Top Categories

Obama Promises Unilateral Action on Guns

The Washington Times reported yesterday that President Obama promised a group of big-city mayors that he would take more executive action on gun control.

The closed-door meeting at the White House included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who discussed “strategies to reduce youth violence,” the White House said in a statement.

Mr. Obama “vowed to continue doing everything in his power to combat gun violence through executive action and to press Congress to pass common-sense reforms like expanding the background check system and cracking down on gun trafficking,” the White House said in a statement.

Among those attending the session were Mayor Cory Booker of Newark, N.J., a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate; Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter; Washington, D.C., Mayor Vincent Gray; New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu; Mayor Jean Quan of Oakland, Calif.; Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, Mayor Sly James of Kansas City, Mo.; Mayor Molly Ward of Hampton, Va., and Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed.

You can read more here. Personally, I’m not too worried about this rhetoric, at least not yet. This comes off as pandering in my opinion, especially considering that midterm elections are coming up next year.

Having said that, this is something that we must pay close attention to.

H/T Colion Noir

Update 8/29/2013: Two new Executive Actions announced.

, ,

37 Responses to Obama Promises Unilateral Action on Guns

  1. dgdimick August 28, 2013 at 10:03 am #

    So he said it, does ANYONE still believe anything he says? Yes, we need to keep a watch on this type of rhetoric, however, he has has less creditability then Al Sharpton

  2. Hillbilly Bob August 28, 2013 at 10:15 am #

    I wish these Mayors would personally go door to door to confiscate everyone’s guns

  3. Jason Discher August 28, 2013 at 10:19 am #

    I believe him when he says he’s still going to come after our right to bear arms, absolutely. We’re not out of the woods yet with this guy.

  4. Prairie Patriot August 28, 2013 at 10:55 am #

    Sly James is my mayor. Come the next election, I’ll know who NOT to vote for. Piece of garbage.

  5. James August 28, 2013 at 4:00 pm #

    Keep an eye on sure, but where does one get “he says he’s still going to come after our right to bear arms” from “to press Congress to pass common-sense reforms like expanding the background check system and cracking down on gun trafficking?

    When I went to pick up my Walther from the only gun shop in Seattle I could find that had one in stock – which was in a seedier part of town, judging by the look of some of the customers picking up $60 Saturday Night Specials, I don’t see why anybody should be concerned about pressing Congress to pass common-sense reforms like expanding the background check system and cracking down on gun trafficking. No politician in his right mind would promote going after ones constitutional right to bear arms. It’d be political suicide.

    • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 4:22 pm #

      First of all, I’m against expanding background checks because they will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals won’t stop selling guns to other criminals because you close the “gun show loophole”, which is of course political nonsense, and expand background checks.

      Second, how can you say that “no politician in his right mind would promote going after ones constitutional right to bear arms”? Well, I guess you made the “in his right mind” qualifier, so I’ll let it pass. There are politicians ALL OVER the US on many different levels doing just that. Where have you been?

      • James August 28, 2013 at 4:44 pm #

        All right, towards trying to keep this discussion on a constructive level (or redirect it to one), what do you think WOULD help prevent gun related crime?

        And, I’ve been in the same place that you have. Now, I really don’t want to get too far into politics and, while I certainly don’t think the Obama has been the perfect president – far from it. But really, the other guys? Iraq? Afghanistan? The nation’s debt? Sara Palin? GOOD things? Really? no offense intended, and I DO really respect and enjoy reading about your gun knowledge, but I COULD ask where have you been?

        • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 4:57 pm #

          “what do you think WOULD help prevent gun related crime” – fire Eric Holder.

          I don’t follow the rest of your points. I voted Libertarian at the Presidential level, not Republican, if that is your line of questioning. By the way, if your argument for your guy is that the other guy would have been worse, that’s weak.

          You’re upset about war? It looks more and more like Obama is taking us into an illegal war in Syria, which may spiral out of control and into WWIII. The national debt? It was ~10 trillion when Obama took office, it’s at what, ~17 trillion now?

          I’m perfectly fine getting into politics. Obama has been the worst in the history of the United States, bar none.

    • TK August 28, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

      James, you might want to try removing your head from Obama’s ass, then perhaps you’ll be able to see clearly. Just a thought.

    • Hillbilly Bob August 28, 2013 at 4:25 pm #

      So what you are saying is that this gun shop sold cheap guns to “Shady looking” customers without a background check?

      • Hillbilly Bob August 28, 2013 at 4:27 pm #

        My above post was meant for James

    • JimmyD (@j1mmyd) August 31, 2013 at 7:47 am #

      Wait! Seattle has $60 guns and only one gun store?! He’d have an empire of stores in a place where guys didn’t think the Utili-Kilt is “manly”.

  6. James August 28, 2013 at 4:12 pm #

    Just to help put things in context, the actual statement was this:
    “In a speech in Mexico this week, for example, Obama affirmed the American right to bear arms, BUT he will “do everything in my power to pass common-sense reforms that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people.”

    Note the “affirmed the American right to bear arms” part.

    • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 4:18 pm #

      Really James? And you’re buying that why, exactly?

      • James August 28, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

        Brandon, simply because the converse would be much harder to believe. As I stated earlier, no politician would seriously consider repealing ones constitutional rights and expect to remain a politician – and I certainly don’t think he has any desire to do so. In any case, the guy’s basically a lame duck president now, and it’d be next to impossible for him to get buy-in to accompish any sweeping changes in pretty much anything in the time he has left – so everybody can relax.

        But really – everybody out there thinks that the gun laws are absolutely perfect the way they are with NO room for improvement?

        • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 4:36 pm #

          Yeah, he can’t get buy-in, that’s why he’s threatening Executive action.

          “everybody out there thinks that the gun laws are absolutely perfect the way they are with NO room for improvement?”

          Certainly not. I’d like to see 99% of the gun laws repealed. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms. Not from you, and not from Dear Leader. Period.

    • Jake August 28, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

      James do you have an Obama phone?

  7. Jason Discher August 28, 2013 at 4:25 pm #

    Here are a list of bills going before committee in California this Friday.

    Senate Bill 47 (Yee) would ban the use of a “bullet button” on semi-automatic rifles to comply with current law by classifying firearms with “bullet buttons” as “assault weapons” and banning their future sale or transfer. Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL of your semi-autos with “bullet buttons.”

    Senate Bill 53 (DeLeon) would require Californians to obtain a permit BEFORE purchasing ammunition, require a background check before every future ammunition purchase and require registration of ALL ammunition that you purchase.

    Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) would ban the future sale or transfer of and classify ALL semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine or holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as “assault weapons.” Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL your semi-autos newly classified as “assault weapons.”

    Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) would ban the possession of ALL magazines over ten rounds, including the millions of “grandfathered” standard capacity magazines currently legally possessed by Californians.

    Still have questions on why I don’t trust anything that comes out of their mouths when it comes to common-sense and guns? They got an inch here, and now they’re trying for a mile. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Pretty simple stuff.

  8. scott kirkwood August 28, 2013 at 5:00 pm #

    james i agree with you. good to see level headed people thinking things through, on the internet. brandon, i get that youre out in god’s country now, but i like civilization (most of the time). not everyone wants the wild west with 99% of the gun laws thrown out. i certainly think there are some, but i want background checks, and a government who enforces them.

    • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 5:05 pm #

      What makes you think that criminals obey gun laws? You want background checks, ok I understand the desire for that, but that’s one law. There are thousands of them, probably 10′s of thousands. Wild Wild West? Hardly. Look at the places in America with the most gun control. Highest crime. Conversely, look at the places with the least gun control. Lowest crime. There’s no data to support your argument.

      Shall not be infringed.

  9. scott kirkwood August 28, 2013 at 5:24 pm #

    its not just criminals. for instance idiots who have no business carrying CHL? texas just shortened the classes required to get a CHL and renewals dont require showing proficiency. As for the gun free zones, many of them are gun free in order to stop all the killings. i agree that it doesnt always work. but they were violent already. what places are you suggesting are are the highest in crime with the most gun control? besides chicago. :)

    • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 5:31 pm #

      “for instance idiots who have no business carrying CHL?” – No man has the right to tell another man that he has to pass HIS test in order to exercise a God-given right (self-defense). I thought the Texas CHL program was crap when I lived there, and my opinion has not changed with Texas shortening the class. Good intentions? Doesn’t matter. It’s a system that can be abused, and will be abused, as a path to “May Issue”. Meaning, if you meet our requirements, which are ever-changing, we’ll let you exercise your God-given right. It’s wrong.

      “As for the gun free zones, many of them are gun free in order to stop all the killings” – and where have all but one of the mass shootings happened in the past few decades? Gun free zones. All they do is disarm people like you and me who OBEY THE LAW. Think about that for just a second…it’s just common sense?

      “what places are you suggesting are are the highest in crime with the most gun control?” – Read this book: More Guns, Less Crime.

    • Hillbilly Bob August 28, 2013 at 5:52 pm #

      Congratulations SK, you just won a new pair of big floppy shoes and a new foam nose

      • James August 28, 2013 at 8:47 pm #

        And there we go: A brilliantly and logically constructed argument that’s difficult to find fault with. Except for, perhaps it might have been more informative had it read, “Congratulations SK, I think you just won a new pair of big floppy shoes and a new foam nose because……”

        Man…and to think I initially found this group because of an excellent comparison Brandon did with a couple of guns I have interest in: the Beretta Nano, and Kahr PM9/CM9. After a total of four home break-ins, four car break-ins, and being held up at gun point (one of the break-ins and the hold-up being in a very upscale neighborhood), I’m a firm supporter of ones right to carry. And, after making a few less-informed choices, I’m in search of a reliable, concealable 9mm suitable for a left-handed person. In a previous post, Brandon made a great point about how EVERYTHING has a failure rate. So, if it’s something one intends to use for self-defense, it should either be a gun with a very low failure rate and with jams that are relatively easy to clear. (Note, that last sentence is mine – I don’t want to seem to be misquoting Brandon). Nothing wrong with carrying backups, but in a high pressure situation, reaching for one after a failure of ones primary may not end up very conveniently. I’ve read some troubling information the Nano and the PM9/CM9 and was hoping for other’s thoughts on the issue, but received none. No shortage of response HERE though.

        So…any thoughts on the Nano, PM9/CM9, or other ambi concealable alternatives would be much appreciated.

        Also, I’d be interested in hearing about WHY background checks to see if a potential purchaser of a lethal weapon is a convicted felon or psychologically imbalanced is such a bad thing? I mean, assuming that you’re not a convicted felon or psychologically imbalanced. I’d think a 13 year old, for example, should be able to go watch a Batman movie without experiencing some nutcase opening fire in the theater. And, for the record, I don’t think that arming the 13 year old is a reasonable solution. And, I think that the argument that background checks would invariably lead to the repealing of ones constitutional right to bear arms is weak. VERY weak.

        I won’t argue that voting for a Libertarian candidate that doesn’t have a ghost of a chance of winning is certainly ones right. Practically speaking though, I chose to vote for the lesser of the two evils who actually DID have a chance of winning.

        And personally, while I DO think that we as a nation, should do a much better job of keeping out of other people’s business, I definitely think that going to war with a nation over falsified reports of weapons of mass destruction that we really knew hadn’t existed for many years, and has resulted in destabilizing the world instead of stabilizing it is a markedly different thing than a strike against a country that is actually using weapons of mass destruction and seems bent on genocide.

        Additionally, Obama HAS been trying to balance the budget, but that’s a hard thing to do when the people on the other side of the aisle insist that the only way to do that is by offering more tax breaks for the wealthy. Ironically, I’ve a wealthy friend who doesn’t argue that Bush helped him get rich, but voted for Obama because of concern for his daughters’ future and the “other side of the aisle’s” insistance that global warning is a liberal plot despite most every credible scientist’s view to the contrary.

        • Brandon August 28, 2013 at 9:02 pm #

          You can find our gun reviews here.

          We already have background checks to purchase a firearm, we don’t need more. I don’t think the slippery slope argument is weak at all, Democrats have openly stated their intentions of disarming us. Choose to believe what you will.

          I haven’t heard anyone suggest that we should arm 13 year-olds. But guess what? That movie theater was a “gun free” zone. Didn’t work, did it?

          Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. If that works for YOUR conscience, so be it. It doesn’t work for mine.

          Obama has been trying to balance the budget? LOL…is that why the national debt has seen the largest increase to date under any U.S. president?

        • Hillbilly Bob August 28, 2013 at 9:02 pm #

          Damn James, the guy that held you at gunpoint, how in the hell did he pass his background check?
          You’re a liberal, I get it, I refuse to associate with libtards anymore because they are sick in the head and most have mommy or daddy issues
          Let me guess, you live in a big city therefore the kids in your area shouldn’t even be able to look at a gun let alone shoot a gun at 13?
          Besides that movie theater in Aurora wasn’t full of 13 year old kids, there were many adults in that theater
          Oh and I refuse to associate with anyone that voted for obamalamadingdong

          • James August 28, 2013 at 9:16 pm #

            With all due respect, I wouldn’t call myself a Liberal OR a Conservative.

            Now, about the guy who held me up, assumably he got his gun off the books, without a background check. So the answer to that is, since he was able do do it, there’s no point in giving ANYBODY a background check? I mean, why should we care how many nutcases have guns, right? And the movie theater guy apparently got his gun from his mother. So the answer to that is because he got one without a background check, there’s no point in giving ANYBODY a background check?

            By the way, I’ve no problem with a 13 year old learning about gun safety and shooting with supervision. That doesn’t mean I think a bunch of kids should be carrying guns to movie theaters.

        • Tim August 28, 2013 at 9:11 pm #

          Liberal hypocrisy is astounding.

          • James August 28, 2013 at 9:25 pm #

            Respectfully, what’s your definition of “liberal?” And, given that, what’s your definition of “liberal hypocrisy?” Now, given that, to complete your argument, “Liberal hypocrisy is astounding because…..???”

          • Hillbilly Bob August 29, 2013 at 11:40 am #

            James the point is that we have background checks and my your own post you point out that the people that CAN’T pass a background check WON’T submit to a background check
            So the guy that held you up and the shooters that got the guns from their family or through theft would have been stopped by a more stringent background check?
            Please explain how ANY background check would have stopped the two shitbags that you posted about above?

    • Dean August 28, 2013 at 8:41 pm #

      I do not know the rankings, but lets just say look up Detroit, Washington DC, Aurora Co, NYC, Boston MA, and lets give you the option of Sacramento, or San Francisco…. All very restrictive on firearms, and I’m pretty sure the level of violent crime would be enough you wouldn’t take your family there for vacation either….

      Oh and yes, Aurora CO is one of the most restrictive cities in CO… But tell me how that gun free zone worked out in the movie theater……

      • Hillbilly Bob August 29, 2013 at 11:44 am #

        James you and your liberal buddies just want more “Feel good” laws on the books, even when they do nothing to stop one shooting or murder
        We have laws and checks in place to stop law abiding citizens and these laws and checks don’t do shit to stop the criminals
        Sort of like a lock that only keeps honest people out

    • Tim August 28, 2013 at 8:48 pm #

      Dude…even the CDC says gun control is bullshit. Turn off CNN, stop listening to Obama and Biden. They are LYING to you.

      http://www.gunsandammo.com/2013/08/27/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/

      • Matt August 28, 2013 at 11:02 pm #

        Just buy a shotgun…you don’t need 30 rounds =P

  10. Matt August 28, 2013 at 11:01 pm #

    James is either a delusional idiot, or a deliberate government troll. Democrats have also openly discussed this type of behavior of ‘infiltrating’ social media and forums and such.

    Also want to point out that all but one of those Mayors are members of Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Of course James will deny that MAIG is really against all guns, legal or not.

  11. Eric Biermann August 28, 2013 at 11:42 pm #

    Has Holder yet been held accountable for the Fast & Furious debacle??? And this guy is speaking about …OUR….gun rights???? Hmmmmmm. Putting on hip waiters now!

  12. gregvandemark September 14, 2013 at 1:33 pm #

    What a funking asshole! He has not done a damn thing to combat the real violence in this country. He does not address the gang violence or the hundreds of blacks killing each other in Detroit/Chicago. It’s just another way to strip us of our freedoms and to create a police state. And yes! What about Eric Holder and his covert gun running with the cartels.

%d bloggers like this: