HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Obama’s prime-time chance...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:15 PM

Obama’s prime-time chance to honor Giffords

By Editorial Board, Published: January 23

IT TOOK A MATTER of seconds during a gathering with constituents at a Tucson shopping center for Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’s (D-Ariz.) life to be profoundly transformed. Ms. Giffords was one of 19 people wounded or killed there last year, allegedly by a deranged young man who inflicted unspeakable damage with the help of a semi-automatic weapon and an extended magazine clip. The bullet that pierced Ms. Giffords’s head left her clinging to life; hers has been a remarkable rehabilitation over the past 12 months, during which she has learned to walk and speak again.

------

Ms. Giffords did not refer directly to the events of Jan. 8, 2011, other than to say that she remembered little about that horrific day. But it would be a disservice to her life and that of the others directly affected by this, and tragedies like it, to ignore the factors that precipitated the violence: the easy access to guns; the availability of accessories such as extended clips that make deadly weapons all the more lethal; and a porous and shoddy regulatory system that too often fails to keep these weapons out of the hands of dangerous or dangerously unstable individuals.

Mr. Obama last year delivered his State of the Union just weeks after the Tucson massacre and in the presence of victims’ family members. Yet he, like so many politicians intimidated by the gun lobby’s muscle, could not muster a single word about the need for reasonable gun control measures to ward off such violence in the future. Perhaps he will find the courage to speak up this year, as Ms. Giffords looks on during her last State of the Union as a member of Congress.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-prime-time-call-for-gun-control-would-honor-rep-gabrielle-giffords/2012/01/23/gIQAs7m0LQ_story.html

35 replies, 3250 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama’s prime-time chance to honor Giffords (Original post)
ellisonz Jan 2012 OP
rl6214 Jan 2012 #1
Paladin Jan 2012 #16
rl6214 Jan 2012 #18
Glassunion Jan 2012 #2
SteveW Jan 2012 #8
ellisonz Jan 2012 #10
burf Jan 2012 #19
ellisonz Jan 2012 #21
gejohnston Jan 2012 #23
DonP Jan 2012 #24
SteveW Jan 2012 #35
burf Jan 2012 #3
X_Digger Jan 2012 #4
DonP Jan 2012 #5
burf Jan 2012 #6
Bill O-Rights Jan 2012 #7
burf Jan 2012 #9
X_Digger Jan 2012 #11
ellisonz Jan 2012 #12
gejohnston Jan 2012 #13
pipoman Jan 2012 #14
LAGC Jan 2012 #20
pipoman Jan 2012 #15
ellisonz Jan 2012 #22
DonP Jan 2012 #25
ellisonz Jan 2012 #26
DonP Jan 2012 #27
ellisonz Jan 2012 #28
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #29
pipoman Jan 2012 #31
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #32
PavePusher Jan 2012 #33
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #34
pipoman Jan 2012 #30
Atypical Liberal Jan 2012 #17

Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:19 PM

1. Yawn

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 07:26 AM

16. JFK(yawn), RFK(yawn), MLK(yawn)......


You Gun Enthusiasts have an infinite number of "yawns" regarding prominent Democrats who have taken bullets in the head, haven't you? Stay classy......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 11:00 AM

18. Got nothing to do with Ms Giffords being shot

 

has to do with the same old worn out whining by the anti-gun zealots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:33 PM

2. ok

Ms. Giffords did not refer directly to the events of Jan. 8, 2011, other than to say that she remembered little about that horrific day. But it would be a disservice to the tactless nature of main stream media to not peddle a journalist's personal opinion and sycophantic desires by exploiting the victims of a senseless tragedy by dancing in some blood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glassunion (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 05:22 PM

8. Surely, you can't mean the objective, detached WaPo?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SteveW (Reply #8)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 08:45 PM

10. It's an editorial from the editorial board. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 11:28 AM

19. Seems as though this may have not originated with the

WaPo editorial board.

Gun reformers press Obama for action

Mayors Against Illegal Guns — a group headed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino – called on Obama this week to use the State of the Union speech to press Congress for tighter background checks on potential weapons buyers.


snip

Bloomberg and Menino said Obama should "take the opportunity to address her departure, and the causes of it."


http://thehill.com/homenews/news/206201-gun-reformers-press-obama-ahead-of-sotu


I am shocked that Gene Robinson and his cohorts would use their editorial as a mouthpiece for Bloomberg when he has his own newspaper to do the work for him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burf (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 02:30 PM

21. You don't understand a newspaper drafts editorials...

...it more than likely has nothing to do with Eugene Robinson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editorial_board

The editorial board states the formal opinion of the newspaper publisher. The WaPo really dislikes you guys. I wonder why...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 02:55 PM

23. for the same reason they didn't like Clinton

another "not our kind of people"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 03:49 PM

24. "The WaPo really dislikes you guys. I wonder why..." - He's a dick and a hypocrite?

Who can afford to rely on private armed security in a gated community because of his pay level and projects his personal feelings and privileged sheltered experiences onto the general population. Just like a lot of other gun grabbers that think they speak for the general population.

Another Rosie O'Donnell type? e.g. "nobody needs guns .... except my private security guards for me and my children of course, that's different".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #10)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 02:08 PM

35. No, it's proven agitprop, hardly distinguished from its 'news.' nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:39 PM

3. Maybe he will also remember

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:41 PM

4. *stomp* *stomp* *stomp* *stomp* -- this blood rehydrated on the anniversary!!

It's a miracle!

*stomp* *stomp* *stomp*



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:46 PM

5. Oh yeah, that would just be a brilliant political move.

Succumb to pressure from a handful of loser gun grabbers to declare a major initiative on gun control.

After all, the majority of the 80+ million gun owners that vote like clockwork will probably forget it all by November, right?

I agree, as long as he talks about the death of the Border Patrol agent in the same paragraph while Holder hangs his head in shame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:57 PM

6. Personally, I'd rather see

Holder and his motley crew perp walked when Obama gets to the subject of responsible government.

It might lead to people taking him serious on the subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 05:02 PM

7. Is this the same Ms. Giffords who has owned and practiced with a Glock for years?

 

Must be a mistake somewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 08:41 PM

9. There is something else.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Introduces Last Bill Before Stepping Down

Two days before resigning from Congress, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) on Tuesday announced her final piece of legislation aimed at cracking down on cross-border drug smugglers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/24/gabrielle-giffords-last-bill_n_1229309.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 10:26 PM

11. Poor WaPo..

the president didn't take the bait.

Their editorial board must be crying into their scotches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 11:06 PM

12. He did say that the perpetual war between...

...Democrats and Republicans has to end. I'm not sure which side the libertarians fall on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #12)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 11:38 PM

13. Libertarians or libertarians

there is a difference.

politicalcompass.org

most Libertarians lean right. libertarians can go either way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 06:59 AM

14. Big difference between

Libertarians and civil libertarians...most civil libertarians are Democrats, and most honest civil libertarians believe in a liberal interpretation of all civil liberties/rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 11:34 AM

20. Proud civil libertarian here.

Don't see the Republican Party being better than the Democratic Party when it comes to most personal/individual freedoms.

Too bad some Democrats insist on being authoritarian on certain issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 07:02 AM

15. Couldn't disagree more with the insinuation

that gun laws would have changed anything. Mental health/addiction services available to anyone who wishes to be treated or the family of those who need treatment would go to this problem. Dis assemble the money machine called "the war on drugs" and spend the money on services which would actually effect the real problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 02:33 PM

22. Even President Obama thought gun laws have something to do with it...

President Obama: We must seek agreement on gun reforms
President Barack Obama Special To The Arizona Daily Star | Posted: Sunday, March 13, 2011 12:00 am

It's been more than two months since the tragedy in Tucson stunned the nation. It was a moment when we came together as one people to mourn and to pray for those we lost. And in the attack's turbulent wake, Americans by and large rightly refrained from finger-pointing, assigning blame or playing politics with other people's pain.

But one clear and terrible fact remains. A man our Army rejected as unfit for service; a man one of our colleges deemed too unstable for studies; a man apparently bent on violence, was able to walk into a store and buy a gun.

He used it to murder six people and wound 13 others. And if not for the heroism of bystanders and a brilliant surgical team, it would have been far worse.

But since that day, we have lost perhaps another 2,000 members of our American family to gun violence. Thousands more have been wounded. We lose the same number of young people to guns every day and a half as we did at Columbine, and every four days as we did at Virginia Tech.

Every single day, America is robbed of more futures. It has awful consequences for our society. And as a society, we have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to it.

Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/opinion/mailbag/president-obama-we-must-seek-agreement-on-gun-reforms/article_011e7118-8951-5206-a878-39bfbc9dc89d.html#ixzz1kV5SUkry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 04:38 PM

25. Surprisingly, you left this part out ...

" ...Now, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. And the courts have settled that as the law of the land. In this country, we have a strong tradition of gun ownership that's handed from generation to generation. Hunting and shooting are part of our national heritage. And, in fact, my administration has not curtailed the rights of gun owners - it has expanded them, including allowing people to carry their guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

The fact is, almost all gun owners in America are highly responsible. They're our friends and neighbors. They buy their guns legally and use them safely, whether for hunting or target shooting, collection or protection. And that's something that gun-safety advocates need to accept. ...."

I'm sure it was just an oversight. Or don't you agree with and support our President in this matter?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #25)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 04:40 PM

26. I disagree.

I'm not afraid to state my beliefs. Unlike you in this thread: http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=11162

C'mon what did you mean when you called me a scalawag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #26)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 06:51 PM

27. So you do disagree with our President on this issue and think he's absolutely wrong.

Just wanted to have that cleared up for future reference.

The President (along with pretty much every law school and legal scholar in the USA) agrees with us, that it's an individual right not connected with militia service. But you keep beating that dead horse over and over.

My beliefs are very clear to any that bother to read my posts. I've been here for close to a decade now. And are you that poorly read that you can't recognize a term in common usage since FDR was in charge?

But feel free to keep obsessing on gun control and gun owners.

Many of us enjoy living rent free in your head, but it is getting a bit crowded for the limited space available.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 08:50 PM

28. I do.



I'll beat that dead horse until the Court reverses itself. I'm not about being intimidated into silence.


But feel free to keep obsessing on gun control and gun owners.

Many of us enjoy living rent free in your head, but it is getting a bit crowded for the limited space available.


And break out the insults...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #28)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 09:10 PM

29. Sorry, I'm going with the Prez on this one.

Even if he wasn't POTUS, he'd still have "President of the Harvard Law Review" and "Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School" on
his resume.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 10:03 PM

31. One of those frustrating aspects of this entire debate

is the failure of the ACLU (and many associated legal scholars) denial of this one civil right. I believe that this is one of those puzzle stories of a privileged and elite few intentionally placating the masses simply by ignoring the issue whenever possible, then when forced to discuss the actual verbiage of the 2nd, would retort with utter revisionist nonsense and claim it to be true. SCOTUS ignored pleas for clarification until they couldn't any longer. Legal scholars, like Pres. O., have known for years they could only carry on the charade for so long, they realize that time has come, and they agree with the decision in their own way. President Obama has done this gracefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 10:50 PM

32. At least United States v Jones (the "GPS tracking" case) is undercutting the genetic fallacy...

used against the decisions in Heller and McDonald. It's rather hypocritical to decry Scalia and Roberts as right-wingers while simultaneously
enjoying the 9-0 beatdown they gave to warrantless surveillance via GPS tracking. Then again, these same people might also be unhappy about
Jones. Reflexive statists tend to be like that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #32)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 10:55 PM

33. Cough... <Kelo>... cough.... n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 11:32 PM

34. Ah yes, thanks for the reminder:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=3992

The disinterested observer will also note that certain posters are studiously ignoring US v Jones...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 09:39 PM

30. He said,

But one clear and terrible fact remains. A man our Army rejected as unfit for service; a man one of our colleges deemed too unstable for studies; a man apparently bent on violence, was able to walk into a store and buy a gun.


I said,

Mental health/addiction services available to anyone who wishes to be treated or the family of those who need treatment would go to this problem.


He could walk into a gun store but he couldn't walk into a mental health facility to seek help, nor could his mother to seek help for him. If the president believes gun laws would have changed the outcome, I do completely disagree...keep doing the same shit over and over expecting different results. Further, IF this maniac had been involuntarily committed, and IF the court who committed him reported as they are supposed to, and IF he was declined for a firearm transfer by NICS, the chances he would be even investigated is less than 1%..less than 1% of people declined for NICS transfer are ever investigated (last time I looked up the stats)..These are prohibited buyers actively trying to acquire a firearm..If we don't have time to investigate these blatant, obvious problems, what other non-enforced laws do we need?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2012, 09:55 AM

17. That's why I pay my dues.

 

Yet he, like so many politicians intimidated by the gun lobby’s muscle, could not muster a single word about the need for reasonable gun control measures to ward off such violence in the future.

And that, my friends, is precisely why I keep paying my NRA dues. I am the gun lobby's muscle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread