search
top

Live on C-SPAN

The President’s dog and pony show on stripping Americans of their Second Amendment rights.

11:56: Biden gives a callout to Colin Goddard.

11:57: Now it’s Obama’s time at the podium.

11:58: Obama points to the children who wrote him letters.

11:59: Obama says we need to do everything we can to take care of and protect our kids. We all agree on that. We have vast disagreement on how that should be accomplished.

12:00: Obama is channeling Clinton’s whole gun performance schtick with the fist bumping move.

12:02: “If there’s even one life that can be saved, then we have an obligation to try.”

12:04: The executive orders are apparently on the table and will be signed at the end of this.

12:04: Obama is going to direct the CDC to get back into the business of funding gun control advocacy.

12:04: Obama’s points for Congressional Action:

  1. Outlaw private sales.
  2. Ban on military assault weapons and a ten round limit for magazines. Obama says these guns are only meant to kill a lot of people very quickly. I guess his secret service detail are a bunch of murderers then.
  3. We should get tougher on gun traffickers. Congress needs to confirm an ATF director. He names Todd Jones as the nominee.
  4. Here comes the payoff to law enforcement: he wants to put more cops back on the street. This is the same formula that got us the first ban.

12:08: These are common sense reforms, Obama says.

12:09: He says this will be difficult, and we will all hew and haw. Mr. President, you have no idea.

12:10: “I will put everything I got into this, and so will Joe, but the only way we can change is if the American people demand it. And by the way, that doesn’t mean just form certain parts of the country.” He notes that it has to be broad support from all walks of America, and not just “the usual suspects.”

12:11: “We’ve suffered too much pain, and care too much about our children!” to not let this happen.

12:12: We have to do this. For the children.

12:13: “With rights come responsibilities. Along with our freedom to live our lives as we will, comes the obligation to allow others to do the same.” Hey, last I checked my gun ownership wasn’t interfering with anyone else’s right to live their lives as they well. Obama continues to blame people like me for the actions of deranged and criminal individuals.

12:14: He’s telling the stories of the victims. Cameras are going because the parents are there. It is sad, but I don’t like using people’s grief for political props.

12:15: “Let’s do the right thing. Let’s do the right thing for them, and the country we love so much. Thank you! I’m going to sign these orders.”

I guess he has to sign them in order to see what’s in them.

35 Responses to “Live on C-SPAN”

  1. UTLaw says:

    Reading the children’s letters to back him up:

    “And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.” Isaiah 3:4

  2. Bill says:

    He is so full of shit. Demonizing gun owners, blah blah blah. No tyranny, etc. etc.

  3. Mark says:

    Yes, he was right. There will be resistance

  4. Bill says:

    “The usual suspects…”

    Funny, how he uses that term.

  5. HappyWarrior6 says:

    Does anyone know the background of the ATF nominee?

    • Rob Crawford says:

      Figure it out — he’s been nominated by a Joyce Foundation board member to have the power to arbitrarily shut down FFLs.

      • UTLaw says:

        He’s also done nothing to stop retaliation against the Fast and Furious whistleblowers, and has allowed the coverup to proceed apace.

  6. billy says:

    I just read the list of exec orders. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/list-executive-actions-obama-plans-to-take-as-part-anti-gun-violence-plan/

    I’m very confused. Obama could have easily banned importation of pretty much any gun, magazine, ammo, etc he wants to under current law but he didn’t. Actually, the Exec Orders are pretty toothless. What is his endgame on this? If he wants an AWB and Mag ban why didn’t he do part of it via exec order? Hell, Bush 1 did it!

    • Patrick H says:

      Wow, if that’s accurate, that’s not bad at all- at least not as bad as it could have been. Most of it is advocacy- hoping to change the culture. We need to fight that, but no immediate threat.

      • Rob Crawford says:

        Watch for what these cover, and what they’re intended to enable.

        Meanwhile, fight the crap they’re going to try to move through Congress.

        • UTLaw says:

          I’d just add that this might be a sign that he’s going to push like crazy for congress to pass various bans. If he banned imports today, he might have stirred up too much opposition to get a full AWB. Now he can hope we will lose steam and let him pass that. If it fails, he can always issue import bans then.

          • Patrick H says:

            Yeah, that’s a really good point. No reason to do that until he finds out what happens with the SLWB (Scary looking weapons ban).

    • Woodchuck says:

      His endgame is to force Congress to kowtow to his will.

    • Bill says:

      Well, it basically says the AG has the power to deem who is a danger, so that may have a lot more teeth than we think.

    • Bill says:

      He did stop the M1 Garands South Korea had in large numbers that they wanted to give back to us.

      just because he doesn’t make it an official thing doesn’t mean he isn’t trying something else.

      Their actions deserve no trust whatsoever.

      • Harold says:

        But note that that, and pretty much everything outside of the DoJ/Fast and Furious has been reactive, including this Maximum Effort (for Obama, have to calibrate for his relative wimpiness outside of the rare thing like Obamacare).

  7. aerodawg says:

    As if it wasn’t already well know, the president thinks the American people are idiots…

  8. Bill Weber says:

    Thank you for putting these minutes together.

  9. Bill says:

    “They don’t need millitary style weapons.”

    Yeeeaaaaah. There’s more coming folks.

    2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

    So they’ve been kvetching about privacy, but now they want to eviscerate it?

    4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

    Ahhh, political enemies.

    9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations

    Do they not, now?

    10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

    Will this include Fast and Furious?

    • Harold says:

      9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations

      Do they not, now?

      I’m sure they don’t for some number where they know it won’t help the investigation; resources are finite, after all. This will actually make us less safe by diverting those … unless it’s just Federal investigations, which I suspect seldom involve guns outside of the DEA. I.e. most “gun violence” is under the remit of local governments.

  10. Arnie says:

    Limbaugh (and I realize some of your are not fans, but bear with me, please) just stated that none of these proposals would have made any difference in Colorado, Connecticut, etc.
    e. g. – Lanza’s mother was neither a felon nor mental ill, so Adam would still have obtained her semi-auto pistols and murdered as many as or more than he did. It was a good point.

    I’ll withhold my own comments on Obama and his speech lest the FBI be trolling here!

  11. TS says:

    Did any of those children write to Obama, “Please don’t throw my mommy and daddy in prison. They didn’t do anything wrong.”?

  12. Ryan says:

    I enjoyed the line about how 70% of the NRA’s membership favored the proposed legislation.

  13. Matt says:

    I want to know where this “40% of guns are bought without background checks” meme has come from? It sounds like someone has taken a made-up Brady talking point on the percentage of non-licensees selling at gun shows and translated it into something else. Any ideas?

    • Sven says:

      You can find the 40% number on the Brady website-they cite a DOJ/NIC study from 1996 or 1997 by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig: Guns In America-National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms. The report is based on telephone surveys done in 1994. As far as I can tell, there is no other basis for this statistic.

      Everyone is using this number, but I’d wager that no one knows where it came from or that it is almost 20 years old. However, if you dig down into the report (and there are two versions of it out there: a 12-page brief and the entire report of over 100 pages) you’ll find that the authors discuss DGU and kinda accept around 1.5 million incidents annually.

  14. Andy B. says:

    Has anyone considered that outlawing private sales should be popular with gun dealers, and may be regarded to be as much of a special interest payoff as the promise to fund more police?

    • TS says:

      Just like import bans help domestic manufacturers. And since the NRA is in bed with gun manufacturers, they must love the “sporting” clause. /s

    • Harold says:

      Who get’s gun dealer’s votes and money?

      I.e. I suspect who would benefit from it would help determine who would support this, e.g. on the Republican side. It, or rather universal NICS use, is also the logical endpoint of the system.

      It would, however, piss off a lot of voters.

  15. Sigivald says:

    Obama says these guns are only meant to kill a lot of people very quickly. I guess his secret service detail are a bunch of murderers then.

    Yup. And every cop in the country is a mass murderer.

    (And I guess they’re “military”, too, since the standard patrol carbine is “military style”.

    Actually, I suspect lots of people in the Political Class think of police as A Lot Like Soldiers anyway…)

  16. Clay says:

    They should have opened the speech with Biden saying “ladies and gentlemen welcome to the carnival of constitutional quackery.

  17. Matthew Carberry says:

    http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf

    Inmate surveys undercut the meme that they get guns from gunshows or any other type of legitimate sale, private or otherwise. 40% are obtained by “illegal means” (street sales and thefts) and 40% from “friends and family.”

    The claim that universal background checks will help depends on those friends and family, who one assumes know that their friend or family member is a criminal (albeit perhaps not convicted) and are thus already breaking the law (knowingly providing someone a weapon whom you know or should know will use it in a crime I presume is chargeable somehow) will have a change of heart.

    Of course the whole idea fails in a practical enforcement sense as there is no current universal registry to know who currently owns what, even among the law-abiding, much less the criminal. When a gun is used in a crime there will continue to be no effective way to tell who the criminal got it from and when. All they can do is charge the same old “felon in possession.”

    Given that Canada couldn’t get full compliance with a registry, the thought that the US could is patent nonsense.

    • Matthew Carberry says:

      Forgot to note, the “street sales” involve a prohibited person on both sides, not a law-abiding person who might otherwise comply with a universal check requirement. The non-prohibited criminals of course can continue to buy legally.

      Note the change from ’94 to ’97 as NICs kicked in, formal purchases subject to NICs dropped 6% and “Friend and Family” went up the same amount, a one-for-one transferance that calls even more into question the idea that extending checks will have any effect. They didn’t when checks were first instituted after all.

top