Weekly Address: Making America Safer for Our Children

[cal04]

Source: White House

In this week's address, the President reflected on the progress of the past year, and looked forward to working on unfinished business in the coming year, particularly when it comes to the epidemic of gun violence. As he has many times before, the President reminded us that Congress has repeatedly failed to take action and pass laws that would reduce gun violence. That’s why the President a few months ago tasked his White House team with identifying new actions he can take to help reduce gun violence, and on Monday will meet with the Attorney General to discuss the options. In his address, the President called on everyone to join him in the fight to reduce gun violence, because it’s going to take all of us to make America safer for our children.

Read more: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1014

---

(snip)
Last month, we remembered the third anniversary of Newtown. This Friday, I’ll be thinking about my friend Gabby Giffords, five years into her recovery from the shooting in Tucson. And all across America, survivors of gun violence and those who lost a child, a parent, a spouse to gun violence are forced to mark such awful anniversaries every single day.

And yet Congress still hasn’t done anything to prevent what happened to them from happening to other families. Three years ago, a bipartisan, commonsense bill would have required background checks for virtually everyone who buys a gun. Keep in mind, this policy was supported by some 90% of the American people. It was supported by a majority of NRA households. But the gun lobby mobilized against it. And the Senate blocked it.

Since then, tens of thousands of our fellow Americans have been mowed down by gun violence. Tens of thousands. Each time, we’re told that commonsense reforms like background checks might not have stopped the last massacre, or the one before that, so we shouldn’t do anything.

We know that we can’t stop every act of violence. But what if we tried to stop even one? What if Congress did something – anything – to protect our kids from gun violence?

A few months ago, I directed my team at the White House to look into any new actions I can take to help reduce gun violence. And on Monday, I’ll meet with our Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, to discuss our options. Because I get too many letters from parents, and teachers, and kids, to sit around and do nothing. I get letters from responsible gun owners who grieve with us every time these tragedies happen; who share my belief that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to bear arms; and who share my belief we can protect that right while keeping an irresponsible, dangerous few from inflicting harm on a massive scale.

[littlewolf]

1. tens of thousands and that is just in Chicago

which has one of the strictest guns laws in the country …

[passiveporcupine]

4. And that could mean

It's not the laws (or lack of them) that are the problem, but the numbers of available guns.

I like the idea of a big melting pot...toss the guns in and listen to the wailing and gnashing of teeth of the people who care more for their toys than for their kids.

[hopemountain]

5. and local leader must also be held accountable

for the murders of our children of color or mental state by cops.

[passiveporcupine]

7. I'm not trying to turn this into a one issue battle.

I'm just so sick of all the deaths by gun, I would love to see them all melted down.

[Duckhunter935]

15. I am sick of all deaths

[Skittles]

11. NRA talking points are so fucking predictible

[Duckhunter935]

14. yes we know

anything you disagree with

[GGJohn]

27. And those "NRA talking points" would be, what?

Anything about firearms that you don't approve of?

[malthaussen]

2. We could start by having our police stop shooting children... n/t

[Duckhunter935]

3. let's work on suicides

Since that is 2/3 of firearms deaths

[hopemountain]

10. the lives of innocent children

are more important than the lives of those who choose to kill themselves because there are more of them? right out of far right field, i'd say. but, lob away.

[Duckhunter935]

12. unfortunantly

that is a very small amount and just what do you propose? Each one is tragic, yes but so are the ones that die due to cars, bikes, accidents by other items like pools, lakes, drugs, electricity. More die by those but go ahead knock yourself out. I tend to want to save them most lives possible, you, I guess, do not. Truly sad in my opinion.

but only think of some, the others............

[hopemountain]

16. and the children of sandy hook?

i'd like to hear you defend your argument to their parents and families.

[Duckhunter935]

17. what argument?

That a twisted individual murdered his mother stole several weapons including an AR-15 style rifle that was not an assault weapon as it was legal and Connecticut had so assault weapons ban in place. A tragic event and my heart goes out to the parents of the murdered children and the families of the teachers that were also murdered. You seem to forget about the adults and the mother. All of the weapons were legal and a background check performed. The magazines were legal and no proposal is calling for mandatory confiscation of the hundreds of millions of 30 round AR magazines.

So what do you propose that will get enacted into law? That is other than to use those dead children as an emotional plea? Very sad in my opinion. A tragic but people murdered by rifles is miniscule compared to suicides. I tend to want to save as many lives as possible. I know those lives must not matter to you though, again a truly sad fact.

[hopemountain]

19. yes, the murdering at sandy hook is an

event which actually occurred. and yes, it evokes emotion. so what? does emotion invalidate any other justifiable reason for tougher background checks? do suicides merit more attention than the wanton murder of innocents? i think not. you will never convince me to focus on suicides instead of children on this issue. mental health and depression leading to people's right or choice to end their lives is not a superseding issue when it comes to expanding background checks to keep guns out of the hands of mass murderers.

[Duckhunter935]

20. what background check would have prevented that

The background check was performed and passed by the mother who was murdered and weapons stolen. What background check are you for to prevent that. Too bad suicides do not matter to you, sad.

[hopemountain]

21. do not speak to me about suicides

there is a history of suicides in my family. at the age of 10 it i, not a mother, who took the gun out a father's hand. grand father, great grandmother, and two aunts. all dead from suicide.

[Duckhunter935]

22. too bad you

say yourself that is not a problem that you want to address first. Unlike I who realizes it causes 2/3 of firearms deaths.

I see you also could not bring yourself to answer my very simple question but had to attack me. I will talk too you about preventing suicides all I want to. Sorry about your past, I would think that would make you agree with my position.

So one more time, you want more background checks, OK. What background check will prevent someone from murdering his mother and stealing her legally obtained firearms that had a completed background check?

[hopemountain]

23. how do you know whether the mother had any questionable background

that would have prevented her from purchasing arms?

[Duckhunter935]

24. because she passed the federal background check

And purchased firearms legal in Connecticut that had an assault weapons ban in place. The magazines she owned were also fully legal.

I see you still did not answer my simple question, why not?

[hopemountain]

25. was a mental health diagnosis for the mom part of the

background check at that time? or any other incriminating issues that are now being considered or expanded with the president's executive order?

[Duckhunter935]

26. I was not aware of any mental health issues with her

What evidence do you have of that. Her son had some issues. The federal instant check system is only as good on that if the states actually give the feds the mental health information. Many do not. Not the federal government's fault if they do not.

Still see you fail to answer my question and are just trying to deflect from it. This just proves my case.

Not sure if his executive orders will change a thing. The weapons were legal and a federal background check was performed and passed. I am not aware of anything he is planning that would change that process.

[hopemountain]

28. i am asking. and, further, i answered your question.

i don't know any other way to answer in a way you will choose to understand.

[Duckhunter935]

29. nice try

[ileus]

6. and yet we do nothing about improving school security...

[BumRushDaShow]

8. Thanks for posting and hope you had a good holiday!

Heard the GOP heads had already started exploding.

[metalbot]

9. There are unilateral actions that Obama could take that the GOP could not criticize

Let's start with background checks. Not expanding them, but actually enforcing them. A "background check" means that you fill out a form, and sign at the bottom that everything on the form is true, under penalty of perjury. Let's start here:

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2012-operations-report

Yeah, it's old data, but it's representative of a typical year.

In this report, the FBI indicates that 88,479 denials were issued by NICS, indicating that when the paperwork was checked by NICS, there was an indication that something on the form didn't match something in their records. Now, let's assume that 90% of these are false positives - the person being checked had the same name as someone else who was a prohibited person. That leaves almost 9,000 people who are likely to have lied on the background check form.

Ok - sounds like about 9,000 people should have been charged with federal crimes, right?

So how many people were actually prosecuted?

Roughly 40.

Obama could step up investigation and prosecution, and it's politically unassailable. What is the NRA/GOP going to do? "President Obama is enforcing the laws that haven't been enforced, and putting felons in jail for paperwork snafu's" This plays well to both the left and the right, and I can't understand why this wouldn't be an easy win with an ACTUAL real impact on crime - getting violent people who want guns off the street.

[Duckhunter935]

13. I fully agree

[leftyladyfrommo]

18. Children 8n KC get shot in 2 ways.

They get shot by accident when there is a gun in the house wed here they are. Either someone in the house shoots them by mistake or they find a gun and shoot it.

Or they get caught in the crossfire of drive by shootings.

People who gave children shouldn't keep guns in the house. Kids are curious. If there is a gun there they will find it.

Drive by shootings are probably mostly illegal guns bought off the black market.