12-20-2012, 09:03 AM
(12-20-2012, 08:52 AM)cannongal Wrote:(12-20-2012, 08:06 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: But, none of that suggests that the President should not hear proposals about reducing gun violence by January, imo. If anything, F&F could be used to support the argument for stricter gun control.
Hearing new proposals on how to resolve a serious problem is never a bad thing, imo. I am not currently for or against stricter gun controls insomuch as they will probably be limited to assault-type weapons and/or high capacity magazines. If there weren't already so many of those types of guns out there, I'd be more inclined to jump off of the fence and advocate for stricter control of them specifically.
My point wasn't about the proposal itself. I have nothing against the Gov't hearing proposals. I'm sad that it takes the loss of twenty 6 to 7 year olds to wake people up.
Where was the Prez back in July during the Aurora Massacre? A Semi-Automatic was used in that, too. Besides Colorado & Newton, there were 2 other mass murders using a semi & no one said boo.
I hear ya.
Actually, it is my understanding that Feinstein drafted her proposal for stricter gun control after the Aurora shootings. If I understand correctly, that is what is being used as the baseline to propose new laws that she will be presenting to the new-term Congress.
But, it wouldn't surprise me if gun control considerations had been intentionally put on the back-burner until after election; 1⁄3 of US households own guns. That's a lot of voters. The horror of the Connecticut elementary school killings presents the perfect catalyst at the perfect time for gun control advocates within the administration.