Should Obama pursue gun control without Congress?

  • Yes, given that Congress in unable to perform even the most basic functions of their job

    Barack Obama should try to do just about everything he can without Congress. The US Congress may be more susceptible to lobbying influences than any other entity in government in the United States. As such, it has become nearly impossible to pass any meaningful legislation through the House in the last 4 years or more. Most Americans agree that something has to be done about the availability of assault weapons in this country, even if many of their representatives in government have dissenting opinions or other obligations.

  • We the People

    Of course. If the president is truly going to be a custodian of the welfare of our people and our children then he must pursue congress to take serious steps to address the epidemic of gun violence in the nation. Despite the Second Amendment, many people see the need to strategically confront the issue of gun control and as such, Obama representing the nation, should confront (as he already has) congress to pass legislation that engenders responsible gun control reforms.

  • Yes, because Congress won't help him.

    The way our Congress is divided is a clear indicator that it is time for President Obama to get tough and use his powers as President. He has the power to pursue gun control and make a positive difference. Why is gun control so feared? Given half a chance, it just might prove to be a positive step in keeping our citizens safe when they go out in public.

  • He Does Not Have That Right Or Power

    Love the gun or hate it that would be an abuse of power in which he does not have the authority to carry out -- the scary thing is: most Americans are unfamiliar with what elected officials can and can not do. Furthermore, a lot of people dismiss what the authority figure does if it is their guy doing it. Bush is guilty of abuse just like Obama is... Obama signed measures in that limited free speech and protest. Where is the liberal outrage? Oh, I guess it is Ok if their guy is doing it. (Bush did similar reaches and it was met with opposition) Please consider thinking independently of your political party and remember that it is supposed to be the will of the people and not the leader.

  • The second amendment is there to ensure we always have the first amendment!

    All anti gun people need to seriously consider that and maybe just maybe read about about Madison (he wrote a lot of the constitution and there are published letters that real why he wanted the second amendment)... Even during the 1700s European countries were not armed like we were and did not have the rights we have... And the second amendment was there to safeguard the first....

  • Our Constitutional Rights

    The Constitution gives Americans the right to keep an bear arms, this Amendment was put in place to ensure that no one in power cold disarm the general populace. The government has banned drugs and yet half of prison population is made up of drug dealers and drug users. The real ploy behind this is government control just like western Europe. If they like that lifestyle so much maybe they should move to these other countries instead of messing ours up.

  • Power Grab

    This guy wants to control everything. His way or the highway. Any resistance he encounters he views as ignorant and goes forward with his own will. It must stop. This is a democracy, not a dictatorship. Regardless of whether I was for or against gun control I would say this is an unacceptable level of power for one man.

  • Gun control does not work. Criminals are still criminals.

    Taking away firearms to upstanding citizens is a mistake. We need firearms for protection against criminals, foreign enemies, and a tyrant government. I also enjoy target shooting with friends and family. Out country was built on the constitution, taking away our constitutional rights is wrong and we should not stand for it. Now is the time to act contact the senate and oppose any and all gun control bill's.

  • Absolutely not.

    We did not elect a king, we elected a president that should be looking to give us more rights not less. To use gun control as a fix for Newtown is like changing out the rear-view mirror because your transmission failed. No part of the gun control provisions mentioned by Obama or Feinstein would have done anything to prevent Newtown. It seriously makes no sense when you find that the most violent and murderous places in the US are places with the most strict gun control.

  • Nope.

    It is precisely actions like that which led to the 2nd Amendment being enacted in the first place. Legislation without representation amounts to tyranny. It was just that sort of thing that led to the revolutionary war as documented in our 'Declaration of Independence." Our government has the authority to make laws with the 'consent of the governed' and we have a Constitutional (legislative) process that must be followed for doing so.

  • It is our second Amendment right!

    If we allow the president to take away guns to law abiding citizens, then we will be on the road to give up our civil liberties. The people who are going to give up guns would be good law abiding citizens, the criminals will by their weapons in the black market. If the criminals know that law abiding citizens do not have guns crime will increase, and shootings will become more common.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.