E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn an emotional press conference, President Obama unveiled his "concrete steps" to keep kids safe, asking that Congress restore a ban on military-style assault weapons, make it easier for mental health professionals to report threats of violence and put a limit on ammunition. NBC's Chuck Todd reports.
Updated 2:56 p.m. -- President Barack Obama unveiled sweeping new policies Wednesday aimed at limiting gun violence, teeing up a political showdown that will pit the broad public popularity for many gun control measures against Congress’s tepid appetite for approving the most stringent restrictions on gun ownership.
"While there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely, no piece of legislation that will prevent every tragedy, every act of evil," Obama said at a mid-day announcement at the White House, "if there's even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there's even one life that can be saved, then we've got an obligation to try it."
Acknowledging the difficulty of the Congressional fight ahead, Obama appealed for public support, slamming - as he did in a press conference earlier this week - conservative commentators and the most vocal pro-gun activists for "ginning up" opposition to gun reforms for political reasons.
"I will put everything I've got into this and so will Joe [Biden], but I tell you, the only way we can change is if the American people demand it," he said.
Some of the main legislative proposals backed by Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are:
- requiring criminal background checks on all gun sales, including private sales
- banning "military-style" assault weapons
- limiting ammunition magazines to 10 rounds
- strengthening penalties for gun trafficking
"The most important changes we can make depend on Congressional action," Obama said. "They need to bring these proposals up for a vote and the American people need to make sure that they do."
Related Information: Gun Violence Fact Sheet | Gun Violence Executive Summary | Gun Violence Reduction Executive Actions
The president also signed a series of 23 executive actions - free from a Congressional blockade -- intended to strengthen existing laws, augment mental health measures and promote federal research on gun crime through the Centers for Disease Control.
The executive actions announced included stricter prosecution of would-be gun buyers who fail background checks as well as new requirements for federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
The president's recommendations also direct administration officials to "clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes" and to "release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."
Obama and Biden were joined at the White House event by families of the Newtown school shooting victims as well as by four children who wrote the president after the tragedy that left 20 young students dead.
"This is our first task as a society: keeping our children safe," Obama said at the beginning of his remarks. "This is how we will be judged, and their voices should compel us to change."
Biden, who led the presidential task-force on gun safety in the wake of the Newtown shootings, praised the activists who met with his staff over the last week to help build the list of recommendations.
"The world has changed and it's demanding action," Biden said.
While some of Obama's long-expected proposals - like universal background checks - garner overwhelming public support, the outlawing of certain types of weapons may be less of a slam dunk for lawmakers eager to appease constituents.
A recent poll from the Pew Research Center showed that a majority of Americans -- 55 percent -- back a ban on "assault-style weapons," with 40 percent saying they don't approve of a ban. But a partisan breakdown shows that only about four in ten Republicans support such restrictions, compared to a broad majority of Democrats.
Democrats in Congress have already voiced doubts about the feasibility of the president's most ambitious proposals.
"We're not going to get an outright ban" on assault weapons, Democrat Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York bluntly said yesterday.
"[Senate Majority Leader] Reid has said he doesn't know whether he has the votes (for an assault weapons ban)," she added. "There's heavy lifting, so are we going to waste time on heavy lifting? Or are we going to try to work on doing something that could actually get passed?"
Related: Obama's gun plans spark little enthusiasm with key lawmakers
Supporters are more optimistic about background checks and magazine restrictions.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy announced Wednesday that his panel will hold its first hearing on issues relating to gun violence on Jan. 30.
In his remarks Wednesday, Obama anticipated opponents' reactions to his proposals.
"This will be difficult," he said. "There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty. Not because that's true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves, and behind the scenes they will do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever."
The National Rifle Association, the country's most powerful gun lobby, released a statement Wednesday afternoon in response to the president's remarks.
"We look forward to working with Congress on a bi-partisan basis to find real solutions to protecting America's most valuable asset - our children. Attacking firearms and ignoring children is not a solution to the crisis we face as a nation," the NRA wrote. "Only honest, law-abiding gun owners will be affected and our children will remain vulnerable to the inevitability of more tragedy."
That statement was relatively muted in comparison to the group's controversial ad released Tuesday night, which criticized Obama's dismissal of the gun lobby's proposal to increase armed security in schools.
"Are the president's kids more important than yours?" a narrator asks in the short ad. "Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools? Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but he's just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security."
Related: White House calls NRA 'repugnant,' 'cowardly' for invoking president's children in ad
The ad prompted outcry from observers who said the First Family should be off limits for such advertisements, while NRA backers say their focus is on school safety rather than on the president's daughters themselves.
"Whoever thinks the ad is about President Obama's daughters are missing the point completely or they're trying to change the subject," said spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "This ad is about keeping our children safe. And the president said he was skeptical about the NRA proposal to put policemen in all schools in this country. Yet he and his family are beneficiaries of multiple law enforcement officers surrounding them 24 hours a day."
White House spokesman Jay Carney shot back that the ad is "cowardly."
"Most Americans agree that a president's children should not be used as pawns in a political fight," he said. "But to go so far as to make the safety of the President's children the subject of an attack ad is repugnant and cowardly."
NBC's Mark Murray, Frank Thorp, Ali Weinberg and Kelly O'Donnell contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
Go to www.ruger.com and you can send a pro gun position letter to your representative. They use your zip code to find your rep. Only takes a couple minutes.
@nh1364
Thanks for the tip! I did just that!!
Congratulations to the president and vice president for having the courage to put forth their proposals for gun control today. And SHAME on the NRA for its new add implying that the president is a hypocrit because his own children are protected by armed guards. The First Family is in a special category of citizenship and is always potentially vulnerable to being in harm's way. The NRA should be designated a terrorist organization.
You should be branded a LEFTIST COWARD!
loydd you are a traitor to your own nation, coward you are hereby branded a leftist moron. for you not to defend your own constitution you should be forced out of this country and made to live in iran
obama is a dictator.. he hates america and the constitution. he hates the usa.
He is Muslim so what do you expect!
Very proud of my president today!
Evidently it doesnt take much to impress you.
How far past the first grade did you get? Not far I would guess!
we are proud of you, because now we get to go back to the supreme court and have every bit of money that obama is wasting to overturn any new laws come out of your paychecks, the supreme court will overturn any gun laws as constitutionaly provided, so be proud and thanks for spending your money foolishly. dum does not get any dummer. crucificiction. may you be first.
agd- yes our forefathers would be weeping if they saw what has happened to the constitution thanks to the liberal trash. They never expected anyone would have the right to vote who didnt contribute to the tax base either, yet the Dems use food stamps, welfare and housing to buy votes.
why don't you please explain to me what exactly has happened to the constitution?
It's all good everyone. We will obey the new gun laws like the illegals obey our existing laws. No problem!!!
If the nut-bags in Congress could ever make a decision based on the will of the people and what is right and makes good common sense, instead of kissing the asses of their special interest groups who don't give a rats ass about anything except lining their own pockets.... there might actually be some progress made on issues like gun control, fiscal cliffs, debt ceilings, spending cuts and tax reforms.
These losers should have been thrown out in 2012 so that some descent progress can be made instead of spending all this time on hype and bull@!$%#. Put some people in congress that can relate to the common people and actually commit to doing their level best to represent the people instead of the rich special interests.
Wake the Fvck up!
Term limits here we come?- Get rid of these old, obstructionist, grossly under-performing idiots in both parties and put people in there that actually care what the people think.
You are right of course about the idiots in congress but to deny American citizens to be armed for their protection is absurd as well. There are so many issues like illegal aliens and jobs going overseas and now gun control, but nothing gets done, there is no going forward but it seems that to be stagnate is okay with Obama. As long that is, as long as he can spend money that we don't have to pander to the people that voted for him and will vote in the future for his party. The shame of it all!
when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns!!
think obummer, think!!
As a responsible gun owner I am for some of the things that Obama has stated, backgrougnd checks, mental checks are a couple but magazine limits does nothing to stop shooters from killing. Outlawing "military style" weapons means nothing. A military style weapon is no more than a car that has custom features added to it, it is still a Chevy or Ford but it had added some details to make it look better. Should we outlaw custom cars? If he wants magazine limits for citizens the there should be the same rule for police and military when in this country or when not at war in this country. How about the same ruiles for the people that guard the president and his family? If you allow government to be more armed than it's citizens then there is going to be a problem. If Hitler did not take away guns from the Jews and the Jews were allowed to posses guns, like ar-15's, there may not have been a massacre of Jewish citizens. There might not have been a World War 2. An unarmed citizen is at risque to have it's own government take control of everything they own and have worked for. But with that being said, I think that this is what Obama wants, complete control of the citizens of this country. He wishes to be "King Obama" and will stop at nothing to get his way.
Statistically, more speeding tickets are given to drivers of bright red cars. They don't go any faster than the blue or green versions. They merely look different. Should we ban red cars because they break the law by speeding? This is the same argument as banning so called "assault weapons". A Pistol grip on a firearm is merely for comfort and not for making the firearm shoot any faster! Just because a firearm looks meaner doesn't mean it is.
XD Shooter...you can't be serious....that is about as lame an arguement as you could possibly come up with...Not that it matters, but the ACTUAL statistic about red cars is that they "stand out" and attract the attention of police officers then any other color...do you research before you try to speak....
Strengthening penalties on "Gun Trafficking" ? Does this apply to The White House and Eric Holder ? Or just us lowly Americans who want to sell our shotgun to our brother in law ? Just a question .....
Hussein Obama is treading on thin ice.
Are you threatening the POTUS? You'd better watch your words
Some of what Obama proposes would be good. Increased penalties for gun trafficking would be good. Finding an easy way to do background checks on all gun sales would be acceptable and worthwhile provided it is easy and inexpensive. The "military style" ban however will not make anyone safer........especially if they limited clip sizes.
So does that work retroactiely, so we could send him and his AG to prison for trafficing guns to Mexico illegally and resulting in at least one law office fatality? Barry is scum of the worst sort, a fear mongering, class baiting racist, who cares not a wit for this country, what it stands for, or its Constitution. Too bad he wasn't at the school that day, but then again with all the guns around him, the killings would never have taken place now would they?
PutAmericaFirst
Do you realize what you're saying? Janet Reno had a similar "solution" when she played Himmler. What you are proposing is to turn yet another Constitutional right into a 'priviledge'. What is being proposed is to turn your inalienable right into nothing more than an automobile. The Lawyewrs have stretched that into making number 4 a 'priviledge' for example. Remember this whenever you're stopped at a routine traffic stop and the cop asks; "May I see your papers please?" That's a violation of number 4.
I grew up in America. She has become nothing more than Germany in the 1930's. It's been a slow process to develop an "edgykashunal" system to brainwash our youth into believing untruths. The violations of our Constitution is abominable! Another example; when is the last time Congress passed a budget? Not during the current administration, now have they? I'd advise anyone to sit down and read the Coinstitution, if you're capable of comprehension that is.
GIRDLOCK IS GOOD FOR AMERICA!
The NRA, like many others, lacks integrity and responsible constraint as they show no reservation in what they will say or do in attempting to sway people's thinking and to control public opinion - as if their interests are more important than common sense and class. Whatever anyone's position is on gun control and having real public safety, abandoning decency and responsible constraint is inexcusable and a real indication of putting self-interests above all else. I suspect what they are actually demonstrating is their desperation and their own believe that their position is not justified, as they seek to create hype and emotional response to hide behind.
Yeah, and all liberals are moronic idiots too stupid to tie their shoes much less hold a job...I can make generalizations too...I am the NRA and I support the organization to the hilt. It isn't there to please you or to bend to the political winds. It is there to protect the 2nd Amendment which guarantees me and you the right to keep a firearm if we choose to. If you don't that's your choice. Instead, lets register all mental defectives who seek psychiatric help, put it on their drivers license so people can see who they are dealing with. I will fight any attempt to abridge my constitutional rights for no reason other than some weepy knee jerk reaction to the actions of a lunatic. You people make me want to vomit.
Hitler hid behind the children too.
What's being done to curb black market sales? How about gun education? This sounds like a quick fix band aid to appease voters and nothing more than that. But we shouldn't expect anything more out of career politicians.
The HUMAN being never ceases to amaze me!
The right to self defense is genetic. It is genetically imprinted in every living organism. That would include especially HUMANS as the planets most evolved organism. There is no living organism on this planet that has the ability to not defend itself. The only organism on this planet that can reason not too, or choose to not defend itself is the HUMAN. Likewise, the HUMAN is the only living organism who is capable of choosing to kill indiscriminately at will, and has done so since the age of man.
What law of man is going to change that. Evolved HUMANS have created governments with laws. When those laws conflict with basic HUMAN and organismal genetics, havoc ensues. Take a good look at the world around you to see the results.
I will not intentionally break the law, as I believe in the principals of our country. As an American I have the right to protect myself. When that right is infringed, I have the right as a HUMAN for self preservation. America is, and has been for some time now, trodding down a dangerous path. Strictly speaking, the basics of HUMAN genetics won't allow for unfettered restraint to our rights of self preservation. The world has tried that before, no matter the cost of life in all of histories bloodbaths, HUMANS will protect themselves by all, and any means necessary.
I intend too, and when push comes to shove, most of you will too regardless of the rule of law!
It was a tragedy what happened at that school. But nothing is going to stop someone that is hell bent on doing something like this short of armed guards. But then again this administration will stop at nothing to dodge the balancing the budget act. Imagine if they would all act as quick as this on the problem with the entire government. Not lefts or rights but both parties are out of control.
Most of you Libtards are missing the point of the 2nd Amendment. It isn't to protect people from the scum who vote democrat and live off the government welfare roles. It was to protect the people from an over reaching oppressive government. If you read any of the quotes by the founding fathers it shows they feared that most of all. That is why they resisted a large standing army, preferring to rely on an armed citizenry. Anyone who is familiar with 20th Century history knows that unarmed people become sheep to agressors. The Jews learned that and the millions of Ukranians and Poles who were executed by the Soviets and Nazis learned that. The just arrested them at night, and put a bullet in their heads...by the hundreds, simply because they were deemed, threats or enemies of the state. How long before our overprotective government begins to disappear people? You don't think it can happen? They didn't think the Holocaust could happen again either, but look what happened in the Balkans in the 1990's. To hell with having a gun to protect my flat screen, I keep mine to protect my family from the government thugs that say they want to take my guns in order to make me safer. Only the government could come up with that kind of logic, and it comes from a guy with no respect for the Constitution. Give the Dems another decade, and you won't recognize this country. It will look more like Mexico but without the inexpensive food.
Wow...what alot of hot wind...nobody has said you cannot have guns...you people on here are fast to over react....read the words...no military (automatic weapons), and clips smaller then 10 rounds...did you get that? Where in any of that, does it say you will have to relinquish your guns to the government? I will go out on limb and assume you are a republican...and having said that, you are looking for ANY excuse to bad mouth the president. But if you are a republican, you might be more concerned with important things, like the fact that your parties days are numbered if they don't figure out the changes they need to make to become something, other then the laughing stock of this country. And thats coming from some very high ranking republicans...Ya know, like Collin Powel...who voted twice for Obama!
you can have my guns from my cold dead hands, be carful when you pick the guns up the barrel will be hot.
More insane laws from a "dictator wannabe". No amount of laws will stop criminals. Such laws do not effect criminals at all.
what an idiot....2nd amendment or not...this is all meaningless nonsense. the libholes must be pissed.
The only people who sound pissed are you re pube bicans...
What a horrible production this NBC event was. Is this "24" the series or real life? With as much white house control and puppeting it's hard to tell. Very sad day to be an american.
Using children for his speech? I think there should be a picture of him standing over all the aborted babies he approves of killing...thousands! Guns are on the bottom of the list as far as deaths in this country. I Will keep my gun for protection and hopefully I will never use it. The guns are only for criminals and the Gov't. Obama is nothing but a walking contradiction. Impeach this man. Oh yeah and let him just try to hold back my SS check or the military checks. My SS is not an entitlement. Everyday there is something new to disgust this country. Divide and conquer. What ever happen to Benghazi or Fast and Furious, weren't guns involved and Holder was handing them out, thousands were killed because at Holder's authorization.
Anybody who finds this simple list insulting, or a threat to their 2nd ammendment rights must be sipping the kool aide! The first and last things on this list apply specifically to criminals...(so who gives a sh**) the other 2 on this list ...well...lets just say if you need an assualt weapon, and more then 10 bullets to shoot a deer, perhaps you need to look into a new hobby...Maybe needle point?!?!?
Seriously, you guys whinning about your "rights" being infringed upon will use ANY excuse to start a fight! Get over yourselves!!!
Hey CRISK196 - The 2nd Amendment isn't to safeguard hunting. It ensures we won't live under tyranny. The 2nd Amendment doesn't say only those who can prove a need have the right to bear arms.
Who "needs" an "assault weapon"? I don't really know but I know who we should ask. The citizens of EGYPT, SYRIA, and LIBYA!!!
Well XD Shooter, I guess we should be thankful we don't live in those countries. But I know this to be fact: Canada allows people to own long guns, rifles, shotguns...To own a hand gun takes ALOT of paperwork, and background checks...nobody there complains about that. Assualt weapons, automatics of any kind, are illegal. I can gauruntee you, their murder rates are MUCH lower per capita than the US, And when was the last time you heard of a shooting spree anywhere close to what happens in the States, in Canada? They DO have the right to defend themselves, and safegaurd their loved ones...with rifles and shotguns...if you can't get it done with that...seriously, you maybe should NOT have a gun at all.
I love how Obama spoke of harsher punishments for gun traffickers while Eric Holder sat front row! Anyone notice Joe Bidens smirk towards Holder when Obama said that?
And yes, let's ban assault weapons which make up for less than 1% of gun related deaths!!! (sarcasm)
How about instead of proposing useless legislation, we look into WHY these things happen?
When shootings happen, people cry gun control..... instead they should be asking 'WHY?'
First of all....there is NO such thing as an "honest politician". Secondly, I wonder if you would have a different opinion if it was your childs brains that were splattered all over the classroom? Sadly, Probably not. I know alot of people like to say that guns don't kill...However...If the guy didn't have a gun, how could he shoot anyone? Now, you'll probably say, they'd find another means...like a bomb, instead...So would you then complain that the government wanted to ban bombs...because thats against your 2nd ammendment rights?