Biden: Obama may side-step Congress on parts of gun control agenda

(CBS News) WASHINGTON - The shooting deaths of 20 first graders and six educators in Newtown, Conn., led President Barack Obama to promise action.

Senior administration officials tell CBS News President Obama is likely to unveil his new ideas to reduce gun violence next week. The president will also push his gun control agenda in his State of the Union address next month.

The president wants Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and extend criminal and mental health background checks to firearm sales at gun shows and through private dealers.

Vice President Joe Biden has devoted this week to hearing from all sides, including the National Rifle Association Thursday.

Biden meets with gun safety advocates
Christie: Talking gun control is not enough
Gun control lobby grabs window of opportunity

"We're here today to deal with a problem that requires immediate action, urgent action. And the president and I are determined to take action," Biden said.

He met today with victims of gun violence and gun control advocates and said the political climate will never be the same after the Newtown massacre.

(Watch: Obama to nominate Jack Lew for treasury secretary)

"I've been doing this a long time. I can't think of all the tragic events we've endured. I don't think anything has touched the heart of the American people so profoundly as seeing those and learning of those young children not only being shot but riddled with bullets," Biden said.

The White House is also looking at ways to encourage gun owners to use and store their firearms more safely. It is reviewing the effectiveness of gun buy-back programs, seeing if a federal buy-back program might work.

Biden also said the president might side-step Congress and seek to advance his agenda through executive order. Senior officials offered no details, but they acknowledge there's very little the president can do to advance gun control without the consent of Congress.

Biden faces a difficult meeting with the NRA Thursday. Both sides said they're going to listen to each other, but CBS News spoke with senior administration officials who said they could not advance this agenda if they didn't invite sportsmen and NRA to Washington. NRA representatives said they had to come because if they denied this meeting, they would be outside and have no voice whatsoever.

(Watch: New Conn. gun laws met with opposition)

[mstrong1]

Isn't "sidestepping congress" (the people's representatives)or failing to defend the constitution (which they swear to do when taking their oaths).... aren't those acts the acts of a tyrannical government ?

[BillT102]

Why did comments on this story turn into a debate on GUN CONTROL? the story here is leadership that thinks that they are ABOVE following the constitutionally directed CHECKS and BALANCES of the 3 branches of government! This is NOT behavior isolated to one incident. It is an ONGOING philosophy of arrogance and disdain for the Constitution of the United States of America. I've got an idea... How about the citizens of this country be compelled to pass a CITIZENSHIP TEST like the immigrants who are becoming legal citizens of this country, before they are allowed to VOTE. Obviously the masses who would vote for this current regime are no longer in touch nor are they being taught in our public schools, what our forefathers intended when they laid out the cornerstones of our government which are currently being smashed with a sledgehammer.

[cowboyZeroOne]

The people that invented the printing press are dead. Those times were different from now and there is no longer a legitimate reason for one to own a printing press. There's just no purpose from my point of view.

The printing press should clearly be banned due to it's high paper capacity, automatic reloading capabilities, high rate of production, and other naturally offensive features. With the printing press, one could perform massive acts of information, acts that my political party has determined to be sedition, or, worse, publishing words or writings that the government just generally does not approve of. There is also the chance that the printing press could have bells, whistles, or be made up from foreign made parts. All of these acts, including making your own printing press at home are clearly evil.

Oh, also, all printing presses that are presently out there should require registration and serialization. Anyone found in possession of an unregistered printing press or one with a destroyed serial number should be handed an automatic 10 year federal prison sentence and have his printing privileges evoked for life without opportunity for redress. Anyone found to be transferring printing presses without a federal license to do so should be sentenced to 20 to life without opportunity for parole.

While we're banning printing presses, we should also ban home printing machines. These machines kill thousands of acres of trees every year and for what? So you can look at a piece of paper? Clearly, there is no logical reason why you should need to print something at the expense of trees.

And, while we're on the printing machines, office copy machines and printers are clearly far too high of capacity for an average citizen to own. A new law should be passed making it a felony to even handle one of these without first getting the approval of your local publicly-elected and political-affiliated sheriff, followed by getting fingerprinted and sending that card, two copies of a passport photo, $200, and a 3 page form to the US Bureau of Trees, Paper, and Presses, followed by a 6 month wait, and, likely, a second 6 month wait after you make corrections to your application.

Large format printers are also too much for a common man to handle. Only unionized federal employees should be allowed to be trained on and use these machines. Their capacity for making large political banners that could send too loud of a message to people is just too risky for the public at large.

Banner printers are out of the question for private ownership. Only manufacturers and specially-vetted maintenance men with security clearance should have access to those...and only then under close observation.

This is my point of view, which is the only one that is right. Your view (yah, you) is wrong and makes you a bad person, you societal outcast misfit.

[hillzagain]

by thechooch1 January 10, 2013 9:58 AM EST
zimmerman I question your "facts". You are saying that there are 20,000 suicides a year with guns. Secondly even if we were to believe your numbers, it seems that assault type weapons are the weapon of choice in the mass murders.
___________________________________
Mass murders make up a tiny fraction of actual gun violence, but of course they are shocking and great for selling newspapers so we hear a lot about them.

"Assault weapon" bans have no statistically significant impact on gun violence. That's not to say we can't make it difficult to acquire them and a hassle to keep them - with licensing, registration and training requirements. That would fall under protecting the General Welfare of the public and would probably not go against the 2nd Amendment - our rights in the Constitution are not blanket rights - they can be restricted to promote the general welfare.

And keep in mind, if you want to kill a lot of people and are crazy enough to follow through with your urges, you will find a way to do it even if assault weapons are not available.

[pleaseletitbeso]

I am curious how any sane individual could even think about any form of firearm restriction or ban knowing full well that the Violent Crime and Murder rates have continued to Plummet in these United States for the last 20 years, consistently.

Violent Crime and Murder have Decreased 50% in the last 20 years, how has this trend not made it into the media, why are the politicians not willing to praise the progress.

As the population steadily increases the Violent Crime and Murder rates Drop, this trend is because we have access to the firearms we do, not in spite of them.

Talk about an ignorant moronic thought process, disarm the public while Violent Crime and Murder Drops.

The latest push truly is less about the safety of the populace and driven solely by agenda.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1

[zzimmerman13]

The debate about "Assault weapons" misses the point entirely and is a waste of time. The reality is 30,000 people die a year as a result of gun use, 2/3's of them are suicides and of the remaining 10,000 less than 375 are caused by rifles of every kind including Shotguns, Hunting Rifles and Assault-style Rifles..

In other words 1% of all fire arm deaths are caused by rifles...This discussion is pure PAP for the media and low information voters.

nopartyline, seriously please quit trolling this forum unless you have something smart to say that isn't an insult. Thank you

[chevyhotrod]

nopartyline has had many screen names over the last couple of years and never has anything intelligent to say about anything. They are a strictly propaganda machine, nothing more.

[thechooch1]

zimmerman I question your "facts". You are saying that there are 20,000 suicides a year with guns. Secondly even if we were to believe your numbers, it seems that assault type weapons are the weapon of choice in the mass murders.

[lapazjim]

The biggest problem with this is Obama is sidestepping the House yet again to get what he wants.he wants to eventually begin taking the Americans rights away.This is his first step,taking away the Second Amendment Right and then next he will tale away the 1st amendment and so on.Then he will work on the Constitution.All this while Congress and the Senate sit back and accept his backdoor tactics.
The politicians in DC need to stop Obama in his tracks before he gets started.To allow him to get away with Executive Orders and making them was not what he was elected to do.Pretty soon there will be a whole new set of laws in this country called "The Obama Law Doctrine"and then you have a dictator!!!

[JWsOpEd]

Not sure why we even have a house or senate - and with a kangaroo court - you would be witnessing the take over of a country. There's good reason why there are so many AR-15's in circulation - it's to protect citizens from the government (remember the 2nd ammendment).

A sweeping executive order without a quick overturn by the court would be a recipe for disaster. But hey - why not do what Bill Clinton prescribed - go until the court stops you.

[dj-100]

I am amazed at how uninformed we as Americans are. Firstly, "assault weapons" are fully automatic and are used only by military. An assault weapon is where you hold the trigger down and get multiple shots. Semi-automatic require that you pull the trigger for each shot to be fired. In insists that you intentionally shoot something.

Trust me, if you are hunting and are attacked by wolves or other pack animals, you will want to have a semi-automatic weapon handy or you will not survive the incident.

Furthermore, how about looking at the facts. The cities in America with the strictest gun control laws are Chicago, Washington DC. Camden NJ...and the list goes on. All of them have one thing in common. An extremely high violent crime rate.

The reason is simple. Criminals do not obey laws, law abiding citizens do. I personally do not want to live in a city, county, state or country where the only people who have guns are the criminals. To see the results of that, all you need to do is look at the current situation in such places as Mexico, the Congo, and the Soviet Union.

To discover what happens when guns are outlawed, take a look at Great Britain. Since banning all weapons, the violent crime rate has increased. Yes, it is lower than here in the United States, but their country is smaller with fewer people.

Just look at the facts and they will speak for themselves.

[Kaeton117]

Exactly. Being a criminal means not obeying the law. So why would they follow this one? This is un-constitutional, and its just not going to help that much. I know that if someone sets their mind on hurting someone, they're going to do it with or without guns.

[bjoh249]

Adolf Hitler said that the way to conquer a nation is to first disarm its people.