Obama falters again on Oregon Shooting Speech

And I have seen Obama do the above. But after years of mass shootings my take is that he is getting frustrated by the inaction of many on the right which IMO plays a big part in the status quo of mass shootings to be tolerated in the name of defending the 2nd Amendment.

What is the root cause in your opinion?

 

People keep trying and trying to point out the obvious, but some just can't seem to see it.

 

Well how many times can a man and a father come out to speak to the press and the public and be forced to repeat the same (*)(*)(*)(*) over and over again (while the GOP sucks up to the gun lobby) and not feel like a shmuck? If Obama had smoke coming out of his ears at this point, it would be perfectly understandable. This pandering to lobbyists has made the USA a shameful and embarrassing disgrace.

 

Gun laws are part of the problem. Another part of the problem is the desensitized nature of people today.

We should creat a law that controls gun use for specific purposes. Home defense, all you get is a shotgun. Hunting, all you get is a bolt action rifle. Hand guns and and other should be delegated to military or law enforcement only.

 

Root cause: http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/

Of course he's frustrated because he's blinded by his gun agenda and ignoring the possibility that there's a real mental health issue that he and the congress need to begin discussing and working to fix. He doesn't want to fix it. He just wants to make guns illegal, as if that will stop gun crimes. He's ignoring truth to propel his own agenda, completely ignoring the fact that he himself is politicizing it every single time without actually doing anything productive toward truly addressing the problem.

I think of it like this. We take all weapons away from prisoners, yet they continue to commit crimes in prison. Why would that happen if they had no access to weapons? We're told eliminating the tool eliminates the problem. I know, the answer is because they're convicted violent criminals, but shouldn't violence end when the weapons disappear? Removing the weapons is the strategy Obama is trying to push and if it won't work for our most violent, what good is it? The most violent people commit the crimes like mass shootings, even if the mass shooting is their first crime. So...more gun laws do what?

 

Empathy and shared pain is appropriate today when dealing with those in shock. Politics is for next week.

I thought the victims came first today.

Cheers
Labour

 

In 12-Min Speech to America About Mass Shooting, Obama Refers to Himself 28 Times.

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=38185&from=allstories

 

No talking points. Please show me where Media Matters or MSNBC has called for a mandatory 21 day waiting period, universal background checks and tight restrictions on ammo purchases.

The only talking point is your inability to respond to my points without making a generalized non-sensical claim or a ad-hom attack. I can understand your frustration with me.

 

I mean no disrespect, but whatever is being done, it doesn't seem effective in reducing the number of mass murders happening in America.

For the record, I'm not anti-gun or anti- Second amendment. It seems to me that our Constitutional rights actually are protected by the individual's ability to protect themselves, especially in the case of insurrection. I grew up in the south, with guns, and respect the deadly power they hold. I don't think law abiding citizens should be restricted from having a gun, if they so choose. However, I strongly feel that not enough is being done, whether by practice or statute, to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. No normal person goes into a school, church, or theater with mass-murderous intentions. As the reporter said on CNN tonight, in the murder autopsy, looking back, there were almost always signs and none of these mass murderers just snapped. There is a predictable progression of behaviors that they all share, but it is only seen in hindsight. We need public service announcements on ways to get these people help- what kinds of red flags to look for, when it might be important to ask some questions, and who to contact for concerns. and for goodness sake, enter the background check data in a timely manner. There needs to be monitoring of people that take medicines known to have violent side effects. Awareness could make a difference. Now, when there is a shooting, just as Obama said, we respond in typical ways. The anti-gun lobby screams about controls and the pro-gun lobby checks to see if their fingers are cold and dead. Nothing gets done. No one looks to causes or remedies. We just live our lives and wait for the next one to happen.


Sorry, I am very cynical about this issue. It may not be easy, but there is a potential fix to this situation. We can't get to finding it, because all people want to do is talk past each other.

 

I am not disarming anyone and would prevent a great deal of these shootings as most of them are acts of passion. It is clear if you think I am would be disarming people that you did not read my posts. You are arguing a typical pro-gun straw man that does not exist.

 

Obama failed to say what changes he wants.

Federal, state, county and local law enforcement kicking down doors and confiscating firearms ?

That's what Obama and liberals have wet dreams about.

So far what we know.
Another "Millennial Generation" looser who believed in "change and hope."

Another "Millennial" who cooped up in their home playing video games instead of participating in "politically incorrect" contact sports where there are winners and losers and maybe some broken bones.

Another liberal who couldn't get laid because cultural-marxism has indoctrinated so many females that they are bull dykes that there isn't enough (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) to go around. So what do you do, grab a gun and head to the nearest "gun free zone" and send a message to Obama, I want free (*)(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

But Donald Trump says that America isn't great. It's his campaign slogan. Is he wrong?

 

Another shooter in a gun free zone. How long are we going to have gun free zones for these killers.

 

Yep you know everything.....well except that it is being reported the shooter identified himself as a conservative republican and had a history of buying Nazi gear....another conservative who couldn't get laid so he grabs a gun and goes to a gun free zone to stand his ground.....

 

I do not see psychiatric drugs as the cause. What I do see as a cause is that they are allowed access to firearms. It makes me angry when I hear that a mentally ill person is able to buy a firearm which they then use to kill another person. It makes me angry when a mentally ill person takes the gun of someone they know and uses it to kill another person or the person they took the gun from.

There are many millions of Americans with mental illness who use psychiatric drugs and never harm anyone so I see your argued root cause as the exception and not the rule. If you believe a particular Ted Talks speaker, we all have at least one diagnosable psychological abnormality or at least have experienced a psycological abnormality at some point in our lives.

What is Obama's gun agenda?

Source citation needed for the above claim. This is a claim I hear often but have yet to see evidence that the claim is true.

He can't do it alone, he needs the help of the republicans and the republicans thus far are not budging thus I accuse them of allowing the status quo of killings to continue.

Told by who?

Again source citation needed for above claim.

Perhaps something and perhaps nothing but worth a look at if there is a chance that stronger laws would mitigate the violence.

 

Yes, he's wrong. Presidents (and congress) don't make countries not-great. They just make it appear so. We haven't fundamentally changed as Americans, but our politicians suck and seem to get worse with time. When catastrophes happen, we see how great Americans are at coming together to face whatever the challenge ahead. That's what is great about America.

 

Over 75% of the weapons used in mass shooting are legally obtained so you are just completely wrong on that point. As to your Gestapo claim I was wondering when the pro-gun crowd would get around to proving Godwin. It usually takes much, much less time. The only one apparently living in fantasyland is you by assuming that most of the mass shooting are committed by people who steal weapons or obtain them illegally. You are again incorrect in that assessment. As for what my proposals would stop would be the people who perpertrate these mass murders after snapping from a prolonged period of bitterness and anger. While it would not stop the methodical planners like the Columbine killers it would stop people like the Navy Yard shooter, the VA Tech shooter, amongst others.

 

If he was buying Nazi gear, you would think he was a Nationalist Socialist wouldn't you ?

You know, big government and a police state with thought control aka political correctness.

 

Ok but none of those were comparable.

Your first link...multiple attackers 10 to be exact. So if you extrapolate that out that would 3 people per attacker killed. Now introduce a gun and say they are able to kill 10 people each That would make it 100 dead. I am sure the 70 people who are alive because the attackers didn't have guns are good with that.

Your second link...2 attackers and they were not indiscriminate it was a family attack. There were only two adult victims and again there two attackers. The other three victims were 5, 7 and 12 years old. Hardly of an age to defend themselves from the attack.

Your third link...No one was killed...so much for you hypothesis.

All that being said it is just silly to argue that guns do not make it easier to perpetrate mass murder. That is just silly.

 

No I would think he was just another conservative.

 

So the fact that all those shooters had a common link is still the gun we should blame? Sounds partisan to me. Imagine if we made more laws about theft then. Shouldn't that stop them?

Please.

Ok, here goes:

Source: http://thehill.com/regulation/243520-administration-preps-new-gun-regulations They chip away at it because they have failed to make headway otherwise. Maryland is a great example of such slow encroachment. Now we're down to magazine sizes of 10 rounds even for rifles, those scary black guns are almost all illegal, and nobody can concealed carry without proving their life is in danger unless they do via documented police records. This is well known information so I'm not sure why it's a point of contention unless you just want a partisan argument.

He also doesn't talk about why Chicago had some of the strictest gun laws in the land and worst gun statistics all while being run by his buddy Rahm.

Leaders after every new gun law they enact. Martin O'Malley did it in Maryland more than once where he proclaimed how much safer we'd be in Maryland with these new laws on the books. And then we have Baltimore so...

Or we could try something else because the mountain of gun laws that are on the books and continue to be added do absolutely nothing since we seem to be accelerating how frequently these kinds of events happen and the ease with which they can be committed. Where's the rationale that maybe just one more law will be the one that does the trick? In any other area of business, science, etc., we'd determine that doing the same thing again and again is not going to produce different results so we would go back to the drawing board and tackle it from a different perspective. This right/left BS is just wasteful of time and ignores the reality that people will get some type of weapon if they want one so we need to interfere between the point where they decide to do something and when hey actually do it. If we can insert some mechanism right there, maybe we'd have a chance. I have no idea what that is, but that's what medical professionals, politicians, drug makers, gun makers, and others need to hammer out. But a law on paper does nothing to stop a human from wanting to commit an evil act.

 

If he wasn't packing a .45 ACP M-1911 A1 pistol, I wouldn't call him a conservative.

 

Prohibiting citizens from purchasing more than ten rounds of ammunition in a 30-day period is effectively disarming them.

 

Just ask yourself why these guys never shoot up a police station.

 

There should be mandatory background checks and mandatory psychological evaluation for anyone who wants a gun. Laws should include the removal of hand guns from public use. This is a simple fix to many problems.