Obama Likely Won't Pursue Assault Weapons Ban
President Obama said in Mexico Thursday that while he continues to back bringing back the expired assault weapons ban, it would be politically difficult to do so.
He called instead for greater enforcement of existing laws despite the fact that, according to Mexican President Filipe Calderon, such weapons have strengthened organized crime groups in Mexico who are fueling border violence and the drug trade.
"I have not backed off at all from my belief that the assault weapons ban makes sense, and I continue to believe that we can respect and honor the second amendment right in our Constitution," he said during a press conference with Calderon.
"Having said that," he continued, "I think none of us are under any illusion that reinstating that ban will be easy. So what we focused on is how we can improve enforcement of our existing law."
Calderon said that Mexico has seen an increase in organized crime since the ban expired; on "Face the Nation" Sunday, Mexican Ambassador Arturo Sarukhan said that "ninety percent of all weapons we are seizing in Mexico, Bob, are coming from across the United States" – a comment echoed by both leaders today.
"He is well aware of our problems, and we have described it as it is," Calderon said with regard to Mr. Obama at the press conference.
"We definitely respect the decision of the US Congress and the US people in this regard," the Mexican president said. He acknowledged that the ban "is a politically delicate topic because Americans truly appreciate their Constitutional rights."
Calderon said he is hoping for a solution which respects the rights of the Constitution as well as keeps assault weapons trade at bay.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. He called instead for greater enforcement of existing laws despite the fact that, according to Mexican President Filipe Calderon, such weapons have strengthened organized crime groups in Mexico who are fueling border violence and the drug trade.
"I have not backed off at all from my belief that the assault weapons ban makes sense, and I continue to believe that we can respect and honor the second amendment right in our Constitution," he said during a press conference with Calderon.
"Having said that," he continued, "I think none of us are under any illusion that reinstating that ban will be easy. So what we focused on is how we can improve enforcement of our existing law."
Calderon said that Mexico has seen an increase in organized crime since the ban expired; on "Face the Nation" Sunday, Mexican Ambassador Arturo Sarukhan said that "ninety percent of all weapons we are seizing in Mexico, Bob, are coming from across the United States" – a comment echoed by both leaders today.
"He is well aware of our problems, and we have described it as it is," Calderon said with regard to Mr. Obama at the press conference.
"We definitely respect the decision of the US Congress and the US people in this regard," the Mexican president said. He acknowledged that the ban "is a politically delicate topic because Americans truly appreciate their Constitutional rights."
Calderon said he is hoping for a solution which respects the rights of the Constitution as well as keeps assault weapons trade at bay.
Popular in Politics
- Obama forgets to salute while boarding Marine One Play Video
- The Ted Cruz conundrum
- Senators lack votes on immigration despite progress
- Senator: Oklahoma "hit hard, but we're not knocked out"
- Petraeus biographer regrets affair
- IRS' Lerner was asked to resign, refused: GOP Sen. 206 Comments
- GOP Rep.: Obama elected because of Reagan's immigration reforms
- As summer approaches, sequestration threatens holiday fun
The way we know is from crime studies done by the federal Government- some required by the ban it's self. One commissioned by none other than bill clinton.
Another way to tell was to read the law. Not what politicians said it would do. They lied.
The law it's self was toothless as a responce to violence in the USDA, and it was clear it's key point was to serve as a gimmick for a discrimination campaign against firearms owners in the USA.
It's the longest run, most viscious and well funded discrimination campaign going right now--from LIBERALS and the left wing.
The explination points are conditioned from listening to Obama.
" We're GONNA! WE'RE GONNA! WE'RE GONNA GONNA !" Swahili I think it is. He did say we all gotta learn another language.
I didn't . I got a T-shirt that commands "Eng Speaklish Fother Mucker!" I live in the USA, you see?
If in the MANY US studies the ban had reduced crime at all-better than mid-night basketball, lets say-- it would STILL be law now.
----
That means they are spending extra effort determining how to remove weapons from the US voting population.
And CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC are doing their best to support their agenda.
And you're an ass.
Well, the crime rates were not affected by the imposition of the ban and were not affected by the repeal of the ban.
this is because the campaign amplifies small differeences (like pistol grip!).
but the law AS WRITEN focuses on what is IDENTICLE to your gun and the onse banned so YOURS falls under the ban!
It's not about "Assault Weapons!" And it ignores we already have tough control laws on real asault weapons .
It's a scam! And as such, it didn't reduce any violence while it was law for ten years--which many legislators know while the Obama Administration trys to ignore it!
Don't be fooled!
Rowen?s trial was declared a mistrial because the jury could not reach an undeadlocked decision.
Carl T. Rowen was never retried and said that he favors gun control but admits to being a hypocrite.
One really needs to evaluate what, how, and why they need personal protection. If a firearm is your chosen method then I suggest seeking professional guidance from a Range Master. Legal ownership and proper TRAINING (this could be fun) should be the course that one should search for if they chose to arm themselves.
Fences block walls, lighting, alarm systems with video monitoring and possibly even a good old barking dog are all other means to protect yourself and your family. There are lots of options, and of course I stress when there is a situation in doubt call the police.
Posted by mattcat25 at 8:40 AM : Apr 17, 2009
Isn't that what Carl Rowan said?
Look it up....
The rest of us need to be armed just for the protection from them.
Posted by raflin1 at 7:51 AM : Apr 17, 2009
How about swimming pools?
Those are a lot of work to clean, too.
And they kill more children than handguns.
I know a man who got stabbed in the chest by his wife, who used a big kitchen knife from the woodblock.
We should ban woodblock knife sets, too.
And knives.
Including box cutters.
And those heavy toenail cutters with the sharp sharp point.
I can't get on the plane with nose hair scissors, but I can with heavy toenail clippers (and I have several times).
Why is that?
You people are weak on facts and strong on ignorant.
Apparently, YOU have no idea what it takes to repeal any Amendment, but it takes 2/3 vote in BOTH HOUSES of Congress, which is 68 votes in the Senate alone. Then it must be ratified by 3/4 of ALL the states which is 38.
The votes are not even close to being there, and many of the latest Dems elected in 2008 are pro-gun.
Stop your FEARmongering and stick with the FACTS!
Posted by evilbusheviks--------------------------
Based on what we saw last year in the narrow Supreme Court decision on private citizens' right to keep and bear arms, it would actually only take one Supreme Court Justice Appointment.