretty sure it was a pun...

[farminator3000]

9. yes, a terrible headline for a good article

i think the editors write titles, don't they?

[BlueStreak]

15. This is exactly the kind of thing that causes people to not take CNN seriously anymore

[Peter cotton]

14. Let's keep our powder dry and not go off half-cocked.

It wouldn't do to be hoist by one's own petard, after all.

[BlueStreak]

16. This was just Biden's shot over the bow

for common sense reductions in gun violence.

But I think he shot the target right in the heart.

[hack89]

29. If they can't pass an AWB then it is just Joe talking.

right now it is just talk.

[Eleanors38]

30. Or both barrels through the door.

[farminator3000]

17. i guess CNN really shot themselves in the foot w/ that one?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

4. How many guns have been used to kill children and others in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Who voted in favor of the Iraq War Resolution?

To be consistent, can't we withdraw firearms (or at least "our" firearms) from the area? Isn't it wrong to favor using firearms against people who are sitting on oil but apparently had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack or Osama bin Laden?

[farminator3000]

12. i wouldn't really say uncle Joe is the guy to blame for those wars...

http://www.ontheissues.org/joe_biden.htm#War_+_Peace

and yes, any and all war pretty much sucks, but more people are killed within our borders than innocents and soldiers combined? (not counting enemy soliders there)

[AnotherMcIntosh]

19. How dare you call Vice-President Biden "uncle Joe." Any knowledgeable person knows "Uncle Joe"

is a common reference to Joseph Stalin.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=uncle%20joe%20stalin

[slackmaster]

22. Yes, Stalin. Or the late Edgar Buchanan.

Both of whom are movin' kind of slow these days.

[farminator3000]

25. when you don't capitalize the "u"

it means Joey B.

[Crepuscular]

20. A more accurate statement regarding the proposed AWB and the Bushmaster might have been....

"Taking it off the American streets will have no impact on preventing the occurrence of another tragic event like Sandy Hook, by someone using a functionally identical weapon that will be fully legal to purchase and own under the terms of the Assault Weapons bill that has been proposed. "

Sometimes the truth is a painful thing to acknowledge.

[farminator3000]

24. no, that's a statement you made up, not really accurate at all

got a link to that? paste the part of the bill where it says or implies that?

[hack89]

31. I can show you with two pictures

This gun is specifically called out in the legislation as being illegal under the AWB:




This gun is specifically called out in the legislation as being legal under the AWB:



They are both Ruger Mini-14s

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14TacticalRifle/models.html

Same bullet, same rate of fire, same magazines.

[farminator3000]

35. are those 10 round mags?

and the diff. is as plain as the nose on your face- the illegal one has a pistol grip AND a detachable stock?

you own one, don't you, hackster, why aren't you happy they didn't ban your gun?

the top one is a military gun, the bottom one is a hunting rifle with too many rounds (for someone who isn't a good shot, i guess?)

[hack89]

39. Same bullet, same rate of rife, same size magazine - same rifle with cosmetic changes.

Are you going to tell me that if the Sandy Hook shooter had the second gun, all those kids would be alive?

I own an AR-15. Because the AWB will not be retroactive, my gun will be perfectly legal to own and use.

[farminator3000]

46. so what size is the mag?

if lanza had 10 round mags, he'd of had to change them, giving someone a chance to tackle him.

i know for a fact there's a 9 year old girl that was killed in tuscon bc loughner had a 33 round mag instead of 10.

try and argue with that.

and the changes aren't cosmetic, why would the , military put cosmetic things on a gun?

[hack89]

48. Various sizes up to 30 rounds.

The military wants a gun that is light and easy to modify. There are over 20 official options a soldier can use on his M-4. They also want a gun that stands up to bad weather and tough use - hence the plastic furniture. The adjustable shoulder stock (which only moves about 3.5 inches) allows them to fit a rifle to users of different sizes.

All pretty irrelevant to a mass shooter.

[Crepuscular]

32. Did you miss the part where I said that it would be a more accurate statement?

And it's a very accurate statement, the AWB as proposed would do nothing to prevent another mass shooting like Sandy Hook.

[farminator3000]

36. no, i'm saying you are wrong.

and you have zero info to back up your dramatic 'statement'

[Crepuscular]

40. Basic logic

is all that is needed to be able to see that the proposed AWB will accomplish nothing. It's analogous to banning red cars, while allowing blue cars and believing that the color of the vehicle will determine it's functionality.

[farminator3000]

47. again, that's just some sentence you typed, it has zero to do with logic

or any kind of fact whatsoever.

[Hoyt]

28. LMAO. It and other material measures will, especially long term.

You guys have enough to keep folks supplied near-term, but long-term the reduced supply wil help. And, taking some of the excitement out of guns will help reduce sales of other guns.

[Crepuscular]

33. Other material measures?

Without a doubt, other measures will help reduce gun violence but the AWB is not a "material measure", it's an ineffective measure designed for political theater. It won't "reduce supplies" in the least, merely cause some minor cosmetic design and name changes.

You want to remove the tail fins from car's, believing that it will reduce the number of people killed in auto accidents.

[Hoyt]

38. I would change the definition from looks to function (semi-auto), including handguns.

Might not pass tomorrow, but doesn't have too. This process is helping present the issues, and danger of those enarmoured with lethal weapons.

[Crepuscular]

41. Good to see you acknowledge

that the AWB merely addresses looks and not function.

[Hoyt]

42. As currently written. And, I still question whether those who acquire based upon menacing looks

should be allowed to own guns.

[Crepuscular]

44. And, I still question whether those who acquire based on menacing looks should be allowed to own

Careful, you are liable to piss off some progressive pit bull owners.....

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I'm more worried about functionality than appearance.

[Hoyt]

45. I suppose you are saying that you are a "progressive" gun promoter/owner?

Sorry, guns are "progressive."

[Thinkingabout]

27. Its about common sense, sensible guns, to continue to say the grip can change and it would be off

The AWB is neither common sense or sensible. Get the weapons off the streets, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

This may not happen this year or next, we will have to continue to target Congress members who do not respond sensibly and cater to the NRA in order to get common sense Congressional members to do what more than 50% wants.

[farminator3000]

37. hell yes

don't the nra talking points get a bit dull after a few dozen (hundred) of the same BS non-arguments?

[laundry_queen]

43. The only one I haven't heard on this thread yet

is 'emotional hyperbole'. All the others are here though. Everyone must be furiously PM'ing behind the scenes to get the gunners to flock to this thread.