WASHINGTON (AP) — Braced for a fight, President Barack Obama on Wednesday unveiled the most sweeping proposals for curbing gun violence in two decades, pressing a reluctant Congress to pass universal background checks and bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the Newtown, Conn., school shooting.
Comments
military-style assault weapon - there is no such thing
Perhaps it is shorthand - but you and I both know what that term refers to - civilian versions of military weapons that, other than modifications to the reciever, do not differ from their military counterparts. The AR-15 is an M-16/M-4 that cannot be fired in full auto mode because the lower reciever has been modified. Semantics are important, I'll grant you that. On this issue, however, terms are used in the way you are using them to cloud the issue and try to exclude folks from the debate.
This comment has been removed.
quote from an article on Obama: If he were to get a report card akin to the ones received by children, it would read: Does not make good use of time. Does not work well with others. Does not show respect to peers. Is disruptive.
Let's get some terminology straight. A post in the Globe Comments section is not a "blog" and a blog post is not an "article."
Your latest piece of "borrowing" comes at the very end of a long, whiney blog post by Jennifer Rubin, a self-identified "Right Wing Opinion Blogger." Her work is most frequently picked up the Weekly Standard.
I do love that you left the first two sentences out of the quote.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/01/16/obama-the-peevish/
Winning has made the president less interested in deal-making. Remember that in 2008 he was repeatedly lauded for his first-class temperament. No more. If he were to get a report card akin to the ones received by children, it would read: Does not make good use of time. Does not work well with others. Does not show respect to peers. Is disruptive.
"be" You know or perhaps you don't but as a veteran I know that the reference to "military assault weapons" is more in reference to the types of munitions these weapons use as opposed to whether automatic or semi. This argument that there is no such thing is nothing more than smoke and mirrors at best, stupid at worse. I don't find anything in these proposals that is onerous or beyond the pale. None of these regs. takes away any of my hunting rifles, shotguns or my pistol. Background checks should be acceptable to any honest person. Mental health data base the same. Getting all wired up about this is nothing but political on some folks part and fear of the NRA on the part of some Congressmen. It is purely people talking stupid. Sorry bud but as a veteran I just see no reason for the attitude shown by some.
I'll give you credit on your cost argument but I think public safety is worth the bucks.