Three of the national newspapers have published editorials calling for some action from the federal government on gun control.
What they had to say, in light of the massacre at Sandy Hook elementary (emphasis ours)...
"There is no defensible reason for civilians to own a Bushmaster or other semiautomatic rifles, known more broadly as assault weapons. This is essentially a military weapon, a version of the M-16, capable in some cases of shooting bullets at more than 2,000 feet per second. It does not belong in private hands, any more than M-1 Abrams tanks belong on Rockville Pike or mortars in the backyard. ... It makes sense to reimpose strict limits on these assault weapons, including a ban on high-capacity magazines with more than 10 bullets each. ... We can start by locking up these killing machines." Washington Post, 12/18
"Americans are fiercely devoted to the right to keep and bear arms, and the Supreme Court has upheld that right. Hundreds of millions of guns are in circulation, and no one is going to take them away. But a willing Congress and president could do a lot. Americans do support bans on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. And there is no legitimate reason for the loophole that lets some people evade background checks when they buy guns at gun shows." USA Today, 12/16
New York Times, which dedicated three editorials to gun control, 12/18: "[I]t is past time for both sides of the gun debate to be less inflexible on the issue of a Constitutionally mandated right to bear arms. ... There are no rights granted by the Constitution that are so absolute that they erase concerns about public safety and welfare. There is reason, this time around, to hope that both parties can shake off the N.R.A."
The Wall Street Journal has not yet called for any action regarding gun control. On Saturday, the paper's editorial board said, "There is time enough for that public debate and all the usual intellectual tensions put in motion by such discussion. But not at this moment."