reinstate AWB

[hatidua]

From yesterday, the most relevant aspects to 2A are from the midpoint on down:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/06/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-862012

[Wiggity]

WTF Carney is so full of diarrhea. He beats around the bush to at stupid extent, but I guess that is to be expected. He answers every single gun question with the phrase " making it harder for those who should not have weapons under existing law from obtaining them" so many times its just stupid then beats around the bush when it comes to actual gun laws.

Not only that, he LIES about it. He says Obama and himself do not support new gun legislation and want to protect 2A rights, then says they both support the AWB, which would be new legislation.

He also uses the phrase "protecting 2A rights" about 312341235 times. Horseshit.

[HoneyBadger]

I added some emphasis to ease the reading for you:


Q Just returning to guns for a moment. You’ve said, in response to a bunch of questions, that he supports enforcing -- better enforcing existing laws. His position in the past has been in favor of renewing the assault weapons ban, which would, at this point, be a new law. He also said in New Orleans that AK-47s belong on the battlefield, not on the streets. Does he still support that legislation?

MR. CARNEY: He does. And I’ve said that before from the podium in the last week, that he does support renewing the assault weapons ban. I think what I’ve noted in the past, and what I noted here, is that there has been reluctance by Congress to pass that renewal.

Q What’s considered sort of an update of that legislation is the amendment that you were asked about a couple of times last week, which was to ban high-capacity magazines. That’s viewed by advocates as essentially accomplishing the same thing in a better way. And when you were asked about that in the past, you didn’t have a position. Do you have -- does the administration have a position on that?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think the legislation on this issue broadly, whether it’s the specific piece of legislation that you mention -- if such legislation emerges, the President will evaluate it, the White House will evaluate it, guided by the principles that I talked about earlier, which is his desire to make it harder for people who should not have weapons under existing law from getting them, and under the principle that we should not infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of American citizens. But I’m not going to speculate about pieces of suggested legislation. If something emerges from Congress we’ll certainly evaluate it.

Q Well, it's introduced; it wasn’t just --

MR. CARNEY: Well, I know, but -- and I think we’ve noted where Congress is on these issues. If something emerges from Congress we’ll certainly evaluate it.

Q And the other thing you talk about on this issue is the national dialogue on issues beyond just gun control, but violence, and you point out that he gave that speech. Does he feel like that speech has sort of accomplished his part of this dialogue, and now it’s up to others?

MR. CARNEY: I’m sure he will discuss these issues again in the future. I think you’ve asked on a number of occasions for specific dates when he might speak again. I don’t have any announcements to make on that. But the President has addressed this on several occasions and I’m sure will again in the future.

Q Does he feel like that speech accomplished its purpose?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t think he does feel that the goal of addressing violence in America has been achieved, and that’s why we need to continue to work collectively on efforts across the board to reduce violence in America.

Christi.

Q Jay, when the President disagrees with Congress’s decision not to take up legislation like this, he goes out in the country and tries to pressure them publicly, and even shame them into doing that. Is this -- does this fall under the same category, the assault weapons ban, or some version of it?

MR. CARNEY: There’s a lot of legislation the President has a position on. He believes -- his support for renewal hasn’t changed. I think we all recognize the situation in Congress with regards to that particular proposal as well as others. The President is focused, as he talked about in New Orleans, on doing what he can, through his Department of Justice, to take common- sense measures that will enhance our security by improving background checks and making it harder for those who should not have weapons under existing law from obtaining them, and working more broadly to address the issue of violence in America. Because, as I’ve said now on a couple of occasions, the issue, as the President sees it, transcends legislation relating to guns; it has to do with a whole variety of factors, and should be addressed accordingly.

Q But he’s been successful at pressuring Congress to take up specific legislation. Does he view this as less possible?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I’m not going to grade possibilities here. I think the President believes that we should -- with Congress where possible, but administratively where allowed -- take measures that enhance security by making it harder for those who should not have these weapons under existing law from obtaining them, but also protect our Second Amendment rights. And he’ll continue to do that.

April.

Q Thank you. Going back to the gun issue, what is the threshold when this administration will say when it’s time to take the gun issue out of that broad basket of violence and focus straight on -- I mean, in recent weeks we’ve had two fatal, horrific shootings. When does this administration take it out of that violence basket and put a spotlight specifically on it?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think, April, the question, as the President discussed in New Orleans, is not one of specific high-profile incidents alone. And the unfortunate reality is that while these terrible incidents get a lot of headlines, there is violence in America every day.

Q And a lot of it is gun violence.

MR. CARNEY: No question. But that's why we have to work collectively towards addressing these issues in ways that reduce violence and include efforts to keep kids in school, keep them off the streets and from joining gangs, in efforts to, as the President has done through his Department of Justice, make it harder for criminals and others who should not have weapons under existing law from obtaining them. That's the kind of comprehensive approach the President thinks we ought to adopt, and that he has adopted in office.

Q But, Jay, many of these acts you can't police against -- many in law enforcement say you can't police against them. So when you can't police against something like that, it would seem that the other half would deal with issues of gun control, of the assault weapons ban being -- not renewing, but creating a new assault weapons ban. Why not now? Why not now?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I think I’ve answered this question a bunch, but the President’s approach is that we should work with Congress where possible, and administratively where allowed, to advance common-sense measures that enhance our security, that keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and others who shouldn’t have them under existing law, but that protect Second Amendment rights, which the President thinks is an important goal as well.

I think that I can say that that’s the President’s approach. You heard it recently in New Orleans. I’m sure you’ll hear from him again on this issue. But I don’t expect his broader view here about the broader problem with violence in America is going to change because of a specific incident. It’s a broader problem that needs to be addressed from a variety of fronts.

Q My last question -- so is the White House Office of Legislative Affairs actively working with congressional leaders, congressional staffers, now on issues of gun control and a new assault weapons ban?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have any legislative update for you. I think Congress is out of session at the moment.


Twice he says that the President want "Common-sense" measures. Don't let it fool you.

[Zundfolge]

I say go for it Barry ... one of the big reasons we never had a President Algore is because of Bill's dumbass AWB.

He's not going to get it passed the current congress and the attempt will make sure the house, senate and whitehouse all go (R).

[yankeefan98121]

Even if Romney losses to cuntlips keeping the house and taking the Senate is just as important

[Pancho Villa]

Unless the dems somehow take both houses and the presidency, and feel like another 10 years without that immediately following the next election, this ain't happening.

As much beef as I have with the NRA, it is important enough a lobby that a lot of dems won't bother getting booted out.

I dislike Obama for his views, certainly, but I rate the likelihood of this as really low.

[Whistler]

Anybody else notice the morning news ran more "gun violence" follow-up stories this morning than usual, several in a row in fact. Think it's a coincidence the POTUS is speaking here today?

Not usually a tinfoil hat kind of guy but some things just sort of jump out at you.

[Peep]

[hatidua]

As much beef as I have with the NRA, it is important enough a lobby that a lot of dems won't bother getting booted out.

Exactly. For all their faults, the NRA is still the 800 pound gorilla in the corner that gives opponents pause. Their methodology may not be ideal but no other 2A organization even comes close to their level of clout with folks running for office (or trying to stay in office).

[yankeefan98121]

This ^^^^

I agree they have their faults and their messge and tactic are not always in alignment but they are the 800 Gorilla

[Singlestack]

+1 again

Although Dudley and RMGO/NAGR has a more pure pro-2A position, NRA has the greatest influence in Washington and gives the most fear to the gun-grabbers.

Singlestack

[Aloha_Shooter]

Given Obama's demonstrated predilection for ignoring Congress and his requirement for their advice and consent, we can't afford to think about just holding on to the House and/or taking the Senate. If he was Jimmy Carter, another ineffectual boob but one who actually cared about the Constitution and doing what was right, those would be sufficient but this guy believes Executive Orders are sufficient legislation.

Anyone still holding on to "purity" of position will be even more responsible for an Obama second term than the brainless zombies that buy his "message" and vote for him. We have enough morons who actually claim to like him without having people who don't throwing their votes away in pointless exercises because they "don't see a difference."

[Zundfolge]

Given Obama's demonstrated predilection for ignoring Congress and his requirement for their advice and consent, we can't afford to think about just holding on to the House and/or taking the Senate. If he was Jimmy Carter, another ineffectual boob but one who actually cared about the Constitution and doing what was right, those would be sufficient but this guy believes Executive Orders are sufficient legislation.

Anyone still holding on to "purity" of position will be even more responsible for an Obama second term than the brainless zombies that buy his "message" and vote for him. We have enough morons who actually claim to like him without having people who don't throwing their votes away in pointless exercises because they "don't see a difference."
As I've said a dozen times if I've said it once; If Obama is re-elected, America is over. Period.