Posted on 12/14/2012 7:33:58 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Today, following the shooting massacre of 20 children in a Connecticut school, President Obama said that "meaningful action" needed to be taken to prevent such tragedies from happening in the future.
But what "meaningful action" can Obama actually take, given Republican control of the House and Congress' deeply felt fear of the politically mighty National Rifle Association? And politics aside, what new laws would actually solve or make a dent in the country's crazed-gunman problem?
Rep. Jerry Nadler said thinks that the president has only one option.
"There’s only one meaningful action he can take, which is to take on the N.R.A., label them as the enablers of mass murderers* they are, really push for strong gun-control legislation and call out those congressional leaders who don’t support it," Nadler told me this afternoon.
"It is time to call out the N.R.A. as enablers of mass murder and start embarrassing people and saying, 'Who do you stand with? The parents and children of this country or the potential mass murderers?'"
Nadler said there's nothing else Obama can do, realistically.
"There is no other meaningful action," Nadler said. "He has to know that. ... I can’t imagine what else he could have meant."
Nadler attributes the N.R.A.'s power to its ability to terrify politicians.
"If you cross the N.R.A. in certain districts, you know that X percent of people are going to come out and vote against you just because of that," said Nadler. "The N.R.A. will come out and run dishonest ads saying you're in favor of taking guns away from hunters."
By Nadler's logic, the only way to counteract the N.R.A. electoral influence is to wield the power of really bad P.R., and he thinks the president is well-equipped to do that, even if he's been unwilling in the past.
Be sure to mention these facts to anyone who comments on how oboma shed his tears....phony POS that he is, President Death, I call him.
Outcomes like that need to get a lot more publicity, but the MSM filter is the usual problem. The NRA needs to come out hard about the abolition of gun free victim zones so that teachers and staff can defend themselves. As long as we are fighting the gun banners with their rules of just how many more restrictions there will be, we will lose.
“I stand with the millions of AMERICANS that carry concealed that would have dropped this piece of shit in a heart beat had we been there. Stop the game playing with dead children you friggin moron. Those guns did not walk into that school on their own. A sick demented human being did that. We have a PEOPLE problem not a gun problem.”
__________________________________
I completely agree. I had this discussion with my Canadian husband, and my 17 year-old son, yesterday. They think I am ... well, let’s say “wrong” for thinking that having gun-free zones in schools, and no trained adults capable of taking this guy out, is a good idea. Imagine if a janitor or other teacher had a concealed carry permit—there would be more children alive today.
“PS - If that group, the Westboro church shows up at any of those kid’s funeral ... G-d help them. We won’t.”
_________________________________________________
Oh no—I hope not. That would really be cruel. Actually, “cruel” doesn’t even describe it.
And it’s not just those poor children and their families—all the other children in the school are scarred for life, psychologically.
This type of evil is incomprehensible—and it must not be compounded by a group of crazy protesters.
May G-d rest those children’s souls and give their families peace.
Good post. Laws only influence those who have a penchant to be law abiding citizens. Others could care less.
We need to see an objective demographic and religious analysis of those that are most vociferous about hog tying law abiding Americans with more gun control regulations. If it was disproportionately (which it isn’t) mostly American-Irish or American Indians it would be made into an obvious issue.
This is slander, without question. Nadler now needs to be brought to his knees over this.
This is slander, without question. Nadler now needs to be brought to his knees over this.
This is slander, without question. Nadler now needs to be brought to his knees over this.
This time things are going to be different. Just watch.
In 1994 Clinton picked a fight with the NRA and got his ass handed to him in the following mid-term elections, an election often touted as the "revenge of the Angry White Male". So chagrined were the democrats by this beating that the fled from their platform of gun control. Mass shootings came and went with nary a peep from the Democrats.
One month ago Democrats learned a valuable lesson. With changing demographics on their side, they learned that they can lose the "Angry White Male" vote by huge numbers and still win elections. Who are the primary supporters of gun rights and the NRA? White males. White males that the Democrats are going to be less fearful of pissing off because they now know they can still win without us.
I will be very surprised if Obama sits by and does nothing this time around. He's got nothing to lose and the ethnic and gender demographics who elected him will support him on this. I hope I'm wrong but I smell a fight in the air and after looking at the recent election results, I am not confident we'll be able to win this time around. Now might be a good time to make some of those purchases you've been holding off on.
Nadler once cried......”help! I’m on my knees and I can’t get up”
Also the NRA went “all in” to beat Obama this time.
I am a member and the magazines, news letters, e-mails, etc., were all “we have to stop Obamma”.
So, yes, it is all-out war, and NRA is about all we have.
NRA has to get out message of arming teachers & principals and/or putting armed police in schools.
They put armed air marshalls on airplanes to deter hijackers. Armed guards in government buildings, court houses, banks..
Why invite these freaks to schools where it is a a known “no gun” zone?
The smart thing to do is to come out in support of a law of our own which will be less restrictive than the other side’s, otherwise we will be stuck with the harsher law. Sadly, we will probably be saddled with the harsher one because of the zealotry of the extremists on both sides.
And a spoon made Nadler fat.
Requiring all children twelve years or older to complete a fire arm safety class and receiving a Fire Arms ID card on passing might be a better idea.
> Folks who support the 2nd Amendment need to come up with solid proposals to keep guns out of the hands of the crazies.<
For starters, there needs to be major reform in commitment law in this country, particularly when parents, who know when their child or adult child might pose a danger to others, are hamstrung in getting meaningful help for an ill family member.
Gun control is a straw man.
Unfortunately so. Compromise only goes one way. We compromise on what guns we'll give up while the Democrats compromise on what they'll let us keep. Obama has long supported the Clinton-era AWB and I think this is exactly what we'll get --with possibly a ban on gun shows and private sales thrown in for good measure.
Please keep in mind that laws aren't about saving lives. They're about making people feel good. Arming teachers won't make people feel good. Banning assault rifles and high-cap magazines will.
Jerry Nadler's massive food intake causes world hunger. Let's pass a law that says he can't eat.
Look what crawled out from under a rock - Gohring’s fat Nazi cousin. Seig heil, Nadler.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.