Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Government

White House: Obama ‘Actively Supportive’ of Assault Weapons Ban

Dec. 18, 2012 2:50pm Erica Ritz

White House: President Obama Supports New Assault Weapon, Gun Legislation

(AP File Photo)

(TheBlaze/AP) — The White House says President Barack Obama is “actively supportive” of efforts on Capitol Hill to reinstate an assault weapons ban, marking a change from the more open-ended support of “change” in days and years past.

President Obama has long backed stricter gun laws, but failed to make significant headway during his first term.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) plans to introduce legislation to reinstate the ban early next year, and while White House spokesman Jay Carney was noncommittal yesterday, he’s now put the White House on record.

“He is actively supportive of, for example, Sen. [Dianne] Feinstein’s stated intent to revive a piece of legislation that would reinstate the assault weapons ban,” Carney remarked Tuesday during his daily briefing.

Carney says Obama would also consider legislation to close the gun show “loophole,” and regulate certain ammunition clips.

Carney explained:

“He supports and would support legislation that addresses the problem of the so-called gun show loophole, and there are other elements of gun legislation that he could support … high capacity ammunition clips, for example. That is certainly something he would be interested in looking at.”

Obama has pledged to address gun violence in the coming weeks, following Friday’s deadly shooting at a Connecticut elementary school. He told the nation Sunday at a vigil for the victims that we will have to “change.”

Carney added that Obama spoke Tuesday with West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat and avid hunter who is now supportive of a national discussion on preventing gun violence.

According to Carney, Obama is “heartened” by what he has heard from some members of Congress who have been “longtime opponents” of certain gun control measures.

Manchin released a statement about the discussion later Tuesday (via Politico):

We agree that as Americans and parents, all of our children belong to all of us – and we must work together to keep our precious children safe.

I believe that we must have a dialogue and bring parties from all sides to the table. I know my friends at the NRA and those who support our Second Amendment rights will participate because I know that their hearts are aching for the families in Newtown, just like all Americans.

To have a productive dialogue, we also need to address a number of critical issues, including our mental health system, safety in our schools and a media and entertainment culture that glorifies unspeakable violence. [Emphasis added]

Here is video of Carney’s remarks, via Politico:

–

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (173)

chips1
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:14pm
Why do they still refer to it as the White House?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- progressiveslayer
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:21pm
  I don’t know why because the Kremlin is more appropriate.
  
  Report this comment
- Objectivist_John_Galt
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:28pm
  This was probably bound to happen anyway but when the gun control petition is the most popular on the white house website its hard to argue. If you love freedom, counter the gun control petition by signing the right to arm teachers here http://wh.gov/RJ5d
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:30pm
  The left is making a false premise. They senselessly think that because one person with a gun murders, that now all gun owners are murderers or intent on murdering. It’s ridiculous. They unjustly lump us into one category, and treat honest law abiding citizens unfairly and with baseless suspicion. It’s bigotry and discrimination.
  
  The only common sense solution that most would agree to is to better secure our schools, and to be better prepared for any emergency or threat. It makes no sense that a father drops off his daughter to school, and then goes to work in a well secured building; he shows identification, passes security entrances, and knows there are armed guards present in key positions, all the while his daughter is left in an unprotected environment wherein anyone can come in cause havoc, and be easy targets, or sitting ducks.
  
  We’re not asking for a one size fits all solution, but to be allowed the opportunity to determine our own course for our own localities. If one school wants one or two armed guards present, let them make plans to ensure training, certification and any other thing necessary. If another school feels they only need a principle or a few other staff members to carry a concealed handgun, then let them make plans to ensure readiness in the event of any emergency. Let each school district decide its own measures, but do not pass one mandatory law for all, or deny us the right by making all schools gun-free zones.
  
  Report this comment
- ArmedAndReallyPissed
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:31pm
  I don’t get that either. I’ve been calling it the Jihad House for several years. I find that way more appropriate. I’d call it something else, but it would never get posted.
  
  Report this comment
- civilwarcometh
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:48pm
  So they want our guns but it’s ok for obama to give guns to criminals??http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/12/18/cbs-news-fast-and-furious-gun-found-at-site-where-mexican-beauty-queen-killed/
  
  Report this comment
- doomytram
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:57pm
  Look peoples! Let me be clear! Say’s Obozo – “It’s on like Donkey MF-Kong!” American Guns cancelled, Dick Sporting Goods stops selling certain guns, Cancelling DJango screenings, and on and on and on.
  
  Meanwhile, here in Pyongyang, Obozo is giving money to Chavez to build assault weapon factories. Giving assault weapons to Mexican Gangs, and getting punch bowls of Cokcaccaine to his secret UN PO Box. Is Obozo shipping guns to the 13 year olds in Chicago, or are the kids buying them directly from the mexican gangs. Which comes first the Chicken (coming home to roost) or the egg? Who does Obozo buy the guns (to give the chicago thugs) from Egg foo Gun or Herberto Chavez?
  
  Report this comment
- 65Mustang
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:37pm
  I refer to it as the Ghetto White House….the damn SOB
  
  Report this comment
- Gold Coin & Economic News
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:40pm
  Obama wanted to ban assault weapons all along, now he has his crisis…and he will take advantage of it:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32UsCrb2-HQ
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:41pm
  Valiant,
  
  “The only common sense solution that most would agree to is to better secure our schools, and to be better prepared for any emergency or threat.”
  
  No–that’s far from common sense. If armed guards were the “common sense” solution to mass shootings, then we would needs those guards also at every public place. And by the way, I would say comparatively few places of business are guarded at all times by armed guards.
  
  The “common sense” solution would be to ban the weapons that are capable of killing masses of people very quickly and are not much good for much else.
  
  Report this comment
- encinom
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:44pm
  The Gun nuts are having hissy fits, spewing paranoid fantasies of NWO, UN and other boogey men they have been programmed to be afraid of.
  
  It time for a sanity test, of course most NRA members would fail.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Jerk
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:45pm
  The black hypocrites, Holder/Obama, surely weren’t for banning weapons during Fast and Furious.
  
  Report this comment
- ginger100
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:49pm
  If the president, a citizen, can walk into a no gun zone or a school with an armed secret service detail for protection, don’t we as citizens deserve the same right to protect ourselves?
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:10pm
  Pencilhead-so no more suv’s and outlaw everything at Lowe’s and Home Despot? Moron all day or just during certain hours?
  Enci-idiot Hahahahahahahahaha. Cry more wanker, it fits your personality type well. Pansy cupcake tulip.
  
  Report this comment
- GuruMeditation
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:14pm
  Dunno, but they sure are a disgusting bunch. It seems they think they have a throne in “the sides of the north”, if you get my drift.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:27pm
  @PubliusPencilman @encimon Idiots, both of you.
  
  The purpose of armed guards is to confront and try to eliminate threats and dangers, including armed individuals, with equalizing force. We can’t accept having teachers and principles confront violent individuals with their bare hands and feet. You’re two screws loose if you think so. Those brave school staff members in CT used their bodies, all they had, to confront the maniac. A human spirit filled with love will never sit idle while defenseless souls are massacred. They will do all they can, immediately. To permit that citizens remain helpless in these situations while politicians sit in cozy state houses all secure and well protected is the height of hypocrisy. I can guarantee you had these courageous servants had a chance they would rather have confronted the maniac adequately armed, and put an end to it before any children got harmed. Armed guards makes the most sense. Right after, and days following, the school had police (armed individuals) guarding the school, as did many other schools. Only baboons like you two would think otherwise. The answer is to be prepared before, not after. Clinton banned these “assault weapons”, and these shootings still occurred. Mexico bans them too, and their murder rate is two times higher than that of the US. England’s crime rate doubled after their ban. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/14/crime-statistics-england-wales
  
  Report this comment
- brother_ed
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:35pm
  It’s good to know that the investigation has been completed, that all factors have been considered, and that all possible solutions have been debated.
  
  For a minute there I thought that we were rushing into a solution that was already written, and just waiting for a crisis.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:59pm
  PENCILNECK…you’re seriously trying to tell me that if an armed guard or a properly trained and armed school official wasn’t present at the school they could not have saved the lives of some of the innocents that were killed? Seriously champ?
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 6:04pm
  In England, Gun crime soars by 35%: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html
  
  In England, Gun crime doubles in a decade: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6438601/Gun-crime-doubles-in-a-decade.html
  
  While in the US, many states have recently passed laws allowing citizens to carry concealed, and yet, crime has gone down.
  
  U.S. violent crime down for fifth straight year: http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/29/justice/us-violent-crime/index.html
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 6:16pm
  After DC allows citizens to be armed at home, homicides hit lowest level since ‘64:
  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/30/dc-homicides-hit-lowest-number-since-64/
  
  Crime rates in Chicago and DC drop after gun control laws are struck down:
  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/30/media-silence-is-deafening-about-important-gun-news/
  
  Report this comment
- decendentof56
  Posted on December 28, 2012 at 7:21am
  Valient…..
  Get out of your head any idea that you can have a thoughtful discussion with gov officials about a common-sense solution. This is not about anything other than taking your right to defend yourself and making Americans defenseless, just like Russians, Chinese, Cambodians, Rwandan’, Sundaese, Cubans, and many, many other people were left defenseless.
  Do your research about how things worked out for those folks.
  Feinstein is a traitor, as is anyone else who supports this non-sense. DO YOU honestly think it will stop with this bill?
  “Dedicating funding for ATF to implement registration” is part of the bill. What do you think that means?
  
  Report this comment
- decendentof56
  Posted on December 28, 2012 at 7:47am
  I like he two smiling-faced, white, useful idiots in the background. I guess that shows that the dictator has white support.
  Let me suggest you go to the web address below, and scroll down to part 6. Then, scroll down to the part where is says….labeling American Liberals and would-be Marists as “useful idiots.” A five minute interview with a former Soviet KGB propagandist explains how Communists planned the scenario we now see playing out.
  
  http://www.newswithviews.com/Moriarity/michael1140.htm
  
  Report this comment
ArmedAndReallyPissed
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:12pm
White House: Obama ‘Actively Supportive’ of Assault Weapons Ban…………..In the mean time, the CLOTUSS sends more F-16′s to his friends the MoBroHo. Is this a great Kountry or what ?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
MrSunshine
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:12pm
Blaming guns for this tragedy is like blaming a match for an arson! Or, praising Mozart’s piano for creating his Requiem.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:23pm
  MRSUNSHINE, You may have no idea how true that is. Our largest loss of life during a school attack was 95 children killed in a 1950s arson attack.
  
  Report this comment
- ArmedAndReallyPissed
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:32pm
  Yeah, this is total BS, just like me blaming Spoons for making me fat.
  
  Report this comment
- bava
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:57pm
  How many people do you know or know of that have been murdered by a match? Deflection is an art you people think you excel at. You actually don’t.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:06pm
  @Bava
  
  Arson fatalities, of which there are countless numbers.
  
  Try harder.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:38pm
  Armed,
  
  It’s not like blaming spoons for making you fat. If the situation were that someone could take a spoon with them to a public place and start making OTHER people morbidly obese against their will at a distance, then we would naturally have to talk about banning these magic spoons.
  
  Mr.Sunshine,
  
  Matches are used for many other things than arson. Guns are only used for shooting things. That’s a false analogy.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:45pm
  And by the way–matches certainly are not illegal, but most explosives are. Are you suggesting that explosives don’t play an important role in explosions?
  
  Report this comment
- countryfirst
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:17pm
  This has nothing to do with guns, But the decay of the family and moral compass, we have neighbors that have 5 & 3 year old grandchildren, They are being raised by deadbeat parents and have seen things that I could never imagine as a child.
  
  To make the story short we had the grandparent and kids over for the 3 years old Birthday, the girls were playing and cutting paper, I stated that they could cut my hair (Laughing) and the 5 year old said “ I will cut your throat”. My wife & I jaw dropped and the grandparents are powerless to discipline , to say they have not been invited back since. The language and looks that the little girl has is truly scary.
  I fear after BHO next 4 years it will be Obama’s America in full gear. Why would God help us?
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:57pm
  Oh I see PENCILNECK…so when you ban the firearms and the next loony chooses to make a bomb from a recipe he found on the internet and from items anyone can buy….what should be banned first…the internet or the fertilzer? Statist idiot.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 8:08pm
  @COUNTRYFIRST Yes. We need real revival in this nation.
  
  The liberals are afraid of “religion” and any mention of God. The liberal’s have a monopoly in labeling what is religion. Religion is not necessarily acknowledging God or even respecting his Authority. Faith is a way of living. You do not deny your faith simply because your title or position in life changes. Why can’t national radio hosts talk about God unashamedly, or regular TV shows praise God? The left has put it in their minds that thanking God or acknowledging Christian kindness toward another is “religious”. We have separated ourselves from our Creator and constructed a box for him, wherein he can’t escape from. We’ve set a place for him, and therein can we only praise him. This nonsense needs to stop.
  
  Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnt7euRF5Pg&vq=medium
  
  Report this comment
- JosefKozlov
  Posted on December 19, 2012 at 3:48am
  @pencilman
  Mr. Sunshine’s analogy is correct. While matches may not be used only for arson, they are only used to start fires, whether that be a candle, a gas stove, or a building is up to the one who lights the match.
  Similarly, guns are only for shooting. That is what they are designed to do. It is up to the person holding the gun to decide what to shoot, which could be a paper target, empty cans, an animal being hunted, a person, who is threatening you or your family, in self-defense, or unfortunately to shoot an innocent person.
  Your rebuttal analogy incorrectly compares arson, an act of malevolence, to shooting, which in itsself is neither good or bad.
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on December 19, 2012 at 1:29pm
  pencildikk,
  Guns are uses in the olympics,other competative shooting events,they’re used to hunt and feed family,their used to take out predators threatening familys,they’re use to scare off preditor they’re used to subdues criminals,intimidate criminals and sometimes kill criminals, oh yeah and to protect your right to make idiotic comments on the blaze. Just off the top of my head. I’m sure their are more examples of the practicality of firearms.
  Your single minded view of guns is established by your intellectual incompetence to comprehend views that don’t fit within your ideological self image. For all the supposed free thinking liberals claim to possess when it comes to thinking outside your little boxed beliefs you hit a wall. I feel sorry for you and people like you what a sad little gray existences it must be having your beliefs fed to from single minded collective views of the liberal borg society.
  
  Report this comment
cessna152
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:11pm
The Federal “Assault Weapon Ban” was in effect from 1994 to 2004
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal…lt_Weapons_Ban

Over that period…
1994–1995 (17 Homicides and 20 Deaths resulting from school shootings in the U.S.)
1995–1996 (29 Homicides and 35 Deaths resulting from school shootings in the U.S.)
1996–1997 (23 Homicides and 25 Deaths resulting from school shootings in the U.S.)
1997–1998 (35 Homicides and 40 Deaths resulting from school shootings in the U.S.)
1998–1999 (25 Homicides from school shootings in the U.S.)
1999–2000 (25 Homicides from school shootings in the U.S.)
2000-2004:
February 29, 2000: Unidentified 6-year-old offender in Michigan school shooting. 1 student fatality.[40]
May 26, 2000: Lake Worth, Florida Lake Worth Middle School Florida teacher Barry Grunow was fatally shot by his student, 13-year-old Nathaniel Brazill, who had returned to school after being sent home at 1 p.m. by the assistant principal for throwing water balloons. Brazill returned to school on his bike with a 5 inch Raven and four bullets stolen from his grandfather the week before. Brazill was an honor student. Grunow was a popular teacher and Brazill’s favorite.[40]
August 28, 2000: University of Arkansas shooting at Fayetteville, Arkansas At approximately 12:14 pm, Dr. John R. Locke, 67, Director of the Comparative Literature Program was shot and killed in his office by James E. Kelly, 36, a Comparative Literature PhD candidate who had recently been d

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DrFreedom
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 10:13pm
  well said!!! As I keep saying to people Chicago has a ban on guns and the since it went into effect their murder rate has doubled, in areas that have passed right to carry laws have had a massive decrease in violent crimes…. Murder is a felony, steeling a gun is a felony! Criminals by name BREAK LAWS so WHAT THE HELL makes people think that writing new laws is going to do a DAM THING????
  
  Report this comment
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:10pm
I am SO tired of Senators and Congressmen introducing bills to make themselves look good.
Bill are supposed to be written to help the people, not further the careers of Representatives and they should be introduced by Congressmen, not Senators.
As for this head-line, no $h|][ Sherlock.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- naughtycal
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:16pm
  Any Congressman pushing Gun Control is violating their Congression oath to uphold and protect the Constitution. Sounds like citizens need to swear out warrants against Congress
  
  Report this comment
- Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:48pm
  Exactly, and the speculation is that Obama will once again bypass Congress and enact legislation by executive fiat.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:42pm
  The people want this bill.
  
  Report this comment
- whater39
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:44pm
  @naughtycal.
  
  Man you stupid. I guess you have never ever heard of additions to it? Please don’t speak unless you have thought first.
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:20pm
  “…whater39
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:44pm
  @naughtycal. Man you stupid. I guess you have never ever heard of additions to it? Please don’t speak unless you have thought first…”
  
  Really, What- name one addition to the Constitution that negates the oath of office.
  
  Now to the ban… like anyone actualy thought the C–n-In-Chief was ever going to doing anything else? He’s been waiting for this to happen- was more than likely instrumental in causing Sandyhook as an adjunct to Fast & Furious.
  
  Report this comment
- Daddy Hawg
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 6:08pm
  @pubicpencildick, please do not speak for everyone, for I as a US Citizen that spent 20 years serving in the military DO NOT WANT THIS BILL. When only the police and military are armed there is no protection from a tyrannical government or an illegally armed citizen. I would prefer to have the ability to enforce my God given right to self protection when needed than rely on some government agency to protect me that is only minutes away.
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on December 19, 2012 at 8:07am
  Pencilman,
  If the the people want it then let the people decide while congress stays out of it. It only takes a 2/3 votes to radify the Constitution….GOOD LUCK.Fact is Congressman swear an oath to the Constitution as it stands.
  And whater39 ,
  “Man you stupid” says all we have to know about you cognative abilities,and intellectual stature.
  It’s called radifacation and can only be done by the citizens…NOT CONGRESS…..and it takes a 2/3 support to get it done. Go back to whatever leftwinger socialist club that pays you to blog and get an education.
  
  Report this comment
biohazard23
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:10pm
Well then, I guess he and Jarret can go ahead and give up their Secret Service detail right now. I mean, they have to set the example, right? LOL, like that would ever happen…..

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RJJinGadsden
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:31pm
  BIOHAZARD, LOL, that would be like taking BROOM ONE away from Pelosi when she was speaker. It will never happen.
  
  Report this comment
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:07pm
What he supports is irrelevant. It will die in the House. It’s doubtful that even the Senate will see it passed (lots of Dems from gun owning states who know where their bread is buttered).

Even if by a miracle it becomes another rising of the first unconstitutional law, it will be ignored. And now that we’re better educated, I’d love to see a cadre of lawyers get it before SCOTUS, assuming that they’ve taken the chip out of Roberts motor and mental control skills brain section.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:35pm
  Just watch for agency regulation. EPA strangling the ammunition manufacturers with strange and insane regultaions, OSHA, NLRB, extra DoT transportation regulations, IRS rules, ATF harassment abuse and bullying,
  
  Report this comment
- stopprintn
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:38pm
  Don’t forget the Small Arms Treaty is on its way also.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:07pm
  @Cavallo
  
  Yeah, I know.
  
  @Stop
  
  Treaties do not override the Constitution.
  
  Report this comment
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:06pm
.
Well just so ya’ll know I am “actively supportive” for a Ban on President Barack Obama……..

And the campaign to Spay & Neuter all of his supporters, their families and pets……..

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- chips1
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:30pm
  Hasn’t Flobama killed more people than any U.S. shooting? Why aren’t our military hiding somewhere safe? Special thoughts to our Seal Team members.
  
  Report this comment
Owt_Raged
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:05pm
Dear Mr. President, if we can’t have these guns than neither can the government. You can not continue to exempt government from our laws.

If you are willing to give them up, all of them, even for the military, then we will think about giving ours up.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Cavallo
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:05pm
” I know my friends at the NRA and those who support our Second Amendment rights will participate because I know that their hearts are aching for the families in Newtown, just like all Americans.”

In other words he does not include himself among those who support second amendment rights. Buy your weapons now people. It’ll be harder to take them from you than it will be to prevent you from obtaining them.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TeslanEdison
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:19pm
  Buy your assault rifle now at a gun show so they cannot go to the sports store and use those required sales records to come knocking saying, by our records you have an illegal weapon and are required to turn it in. I don’t know if internet sales required the same tracking but I assume that new guns from places like Cheaper than dirt also must comply with records of sale for hand guns and rifles.
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:26pm
  It may not be long before the Cartels in Mexico are running guns into the US rather than Bobo the wonder Marxist running them into Mexico. I wonder if they would do anything about border security then?
  
  Report this comment
- southernORcobra
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:32pm
  The only way they are gonna get mine is from my cold dead hands
  
  Report this comment
- mrunner
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:57pm
  Joe is a relatively sane guy (for a Demorat). He is abundantly clear where his bread is buttered. I think he will do his best to slow the process and point out the flaws in the anti-gun folks logic. When you look at his reaction- compared to that of most Dems- at least talking about solutions other than gun control. In the meantime… I will keep stocking up.
  
  Report this comment
- mrunner
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:44pm
  OK- so I just heard Joe Manchin speak again. I rescind my prior comments. He is falling in step with the anti-2nd amendment mob…
  
  Report this comment
ResistSocialism
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:04pm
figures coming from the same people who created gun free zones with signs telling the bad guys they can’t have guns there.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
CulperGang
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:03pm
Hey Barry you stopped selling guns yet?? oh and are you also giving up your personal praetorian guards? No, why??? who would want to jack you???

FREEMEN have the right to self defense by any means necessary and nobody has the right to take that away!!! NOBODY.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SUNTZU
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:17pm
  I called suicide hotline.The man ask my if I knew any
  thing about,pipe bombs ,molotov cocktails,IED’s.
  also wanted to know if I could fly a plane or drive a truck.
  I must have got a wrong number.
  
  Report this comment
JACKTHETOAD
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:03pm
A Budget ban, too, and a reality ban.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Truthbeliever2
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:34pm
  Don’t forget the truth ban. Never mind; how can you have a ban on something that never existed in the first place.
  
  Report this comment
AvengerK
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:01pm
Obama knows he’ll accomplish nothing before 2014, this is just more for his populist ammunition and heartstring pulling in leiu of successful and competent policy.

After the fiscal cliff and upcoming debt ceiling situations….Obama will pillory the GOP no matter what concessions are made to him (are you listening John Boehner?)…especially if the economy continues to atrophy as it has been doing for four years.

This is why Obama continues to campaign rather than govern. Obama would love the fiscal cliff talks to fail, not only for ammunition but the huge tax hikes on every American.

Look..the biggest defeat Obama has suffered is losing his blank check in the 2010 midterms. He hates it, it grates on him. Those elections essentially saved this country from utter collapse into socialism and stopped Obama in his tracks. Obama likes to keep lists of enemies and the GOP house has cost him dearly. Obama wants his blank check back and so he continues to campaign. If he succeeds then expect gun bans, the DREAM Act, EPA over regulation, Cap and Trade, tax hikes, heck I’m waiting for him to say Obamacare doesn’t work as expected..let’s go with national health instead. You think this is out of the realm of possibility with Barack Obama? Think again.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:31pm
  It’s not a blank check. Checks can bounce, be returned with Insufficient Funds. He wants a limitless credit card. The Platinum American Excess Card.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 4:00pm
  Oops..my bad I guess..happy to stand corrected on that CAVALLO…cheers.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:12pm
  Cavallo
  Would’t that be the Black AMX card?
  
  Report this comment
john vincent
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:01pm
Assault ban? Oh, I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have not noticed this intention……however,
here a little, there a little,

and you will then be required to ‘turn in ALL your weapons,’ if you do not believe this, you cant see the forest because of the trees.

But the outcome?? yet to be written

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The_Pointy_End
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:00pm
“The very same people who now wish to ban guns are the very same people who had no problem supplying assault rifles to gangs and criminals in Mexico. Those very same weapons were used to kill two US law enforcement officers as well as several hundred Mexican civilians. The very same people i.e. Attorney General Holder and President Obama used “executive privilege” to cover up their foolishness. If you think that is not bad enough, evidence from several sources indicate that the US government went into Libya not so much to depose Gadhafi but to empower the Muslim Brotherhood to take control not just of Libya but the whole of the Middle East. Multiple sources seem to indicate the administration has supplied weapons to Al Qaeda.” — Keith Davies

http://shoebat.com/2012/12/18/uncontrollable-gun-controllers/

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
VanishingFreedom
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:00pm
Never saw that coming…..

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The-Monk
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:58pm
“The White House says President Barack Obama is “actively supportive” of efforts on Capitol Hill to reinstate an assault weapons ban.”

I think they missed spelled “Capitol Hill”……

Doesn’t the White House now spell that like this…… “UN”?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Stelth96
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:58pm
I am so surprised.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Patrick
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:57pm
And away we go.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GuruMeditation
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 5:15pm
  You mean down I think.
  
  Report this comment
Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:57pm
Yeah, got it. Ban guns and clips rather than using the newfound power in Obamacare where the government know every medical issue there has ever been about you. Rather than saying we’ll start using our database to block transactions to people on psychotropic drugs we’ll simply limit magazine capacity so people will have moments to escape when drugged out crazies are reloading. Makes total sense to me. That’s why he’s smart enough to be the POTUS I guess.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RightUnite
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:56pm
Hello??!! This is not rocket science! Anyone with any intelligence already knew that!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
progressiveslayer
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:55pm
The Marxist POS is all in favor of violating our constitutional rights and he proves it routinely.He’ll eagerly sign our rights away and the jellyfish in congress will aide and abet him.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RLTW
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:55pm
And I’m actively supportive of my Second Amendment rights, looks like we differ on the Constitution.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:00pm
  Obama has killed more women and children than all of the crazies put together. Yeah, the guy blowing up funerals with drone strikes in countries we haven’t declared war upon is now going champion laws that will miraculously keep our children safe when the other 20K laws did not. There’s a cozy little spot in hell for this guy. The nerve, taking the podium with all the blood on his hands.
  
  Report this comment
- RLTW
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:18pm
  I’ve always believed that a conspiracy can only be conducted by a sociopath, now we have one in the WH.
  
  Report this comment
OUTLAW_WEALTH
Posted on December 18, 2012 at 2:53pm
Obama, arguably a war criminal? Pah.

just read this: Back in, August 2011, Ron Paul introduced a bill in the House that would allow teachers to carry firearms onto public school grounds. Gun-control groups called
it an “extremist” bill with no practical use and that the bill would threaten the safety of American families.

Those against this bill argued that American schools are one of the safest places in our country and that the bill is a horrific piece of propaganda that is aimed to present a direct threat to public safety.

Ron Paul argued that the Gun-Free School Zones Act protects criminals, asserting that such attacks as Columbine, Virginia Tech and Fort Hood “all occurred in government facilities where the private possession of firearms was prohibited.”

“It’s time to say NO to criminal safe zones,” Ron Paul said. “And a great place to start is the blatantly unconstitutional Gun-free School Zones Act.”

Paul’s bill would have allowed well-trained and trust-worthy teachers and staff to carry guns onto school campuses.

H.R. 2613, the Citizens Protection Act of 2011, would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and remove all federally created criminal safety zones.

The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 makes it “unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.”

After the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School and the 200

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MrSunshine
  Posted on December 18, 2012 at 3:15pm
  Come on Outlaw, you are using logic and liberals just hate that. However, I second that motion!
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.