Oregon Shooting Draws Obama’s Outrage on Gun Laws

[Omaha Steve]

Source: NY Times

By MARK LANDLER and LEE VAN DER VOO

WASHINGTON — President Obama, speaking hours after a gunman killed a student and wounded a teacher at an Oregon high school, said Tuesday that his failure to push through stricter gun laws was the greatest frustration of his presidency, declaring, “We’re the only developed country on earth where this happens.”

Speaking in blunt and bitter terms about a bloody trail of shootings in the last month, Mr. Obama said: “Our levels of gun violence are off the charts. There’s no advanced, developed country on earth that would put up with this.”

While the president said he had undertaken several executive actions to tighten existing regulations, the failure to require a background check for buyers of guns left the nation vulnerable to an unending series of mass shootings. “The bottom line is, is that we don’t have enough tools right now to really make as big of a dent as we need to,” Mr. Obama said to a young audience at a White House question-and-answer session sponsored by the social media site Tumblr.

The string of shootings continued on Tuesday when a gunman at Reynolds High School in Troutdale, Ore., killed a 14-year-old student and wounded a physical education teacher. The authorities in Troutdale, a Portland suburb, did not immediately identify the gunman, who carried a rifle and was later found dead at the scene. It was unclear if he was a student or knew either of the victims.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/us/troutdale-oregon-reynolds-high-school-shooting.html?hpw&rref=us&_r=0

---

People awaited word about the safety of students after a shooting at Reynolds High School on Tuesday in Troutdale, Ore. Credit Faith Cathcart/The Oregonian, via Associated Press

[Fred Sanders]

1. Background checks and ammo limits are held hostage by the broken primary system that

encourages Republicans to pander to the tea party terrorists to keep the GOP nomination for the general election. The vast majority of Americans supporting such laws are screwed.

"While the president said he had undertaken several executive actions to tighten existing regulations, the failure to require a background check for buyers of guns left the nation vulnerable to an unending series of mass shootings."

[former9thward]

18. Oregon has background checks.

Ammo limits have nothing to do with this shooting. One innocent person was killed. So these would have done nothing to prevent this shooting.

[CreekDog]

20. That may or may not be true, but its affect on one shooting doesn't make it a bad idea

Last edited Wed Jun 11, 2014, 02:40 PM - Edit history (1)

nor does it make it an ineffective idea.

if you post NRA talking points, we will be along to refute them.

just FYI. nice try though.

[former9thward]

21. And when you post anti-rights posts I will be along to refute them.

No matter how much you try.

[CreekDog]

22. You're saying that when I post anti right wing posts, you'll be along to refute them...

quite an admission. not that you can refute them, though i have no doubt that you will try as you always do.

[billh58]

26. +100

Second Amendment absolutists are so cute when they're angry...

[groundloop]

2. I can already hear the GOPers - 'Obama's playing politics with this tragedy'

But President Obama is exactly correct, Congress needs to stand up to the NRA and gun lobby once and for all and come up with meaningful legislation to stop this carnage.

[mybuddy]

3. Background checks are already required

“The bottom line is, is that we don’t have enough tools right now to really make as big of a dent as we need to,” Mr. Obama said

What does that even mean? Background checks are already required and guns are illegal on school grounds.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

5. No background checks are required if bought from a private party.

...

[mybuddy]

8. Private party sales are checked

Seventeen states and D.C. have extended the background check requirement beyond federal law to at least some private sales. Six states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Rhode Island) and D.C. require universal background checks at the point of sale for all transfers of all classes of firearms, including purchases from unlicensed sellers; Maryland and Pennsylvania laws do the same, but are limited to handguns. Two states (Illinois and Oregon) require a background check whenever a firearm in sold at a gun show. Finally, four states (Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts and New Jersey) require any firearm purchaser, including a purchaser from an unlicensed seller, to obtain a permit issued after a background check, and four more states (Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska and North Carolina) do the same only for handguns

[ForgoTheConsequence]

12. Not all of them are checked.

You don't need to conduct a background check if you're privately selling a gun to someone else (outside of a gun show). SB 1551 tried to expand background checks to almost all sales, but it died in committee.



Oregon law requires criminal background checks on those purchasing handguns from a licensed dealer or firearms from anyone at a gun show. It allows those selling guns to request background checks for sales not conducted at gun shows, but does not require them. As part of the background check, the seller must provide certain identifying information about the buyer and the firearm.

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/feb/06/ore-considers-expanded-gun-background-checks/



Any more lies you want try before crawling back to your hole?

[former9thward]

19. Since you are accusing others of lying ...

It is a lie to suggest this had anything to do with background checks. It is illegal to transfer any firearms to anyone under 18 in OR. A background check has nothing to do with this since it would have been illegal for him to buy any weapon.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

28. I didn't say it did.

And he did lie, that's not up for debate.


By the way the shooter was another gun nut.

From his Facebook....

[former9thward]

29. I suggest you stay far away from homes with teenage boys and young men in their 20s.

You will be terrified at the video games they play and the messages on their t-shirts. And absolutely don't look at their fb pages. You will have to go under a rock.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

32. I am a man in my 20's.

And neither me nor my friends fetishize guns.


Swing and a miss, strike 2.


Want to try again?

[former9thward]

33. You and your anecdotal friends do not a generation make.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

34. And yours does?

Strike 3. Try again next week pal.


Or I'm sure you could find someone to buy your bullshit on the NRA forum.

[Omaha Steve]

7. It is so easy to get around background checks

The federal background check system for gun buyers is porous, ineffective, and hampered by a lack of cooperation from the states.
And that’s what the system’s supporters have to say.

You were saying?

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/guns-background-checks-do-they-work-86755.html#ixzz34INSCcqS

[mybuddy]

9. So the Federal goverment is doing a poor job at conducting background checks

Do you propose a Super FBI?

[Omaha Steve]

10. Do you propose

Continuing to do nothing?

[billh58]

11. Of course they propose

doing nothing. It is what Second Amendment absolutists do best.

[Omaha Steve]

31. Almost 24 hours and no reply

Hit & run DUer?

The FBI background checks are excellent. I register firearms for a living. It is the loopholes where they aren't performed that need to be fixed.

Thoughts?

OS

[Rhiannon12866]

24. And those have certainly succeeded in stopping all these horrible school shootings...

[billh58]

27. Second Amendment absolutists and

NRA apologists care nothing about the effectiveness of existing gun control regulations. The mere fact that such regulations exist is an "infringement" on their precious rights to be paranoid and armed 24/7 because Liberty, Freedom, and the possibility of Tyranny.

[Rhiannon12866]

30. If Newtown didn't change hearts and minds...

Then I guess nothing will.

[Lost In America]

4. The Constitution give us the "right" to bear arms. Whatever that means.

However, the Constitution does not give one the right to own ammunition.

We can't sue firearm manufacturers for the damage their weapons do. Has anyone tried to sue the ammunition manufacturer? It was, after all, the bullet that caused the lethal injury, not the gun, right?

I know this sounds crazy, but why not regulate the living shit out of ammo? Let the gun manufacturers flood this nation with as many guns as they want.

Just make ammunition impossible to obtain without military/government credentials.

No ammo, no more gun violence.

Just sayin'.

[mybuddy]

6. Herrington v. District of Columbia already addressed your concern

http://www.islandlawblog.com/washington-d-c-ammunition-ban-violates-second-amendment/

The court therefore reasoned that although neither Heller nor the subsequent Supreme Court case McDonald v. Chicago specifically addressed ammunition, “it logically follows that the right to keep and bear arms extends to the possession of handgun ammunition in the home; for if such possession could be banned (and not simply regulated), that would make it “impossible for citizens to use [their handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense."

[beevul]

15. No, it really doesn't give...

No, it really doesn't give anything.

It protects the right to keep and bear arms against infringement by government.

Isn't high school civics class taught anymore?

[Volaris]

16. Federal Regulation is NOT the same thing as infringement, though..

[beevul]

17. The devil, as always, is in the details. N/T

[hack89]

23. At some point it does become infringement

that is why we have a Supreme Court - to draw that line.

[IronLionZion]

25. A well regulated militia

is that part that everyone leaves out in the 2nd amendment.

Chris Rock had a bit where every bullet should cost $5,000 so that there would be no more innocent bystanders. Shooters may have to save up for some time instead of doing an impulsive shooting.

[neverforget]

13. 74 school shootings since Newtown.

And not a thing has been done because of the NRA and those politicians afraid of that fucking lobby group for arms manufacturers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/06/10/map-at-least-74-school-shootings-since-newtown/

[davidpdx]

14. Call me skeptical

But this will be tomorrow's news when the next shooting happens. Most barely remember the shooting at Clackamas Town Center because the next shooting after that was Newton. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.