Article: Obama to present gun violence proposal

President Barack Obama is launching the most sweeping effort to curb American gun violence in nearly two decades, and New York lawmakers easily passed the toughest gun control law in the country, as gun control advocates move to act swiftly after a massacre at an elementary school last month.

Obama is urging a reluctant Congress to ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like those used in the Dec. 14 massacre of 20 elementary school children in Newtown, Connecticut.
 
Obama like his supporters is an idiot.
What about shotguns? What about knives? What about baseball bats?
I hope the nra and the people who believe in the country's constitution stop him
 
marine1 said:
Obama like his supporters is an idiot.
What about shotguns? What about knives? What about baseball bats?
I hope the nra and the people who believe in the country's constitution stop him
Click to expand...

Does a civilian need access to an AR-15 or an M16? What about semi-auto pistols such as the TEC-9? Do you honestly need that?

And quite frankly when last was a school attacked by a baseball bat/knife wielding lunatic?
 
In an attack on a place like a school, a pistol can do just as much damage as an assault rifle.

So at the end of the day even if they manage to ban assault rifles, it will make so difference.
 
BrandonH said:
In an attack on a place like a school, a pistol can do just as much damage as an assault rifle.

So at the end of the day even if they manage to ban assault rifles, it will make so difference.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Assault and semi-automatic rifles have a higer rate of fire and carry more ammunition. There is a reason they created them in the first place.

Both can obviously kill, but an assault/semi-auto rifle is a far more deadly weapon. It also has greater suppression power when confronting someone armed with a pistol, like the first officers to arrive at the scene.

Man armed with M16 > police officer armed with 9mm.
 
Last edited:
thestaggy said:
Nonsense. Assault and semi-automatic rifles have a higer rate of fire and carry more ammunition. There is a reason they created them in the first place.

Both can obviously kill, but an assault/semi-auto rifle is a far more deadly weapon. It also has greater suppression power when confronting someone armed with a pistol, like the first officers to arrive at the scene.

Man armed with M16 > police officer armed with 9mm.
Click to expand...

In the articles I've read none mentioned the shooters used full automatic. Therefore they used semi which is exactly like a pistol.

Shooting someone in a building would typically mean ranges of only a few meters. So using a pistol would be just as accurate.

Plus the ammo used in a pistol is just as deadly as that of an assault rifle.

Afaik none of these shooters attacked police. They usually end us shooting themselves long before a standoff can happen.
 
I'm all for banning military style assault rifles. A civilian has NO NEED for such a weapon. It's not a self-defence weapon, it's a mine's-bigger-than-yours weapon. If you find yourself in a situation where you would need an assault rifle to defend yourself, chances are, you're f!cked anyway.

I'd love to own a gun, some flavour of pistol, probably a 9mm or a .45acp or something, and yes, I like assault rifles, but civilians shouldn't have those if I'm honest.
 
thestaggy said:
Man armed with M16 > police officer armed with 9mm.
Click to expand...

This. If a hand gun is good enough for a police officer that has to deal with crime on a regular basis, then it is clearly good enough for average Joe.
 
The main issue here is not the type of weapon, although that needs to be addressed as well, but rather the fact that there is little real gun control in the US. The requirements for owning a gun should be far more rigorous than they are.
 
icyrus said:
The main issue here is not the type of weapon, although that needs to be addressed as well, but rather the fact that there is little real gun control in the US. The requirements for owning a gun should be far more rigorous than they are.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
I think they should ban them. There is no need for civilians to own such weapons.
BUT, at the same time I think it will make little difference to the ongoing gun violence.
There is a deeper problem that needs to be addressed.
 
The norway killer used an assault rifle. It's pretty hard to take cover and to run away from one. Suppressive fire makes it hard for the police to get close.
 
In the articles I've read none mentioned the shooters used full automatic. Therefore they used semi which is exactly like a pistol.
Click to expand...

Except it's more accurate and can carry a much larger magazine.

And nobody needs six semi-automatics for self defence.
 
daveza said:
Except it's more accurate and can carry a much larger magazine.

And nobody needs six semi-automatics for self defence.
Click to expand...

Its only more accurate at long range. At the range those people were killed its just as accurate as a pistol.
 
The lack of gun control in the USA is due to the possible need of protection from their government. This is what their second amendment is all about. I think it’s great. If all countries did the same thing oppression from government could be a thing from the past.

It sounds paranoid but better safe than sorry. The killings are unfortunate but there is nothing worse than government force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X