Posted on 07/08/2011 5:20:10 PM PDT by Iam1ru1-2
WASHINGTON (AP) - Six months after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot, the White House is preparing to propose some new steps on gun safety, though they're likely to fall short of the bold measures activists would like to see.
Spokesman Jay Carney said that the new steps would be made public "in the near future." He didn't offer details, but people involved in talks at the Justice Department to craft the new measures said they expected to see something in the next several weeks. Whatever is proposed is not expected to involve legislation or take on major issues, like banning assault weapons, but could include executive action to strengthen the background check system or other steps.
"The president directed the attorney general to form working groups with key stakeholders to identify common-sense measures that would improve American safety and security while fully respecting Second Amendment rights," Carney said Thursday. "That process is well under way at the Department of Justice, with stakeholders on all sides working through these complex issues, and we expect to have some more specific announcements in the near future."
Anti-gun groups have been disappointed to see no action so far from President Barack Obama, who supported tough gun control measures earlier in his career but fell largely silent upon becoming president. Some activists were using the opportunity of the six-month anniversary of the Giffords shooting on Friday to speak up.
The shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz., killed six people and wounded more than a dozen others, including Giffords. Two months later, Obama wrote an opinion piece in Giffords' local paper, the Arizona Daily Star, calling for "sound and effective steps" to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, including strengthening background checks. So far the president has done nothing and administration officials have signaled that no major steps should be expected, given the climate in Congress against gun legislation of any kind.
That's not stopping activists from pushing Obama. The group Mayors Against Illegal Guns, headed by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sent Obama a letter calling him to act.
"To prevent the next Tucson, we need a comprehensive background check system, which is what the president called for in April," said the director of the mayors' group, Mark Glaze. "That said, there are many steps the president can take on his own authority, without new laws, that could make a very real difference."
The group's suggestions included enforcing reporting laws that could have stopped the Tucson shooter from getting a weapon.
It was only a matter of time.
Bullsh*t!
Takes too long.See my tagline.
The AZ shooter was a clear mental case who had been banned from school -- including requiring a physicianl's "clean bill of mental health" before he could return to school.
The dumb@$$ local sheriff could have blocked his gun purchase on that basis -- but let him slide.
The NICS check includes a field for rejection based on mental health. That was not done -- even though the warning signs were clear -- if the school MH issue had been reported to the database.
Maybe they are trying to sneak in a requirement for a MH clearance before gun purchase -- as part of the Fed background check.
The above is just my guess...
“physicianl’s “ — no charge for the exra “l”... ‘-}
As bad as this is going to be, wait until the other shoe drops. Then we’re all in.
Our prayers are similar. Ah, well - a fine weekend to work the good old AQT. 500 yard head shots are the name of my game.
Yep. Banning the person to person gun sale because there is no paperwork is coming. From the same dictator who apparently sent 30,000 guns south of the border in order to frame up American gun dealers.
I doubt seriously that I will even pay attention to his EO. I’ve already got guns and ammunition and even more importantly, I live in Texas not some puke state like Illinois.
Prosecutions in the Department of Justice for violating current gun laws???
Shove your EO up your ass, Barry.
The Republicans would have to grow a set of balls and a spine before they would stand up to ANY Rat president.
I won’t say what I’d like to because I don’t want the law at my door in 2 minutes.
My current thoughts and opinions are un-printable at this time.
“Perhaps I am mistaken, but Congress can negate Executive Orders.”
Maybe I’m also mistaken, but my understanding is that the only entity who can strike down an EO is a future president. That’s why Obama’s EO’s are so scary - they’re like royal proclamations (but his most dangerous ones are done under the radar) - untouchable.
I hope I’m wrong - anyone?
Obama and Holder have killed more people than that crazy Tucson shooter.
That was an odd choice, though. I am sure there is a better example, but probably under a liberal President.
As you had hoped, you are wrong. Congress can override an executive order by enacting legislation that conflicts with the order - the President is duty-bound to enforce the laws enacted by Congress, and to not act contrary to those laws. Of course, just because it can be done doesn’t mean that it can be done easily - most obviously, a President who wanted to protect an executive order of his could veto a bill intended to override that order; it would then take a supermajority in Congress to override that veto. Congress could also simply prohibit any funding for the activities called for in the executive order.
Reagan did blow it with that 86 law. Bush Sr did some bad things as well. W did mostly great on guns, the sunsetting of the AWB I'll still give to Tom Delay though.
Watch the accusations though, it's not a good mentality.
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.