ONTD Political

Obama Asks Biden To Draft 'Concrete Proposals' On Guns By January

1:18 pm - 12/19/2012

Saying the nation has a "deep obligation" to take steps to reduce gun violence, President Obama confirmed Wednesday that he's asked Vice President Biden to head a task force charged with drafting "concrete proposals, no later than January."

And, Obama said, he will push them "without delay."

Repeating some of the themes he has previously stressed about gun violence and Friday's mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., the president said that "sometimes ... words need to lead to action. ... The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing."

Obama noted that polls show the majority of Americans "support banning the sale of military-style" assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips. Also, most Americans support "background checks before all gun purchases," he said, as one way to prevent an "unbalanced man" from getting his hands on such weapons.

"I will use all the powers of this office to help advance efforts to prevent more tragedies" such as Friday's, the president said.


Uncle Joe, don't let us down!
wrestlingdog 20th-Dec-2012 02:37 am (UTC)

85redberries 20th-Dec-2012 04:03 am (UTC)
This is the first time I've seen this image. Fantastic.
moonshaz 20th-Dec-2012 11:18 pm (UTC)
homasse <--cynic20th-Dec-2012 02:58 am (UTC)
Like I said in the other post on this: I'll believe it when I see it.
thevelvetsun Re: <--cynic20th-Dec-2012 06:11 am (UTC)
one_hoopy_frood 20th-Dec-2012 05:38 am (UTC)
I am so so so so glad Joe is in charge of this.
alexvdl 20th-Dec-2012 05:44 am (UTC)
Geee, another issue to take care of before we get around to the economy. Awesome.
celtic_thistle 20th-Dec-2012 11:45 pm (UTC)
Yeah, this one is a LITTLE overdue though, just saying.

alexvdl 21st-Dec-2012 12:34 am (UTC)
Yes. We should definitely focus on that right now instead of sequestration, which is happening on the 4th of January.

ohmiya_sg 20th-Dec-2012 06:47 am (UTC)
Here's hoping it actually passes, though. D:
circumambulate 20th-Dec-2012 07:44 am (UTC)
I realize it rallies the rabble, but I really wish they would drop this 'military style' bullshit. I don't care what a weapon looks like, I care what it can do.
thenakedcat 20th-Dec-2012 09:51 am (UTC)
Does "military style" necessarily apply only to the appearance and not the functionality? I am not a gun person so I ask this in all ignorance, because to me "military style" is clearer than "automatic" or "semi-automatic" (I would not have been able to tell you until, like, yesterday what the difference between the two was) and implies "the only conceivable purpose this thing has is warfare; it would be useless for hunting or scaring off intruders".
kitanabychoice 20th-Dec-2012 03:05 pm (UTC)
Well, I believe they're called military-style because they're similar to the types carried in the military. In the end, I'm sure everyone knows we're talking about high-capacity assault rifles, though.
moonshaz 20th-Dec-2012 11:25 pm (UTC)
My assumption has always been that "military style" was a reference to how a weapon operates and its capabilities, not what it looks like.

The more I think about it, the more I really can't get my head around the idea that anyone would seriously talk about banning certain types of firearms based on their appearance alone, so I'm going stick to that assumption unless I learn otherwise.
This page was loaded Apr 20th 2018, 6:50 am GMT.