dagblog - Comments for "Federal gun checks surge as violent crime ebbs"

Charles Blow's Dec. 14

artappraiser — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 05:54:21 +0000

In reply to Federal gun checks surge as violent crime ebbs

Charles Blow's Dec. 14 column @ The New York Times, "A Tragedy of Silence," has some good factuals with links:

[....] And while gun control advocates grow more quiet, the gun lobby grows stronger and louder. According to a report issued Friday by the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org, “For gun rights groups, 2012 was the most active election cycle since 2000. [....]

No wonder public opinion is shifting away from gun control. Gallup found that the number of Americans who believe that these laws should be stricter fell more than 40 percent from 1991 to 2011.

Gallup also found, for the first time last year, “greater opposition to than support for a ban on semiautomatic guns or assault rifles, 53 percent to 43 percent. In the initial asking of this question in 1996, the numbers were nearly reversed, with 57 percent for and 42 percent against an assault rifle ban.”

Both the Oregon and Connecticut shooters had semiautomatic weapons.

And screening prospective gun buyers for criminal records and for mental illness is helpful, but it is not enough and isn’t always done.

And mass shooters don’t necessarily have criminal records and seem to have no problem obtaining legal guns.

An analysis published earlier this year by Mother Jones of the 61 mass shootings in America over the last 30 years found that: “Of the 139 guns possessed by the killers, more than three-quarters were obtained legally.”

(The Oregon shooter stole his gun. The Connecticut shooter’s guns are reported to have been legally purchased in his mother’s name.)

We must reinstate the assault weapons ban. Military-style guns belong in the hands of military personnel, and maybe police officers, but not in the hands of civilians.

A vast majority of mass shootings in the last three decades involved assault weapons and semiautomatic handguns, according to Mother Jones. [....]

This is a question that is

trkingmomoe — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 00:18:50 +0000

In reply to Justice Dept. Studied and

This is a question that is being asked by many in the last 24 hours. "Isn't there something that the President can do now with an executive order? " Thanks for the info. Maybe this time he will.

Justice Dept. Studied and

artappraiser — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 00:01:41 +0000

In reply to Federal gun checks surge as violent crime ebbs

Justice Dept. Studied and Shelved Ideas to Bolster Gun Database
By Charlie Savage, New York Times, Dec. 15/16, 2012

WASHINGTON — After the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona and others in early 2011, the Justice Department drew up a detailed list of steps the government could take to expand the background-check system in order to reduce the risk of guns falling into the hands of mentally ill people and criminals.

Most of the proposals, though, were shelved at the department without action against the backdrop of the election campaign and the politically charged Congressional investigation into the Operation Fast and Furious gun trafficking case, according to people familiar with the internal deliberations.

While it is not clear whether any of the proposals would have had an effect on the massacre at an Connecticut elementary school, the set of recommendations could provide a blueprint if the Obama administration chooses to go forward with more aggressive steps to curb gun violence. The Justice Department’s list included several measures that President Obama could enact by executive order even if Congress failed to take any new actions [.....]

Current system worked with

artappraiser — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:13:05 +0000

In reply to Federal gun checks surge as violent crime ebbs

Current system worked with Newtown shooter to the pitiful extent it can:

Newtown gunman tried to buy rifle days before shooting
By Tracy Connor and Pete Williams, NBC News EXCLUSIVE, Dec 15, 2012

UPDATED 1:33 p.m. ET: The gunman in the Newtown massacre tried unsuccessfully to buy a rifle three days before he killed 20 children, six adults and himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Connecticut and federal officials told NBC News Saturday.

Adam Lanza, 20, went to a Dick's Sporting Goods store in Danbury, Conn., on Tuesday to buy the weapon, but was turned down because he didn't want to undergo a background check or abide by the state's waiting period for gun sales, the officials said.

Still, Lanza was heavily armed when he forced his way into the school Friday morning – after killing his mother at their home in Newtown

The officials said he had four handguns on him as he stormed the 600-student school and shot his victims – clustered in two classrooms – at close range. There was a rifle found in the car he drove to Sandy Hook.

Previously, officials had said Lanza was armed with two pistols as he rampaged through the suburban school and that the weapons were legally purchased and registered to his mother, Nancy.

At a Saturday briefing, Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance said officials were tracing every weapon connected to the shooter.

The motive for the mass killing was unknown, but officials told NBC's Pete Williams that they were investigating whether Lanza is the person who had an "altercation" with four staff members at the school on Thursday. [....]