After Conn. school massacre, where will the gun debate go?

Prior to the tragic school shooting in Connecticut, both political sides in Washington have been silent on the issue of gun control. / CBS News
Now that three days have passed since 27 people, including 20 children, were killed by one gunman in Newtown, Conn., the discussion over gun control has bubbled to the surface. After President Obama got the discussion started just hours after the massacre when he called for "meaningful action" on guns "regardless of politics," he renewed his vow to take action Sunday night when speaking to residents of of the grief-striken town. "What choice do we have?" he rhetorically asked. "We can't accept events like this as routine."
"We are not doing enough" to prevent these massacres, Obama says
If action is taken, Congress will have a major role. Members of the legislative body escalated the debate on Sunday on the political talk shows as well as more elected officials threw their voice into the discussion, with proponents of gun control calling for a ban on assault weapons.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a fierce proponent of gun control, vowed to reintroduce legislation that would ban assault weapons on the first day the new Congress convenes in January.
"I can tell you that [the president] is going to have a bill to lead on because...I'm going to introduce [it] in the Senate and the same bill will be introduced in the House - a bill to ban assault weapons," Feinstein said. It would ban the sale and possession of the powerful weapons and limit the size of clips to a maximum of ten bullets. Feinstein was instrumental in the previous assault weapons ban of 1994, which expired in 2004.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., also called for a federal ban on assault weapons. "[N]ot to take anybody's guns away that they have now but to stop the manufacturing of these weapons," he said. "We've got to continue to hear the screams of these children and see their blood until we do something to try and prevent this from happening again."
Lieberman also called for "a national commission on mass violence." He said on "Fox News Sunday" that it shouldn't supplant any legislation but to insure that "legislative gridlock" doesn't overcome any changes that might be necessary.
While gun control advocates sounded the alarm, most prominent leaders of the Republican Party have been silent, allowing gun control advocates to fill the immediate void.
The National Rifle Association, the powerful gun lobby, is stone silent. The organization has repeatedly withheld comment and has yet to offer its condolences to the victims. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, cancelled the Republican weekly address, deferring to President Obama to lead the nation at this time. And the Sunday political shows, which are usually filled with opinionated politicians from all sides, were absent of gun rights advocates. But it wasn't for the lack of effort.
- Schumer: Newtown could be "tipping point" for gun control
- GOP Rep.: More - not fewer - guns the answer
For instance, CBS News' "Face the Nation" invited numerous pro-gun members of Congress to appear on the program to discuss Newtown and guns. All declined.
"It's not just that Congress is reluctant to pass laws," Bob Schieffer, the host of "Face the Nation" said Sunday. "Members, as we found out this weekend when we tried to get guests to come on and talk about this on 'Face the Nation,' people are just reluctant to even discuss it."
And the executive producer of NBC's "Meet the Press", Betsy Fischer Martin, wrote via Twitter that her team reached out to "ALL 31 pro-gun rights [Senators] in the new Congress to invite them to share their views... NO takers."
One gun advocate, however, did accept Fox News' invitation to speak Sunday - Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas - who said there should be a debate on the issue. "[T]he conversation we've go to have has got to have everybody open-minded," Gohmert said.
- no previous page
- next
Popular in Politics
- Obama forgets to salute while boarding Marine One Play Video
- Obama prom pictures surface 130 Comments
- IRS' Lerner was asked to resign, refused: GOP Sen. 155 Comments
- Is President Obama ending the war on terror? 283 Comments
- Now, some unions upset over Obamacare
- GOP Rep.: Obama elected because of Reagan's immigration reforms
- IRS official Lois Lerner placed on leave 131 Comments
- Rand Paul uses 2016 bully pulpit to push Obama on drones













If one has crap thoughts they build crap tomorrows . What person would sit in front of kill games for hours on end each day ?
Get a life ! and stop thinking about taking life.
Shootings are not about guns and stabbings are not about knives. There has to be an action behind the objects for them to do damage.
So let's take a look at the bigger picture:
A huge percentage of the sick and twisted people who would do this, claim they were not of sound mind at the time of the killings. With that being said and making a huge story short... If we had better Mental Health in the world to help these people before it gets to this point.... We would not be having these issues! The Mental Health professionals are in short supply. If an individual doesn't have insurance or a mental health diagnosis it is a huge process to get assistance. After these sick individuals do something so tragic, is not the time to help them.
Can we be proactive and provided service to individuals who need Mental Health before a tragedy?
We should trained and arm are principalsand teachers so they can defend our children and themselves from killers. Let's stop allowing them to be defendless lambs being led to slaughter by killing wolves.
There are plenty of really bad kids that have had good parents and good parenting. Some kids are just, sadly, born bad. They have strange chemical imbalances........
_________________________________________
You put a contradiction in this statement.
If they have chemical imbalances, they aren't "Bad", they are perceived as bad due to the imbalance.
Make up your mind, are they "Born bad" or is it the chemical imbalance?
I would call it mentally ill of it's a chemical imbalance, not "bad"
The problem is even if you ban these weapons people will modify other weapons to make auto weapons.
So, what is the answer? Other than crying about your "rights" WHY and HOW can anyone justify owning an automatic weapon who is not military or police?
Automatic weapons have been banned in the US since the 30s.