Quantcast

What Do You Think of President Obama’s Plan to Curb Gun Violence?

ABC News U.S. 2013/01/17 00:16:04
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • hasher 2013/01/19 12:39:27
    Plan is too tough
    hasher
    obama has no right to mess with the 2nd amendment.
  • Michael S. 2013/01/18 21:34:12 (edited)
    Plan is too tough
    Michael S.
    "Too tough?" How about "too counterproductive" and "too much of an unconstitutional overreach" and "too destructive to the balance of power the Second Amendment was created to uphold?"
  • dominic garcia 2013/01/18 18:57:56
    Plan does not go far enough
    dominic garcia
    Like usual... Obama is way off track!!!!!! Criminals don't obey laws. Another law is not going to stop or curb anything!!! It is "Mental Illness stupid" that needs to be addressed!!!!!!!
  • Broken 2013/01/18 04:52:39
    Plan is too tough
    Broken
    +1
    The plan is an unconstitutional over reach, but what else do you expect from this meglomaniac?
  • daniel.putnam.108 2013/01/18 01:00:14
    Plan is too tough
    daniel.putnam.108
    +1
    plan will amount to nothing, mental illness the problem? lunatics rarely obey the law. check fbi murder figures assault rifles are the lowest weapon used in murders, on fbi list.go to fbi web site and look at the statistics. one question, has anyone out there seen actual proof lanza used assault style rifle. hold up in court proof, not hearsay!why have we not seen the evidence?
  • Gregaj7 2013/01/17 23:23:52
    Plan is too tough
    Gregaj7
    +2
    There shouldn't be one, because it's not his job.
  • Tordgaard 2013/01/17 23:10:52
    Plan is right on track
    Tordgaard
    The president will never be able to to make the extremists (right or left) happy.
  • ElliPonto 2013/01/17 17:27:43
    Plan is too tough
    ElliPonto
    If his executive orders when enacted and the laws he is proposing were enforced, Sandy Hook would still have happen.

    Remember, the shooters own mother called for help and was afraid of her own child. But did she remove or prevent him from being able to get the guns she owned. She did nothing, yet it is the fault of those whom legally own guns that this idiot shoot the teachers and students. Why is the media not talking about responsible gun ownership and holding those whom allow their firearms used in a illegal manner responsible.

    Personally, sue the mother estate, hold the father responsible for his child's action. Turns out that he stop the authorities from removing his child from the mothers household.
  • cheryl ElliPonto 2013/01/17 21:40:01
    cheryl
    you know,i do think it was his parents responsibility .teaching your son, with known mental disorders, to shoot a gun?a father that wanted to live his own nice life without having a disturbed son to think about.?well, my issue is this...what should our president have done?he had to address the issue of guns.he knows probably nothing will pass ,but it was addressed.ok? it seems to me that mr.obama cant do anything right according to some.so pathetic what we have become,we need to be one nation and work together to solve this problem.and it is a real problem.
  • ElliPonto cheryl 2013/01/18 14:16:30
    ElliPonto
    Our President is not responsible for raising anyone's children. Parent need to be held responsible, it was not the child whom decided to be born. It was the parent who created that child.

    As for all the school shootings. Oddly enough each time there was a democrat president in office the school shooting number almost if not double. As for what should have been done. Hold those whom knew of the treat responsible.

    Example: Virginia Tech. Two of the school admins knew the shooter talked about a shooting. He wrote stories over and over again about how he would preform a shooting.
    His psychologist heard him say he wanted to shoot. But nobody alert the authorities. WTF.
  • cheryl ElliPonto 2013/01/19 06:39:06
    cheryl
    what about the rule that a psychologist can,t break the oath and repeat was he was told .? we cant haul everyone off that says something strange or threatening.no our president is not responsible for others children.i was talking about the shootings in general.they have to be addressed.they are happening to frequently and people aren,t very happy with what podus is doing about them. he cant win no matter what he does.imagine what would be going on if he just didnt respond to the shooting.
  • ElliPonto cheryl 2013/01/21 16:45:07
    ElliPonto
    I believe there is a ethical duty to protect life. In the case of Sandy Hook, not only did his head doc do nothing. His own father forced the mother to keep their son in her house. She is died now and the father is continuing to live.

    Virginia Tech: Two college admins and a few of his professors kept quite, did not say one thing. The shooter Head doc heard just day before of the plan. Now how do you tell the family of the victims, "I have a moral oath not to alert if my patient is DANGEROUS. "
  • cheryl ElliPonto 2013/01/21 17:05:28
    cheryl
    haven,t you heard anyone say strange things?what can you do?i don,t disagree with what you say about reporting it,but to who?how many folks do you know that have unruley children,and maybe are divorced, and pawn there kid off to someone else?you know why?there is no help .if there is it takes months and months to get it .many folks don,t have insurance then its almost impossible to get tx. yes it should be an ethical duty to protect life but how many of these sick people talking to a shrink are telling the truth? we the people want so many rights that we hurt ourselves.we fought for the right to privacy medically speaking.now we have it and our hands are tied as to what we can or can,t say.im sorry but i still feel folks that dwell on guns (i mean guns all over the place) are the ones to fear. and as you say its an ethical duty to protect life including mine and guns worry me .
  • ElliPonto cheryl 2013/01/21 21:28:57
    ElliPonto
    You are stretching there. If you are a professional head doc, if your patient is talking about killing a crowd or group. You need to step up and end it before hand.

    If you heard or read Obama's proposal for gun control. The one question has to be asked. Would it have stopped Sandy Hook? The answer is a big NO.

    The Bush Master even after the possible regulations is still legal today, even with the 30 round clips. You just can't buy a new clip and on his person he had 6 clips. So I don't think he was worried about running out.

    He carried hand guns which per the Obama administration still have not banned.

    They have only taken or made it harder for legal ownership, but there is nothing stopping you from purchasing out the US and importing for personal use..
  • cheryl ElliPonto 2013/01/21 22:57:30
    cheryl
    im sorry ,i know for a fact you cannot disclose private information that is told to a dr.have you ever heard of hippa.?
  • ElliPonto cheryl 2013/01/23 17:00:02
    ElliPonto
    Actually, the Hippocrates Oath is to do no harm and has nothing to do with the Doctor Patient privacy. It was the government that gave Doctors this protection.
  • cheryl ElliPonto 2013/01/23 17:28:12
    cheryl
    i said hippa you cannot give out any info about a patient.im not talking about the hippocrates oath
  • BeckieGirl cheryl 2013/01/21 21:35:56
    BeckieGirl
    Sorry I have to jump in. I am a survivor of a very bad rape. In fact I posted pictures once and SH got pissed over the graphic view of my injuries to my legs and back. That aside.

    If it was not for a legally owned gun, my co owner and I would be died today.

    There is a big difference of legal and responsible firearm ownership and irresponsible ownership. Criminals laugh at regulation that limits bullet numbers and what you can own. Do you really think someone whom wants to own a illegal firearm is going to go to a local store and purchase it.

    They will be purchasing in the black market. My firearm owners responsible for the ownership of their firearms. But to regulate what I can own or how many bullet I can carry is just wrong.
  • cheryl BeckieGirl 2013/01/21 23:16:03
    cheryl
    i know ,i can bet you didnt have a military weapon?i dont think you shouldn,t be able to protect yourself ,home place of work.once again i ask what should we do to limit the shootings?you know im glad a gun helped save you but, what about a little child getting his hands on a gun and killing himself? and what about people that don,t want to be around guns?they have rights also.anything can turn into an obsession .people that dwell on guns are very dangerous.i would not want to live with someone like that. i don,t want to fight with people but i see so many people upset with president obama.the man had to do something.imagine the scrutiny if he hadnt .20 babies killed for no reason. well he had to bring it to the forefront.
  • BeckieGirl cheryl 2013/01/23 19:01:30
    BeckieGirl
    Actually, per the definition of an assault weapon, yes it was a military style firearm that saved my friend and I.

    As for how to limit shootings. Well look back in history. Each time there is a Democrat is office (Oval Office) shooting death go up. SO maybe it is not to have a democrat president. I joke about that, but it is not the legal ownership of a firearm that is causing these shootings. In fact if you listen or watch the news you will find that a legally own firearm had protected a family. (Boy protect his two sister) (Mother protects her children while on the phone with her husband)

    It is called responsible gun ownership. The media play off the death of a child that shot themselves with a gun in the household. First the question needs to be. Was that gun legally own? Why wasn't the gun locked up or have a disarming device (which by the way is required to be purchased if you put the check mark in the box that children line in the household)

    Think about it. I mean really think about it.
    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_ne...
    Further looking into this. Parent would charged with no crime, but nor were they legally gun owners.

    Why? If you make those whom own a firearm responsible for the ownership, which include making it a crime if you are not responsible. These parents...
    Actually, per the definition of an assault weapon, yes it was a military style firearm that saved my friend and I.

    As for how to limit shootings. Well look back in history. Each time there is a Democrat is office (Oval Office) shooting death go up. SO maybe it is not to have a democrat president. I joke about that, but it is not the legal ownership of a firearm that is causing these shootings. In fact if you listen or watch the news you will find that a legally own firearm had protected a family. (Boy protect his two sister) (Mother protects her children while on the phone with her husband)

    It is called responsible gun ownership. The media play off the death of a child that shot themselves with a gun in the household. First the question needs to be. Was that gun legally own? Why wasn't the gun locked up or have a disarming device (which by the way is required to be purchased if you put the check mark in the box that children line in the household)

    Think about it. I mean really think about it.
    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_ne...
    Further looking into this. Parent would charged with no crime, but nor were they legally gun owners.

    Why? If you make those whom own a firearm responsible for the ownership, which include making it a crime if you are not responsible. These parents should go to jail or at least the father. He SHOT his son. by not being responsible.
    (more)
  • cheryl BeckieGirl 2013/01/23 19:35:43
    cheryl
    +1
    i agree with everything you said.i have no problem protecting our homes.i just don,t like the idea of going ,oh lets say to a football game ,and sit next to someone with a gun.i don,t think the players would like it either.so,as a responsible gun owner yourself,what can our country do to stop all the shooting?i know guns are required to be locked up from children.actually as a parent ,i would never have had a gun in my house.now that my children are grown ,i would consider it.for now ,i live in a deed restricted home and i have 3 dogs,and a security system.that may or may not protect me.i m about to give up driving for fear of p----ing some maniac off and he decides to shoot me.so you see,i don,t like living in fear of being shot thats all.im much more frightened of the gun owners than the criminals.
  • BeckieGirl cheryl 2013/01/23 20:04:43
    BeckieGirl
    Maybe you need to check. No professional. College or public school stadium allows for a hand gun.

    Remember, the theater shooting was in a gun free zone theater. Now it was not that long ago that another theater shooting happen in a theater that allowed for legal conceal weapons. That shooter came in, shot a few rounds and next was laying die after a legal own shot him dead. Not one innocent person was injuries.

    Now the begs to question. Which would you rather be, sitting next to a legal gun owner whom could save your life. Or in a theater where the only thing you can do is hide, because if you run for an exit. You are just lighting yourself up as a target.

    Are you aware that most Pro NFL players have protect on the sidelines? And most NFL owners have armed and in plain clothing guards?

    Now you asked as a legal gun owner, what can our country do to stop the shooting.

    Gun ownership responsibility. If you own it, you are responsible for that firearm. If you allow for your firearm to be used illegally or kill another by accident. As a responsible gun owner, your gun would not fall in illegal hands or cause an accidental shooting. There for, if you own it and it does cause a death (illegal or accidental). You should be be arrested with the criminal.
  • cheryl BeckieGirl 2013/01/23 20:50:40
    cheryl
    i know the laws right now about where its legal to carry a gun.im just saying if many pro gun advocates get there way guns will be everyplace,including football games.and i have to add this,can you imagine a bunch of drunks with guns in a bar? or drunk at a game









    gun owners are responsible for the actions of their guns now.if a child gets your gun and does harm the gun owner is responsible.if you are robbed and weapons taken you must report it or you will be responsible for any incidents after the robbery.so you do agree about background checks?
  • cheryl cheryl 2013/01/23 20:52:05
    cheryl
    i lost half of what i was saying.omg
  • BeckieGirl cheryl 2013/01/31 19:21:47
    BeckieGirl
    You are missing the point. The NRA is not trying to allow guns in where they are currently not allowed. But per the Federal law and even under Obama's proposal. If a movie theater which is privately own allows for legal carry of fire arms, they can allow. Obama is not changing that, he is just changing how many bullets a firearm can carry.

    If a gun crazy person wants to carry a firearm into a theater, there is nothing to stop them. Not one law can force that point. But understand this, if a shoot can only have 7 bullets per magazine. Do you have any idea how many magazines a single person can carry and be changed out.

    Example










    Did you see how a guy shot three round, change the mag and shot again another three. Now understand, under the Obama reform, he will have seven shot instead of three. If you did not catch the time, we are talk a second between changes. The law does not stop you from carrying 20 , 30 or 100 magazines. And if each only has 7 bullets they are legal.
  • cheryl BeckieGirl 2013/01/31 20:28:48 (edited)
    cheryl
    ok ,but i cannot imagine any theater or any store allowing guns.owners aren,t that stupid.at this point i dont care what they do.it will have no effect on me,unless of course,im shot or a family member is shot.personally i try to stay away from them.i dont care for guns nor do i care for over the top gun owners,such as this man right now ,holding a 5 year old in his bunker. .neighbors said he walked the perimeter of his property with his big gun over his shoulder everyday..or ted nugent types,that shoot his neighbors pets.they both need some type of mental eval .all i ask ,have your guns ,but leave others alone.
  • Quietman ~PWCM~JLA 2013/01/17 16:49:17
    Plan is too tough
    Quietman   ~PWCM~JLA
    +2
    Unconstitutional!!!!
  • ray 2013/01/17 16:45:31
    Plan is too tough
    ray
    +2
    25,000 laws to restrict ..
    " the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
    is a to much already , and the Haters keep on coming .
  • RED DAWN 2013/01/17 16:33:20
    Plan is too tough
    RED DAWN
    +2
    I did not like any answer I totally disagree with his plan.
    Mr.ABC and the rest of the idiots that want to ban guns and large clips let me say now that obama wants me to only have seven cartridges in my gun "THERE WILL BE NO WARNING SHOTS".
  • Cal 2013/01/17 16:23:03
    Plan is too tough
    Cal
    +3
    Illegal.
  • Luke 2013/01/17 15:55:45
    Plan is too tough
    Luke
    +1
    What's tough is his plan to enslave the American population and this is the start....Pay attention to Jeans post......
  • tom C 2013/01/17 15:54:33
    Plan is too tough
    tom  C
    +2
    Gee the choices suck here....
    what happened to ...."Plan is on the wrong track""
  • jeane 2013/01/17 15:50:31 (edited)
    Plan is too tough
    jeane
    +10
    SLIPPERY SLOPE...... slipper slope
  • wtw 2013/01/17 15:02:10
    Plan is too tough
    wtw
    +5
    Wrong focus!
  • santa6642 2013/01/17 14:13:50 (edited)
  • fortycal_sig 2013/01/17 06:22:59
    Plan is too tough
    fortycal_sig
    +5
    "Too tough?" How about illegal and the very opposite of effective?
  • Starman 2013/01/17 06:19:25
    Plan is right on track
    Starman
    +1
    I hope that the Republican House will step up and do the right thing and enact the measures the President has called for. Hopefully we will see the kind of bipartisanship we saw with the "Fiscal Cliff". That means that Mr Boenher will need to set aside his "majority of the majority" obstructionist ways again.
  • cheryl 2013/01/17 06:11:27
    Plan is right on track
    cheryl
    +2
    its a beginning.im very proud of president obama taking such a strong approach.very presidential.if he had done nothing,imagine the outrage.
  • RED DAWN cheryl 2013/01/17 16:40:36
  • jeane RED DAWN 2013/01/17 23:26:53
    jeane
    +1
    Yeah - kill the kids before they get here!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/24 08:15:23

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals