Obama Finally Tells Americans How He Plans to Use Orlando Shooting to Take Their Guns


Mass shootings create a unique political environment. After a violent shooting, the public is impressionable and fearful. They’re in utter shock, and they’ll agree to anything that they think might prevent a similar catastrophe from happening down the road. Thus the reason why gun control measures get pushed so hard by liberal politicians right after mass shootings.

With the recent shooting in Orlando being the most deadly in recent American history, you can imagine how vulnerable it makes American’s 2nd Amendment rights.

Barack Obama has been keeping his plans on how to use the shooting relatively quiet, but now he’s coming forward to unveil his play on the tragedy.


This time it’s not just stricter background checks or tougher regulation. He wants to reawaken the semi-auto rifle ban, and he thinks this is the perfect time to get it passed.

Here’s more from Politico:

The White House is stepping up its efforts to renew the assault weapons ban, while trying to boost separate gun control measures that the Senate plans to vote on next week.

On Monday, White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett will host a mass conference call for the general public “about the need to renew the assault weapons ban and the different gun safety measures the Senate is set to vote on in the coming week.”

Vice President Joe Biden announced the call in a response to a petition on the White House’s “We the People” platform on Friday. The request for a ban on the AR-15 assault-style rifle was posted on Sunday, in the immediate aftermath of the Orlando shooting in which were 49 people were killed, and already had nearly 200,000 signatures by Friday.

“The president and I agree with you,” Biden wrote. “Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines should be banned from civilian ownership.”

The Obama administration has pledged to respond to any petition that accumulates 100,000 signatures in a month. This was “one of fastest we’ve ever had to cross the threshold,” said a White House official.

Obama has long supported the ban, but he has been increasingly vocal about it in recent days, condemning the easy access to “weapons of war” like the Sig Sauer MCX that Omar Mateen used to kill many people at close range. But until Friday’s announcement, it was unclear whether his administration would do anything more substantial to mobilize for a ban.

Hillary Clinton has also stepped up her calls for an assault weapons ban on the trail.

However, on the Hill, Democrats have focused on getting votes for measures with broader support, including barring people on terror watch lists from buying guns and expanding background checks. The Senate is set to vote on variations of those measures on Monday — though barring major changes, none appear likely to pass.

The AR-15 has become the most popular rifle in the country since the original assault weapons ban expired in 2004. In the wake of the Newtown shooting, as gun control groups have become more politically sophisticated, they’ve increasingly focused on measures like background checks to stress that their goal is to take guns out of the hands of dangerous people, not law-abiding Americans. They also not that must gun violence is committed with handguns.

But the role of assault weapons in high-profile mass shootings gives the issue emotional weight. In his response, Biden noted that they were used in in Aurora, Colorado, to kill 12 people; in Roseburg, Oregon, to kill 10 and in Newtown, Connecticut, to kill 26.

“A single person killed that many people in just a few minutes. Not in a war zone. Here in America — in a classroom,” Biden wrote.

Do you think Obama will be successful in getting an “assault weapons” ban signed into law?

Give us your thoughts in the comments.



  1. I hope the heck not!! If so I think that come November there will be a lot of seats changing hands in Washington..

  2. How do we get “common sense” into the heads of politicians? They come up with this comment whenever they want to push through something that is anti- Second Amendment. Why is it “common sense” to disarm law-abiding citizens who had nothing to do with some tragedy but it is politically incorrect to suggest that criminals will not obey gun “control” (read confiscation) laws? Why isn’t it “common sense” to suggest enforcing the thousands of firearm laws already on the books and go after the criminal element rather than target innocent citizens by passing more restrictive, and ultimately ineffective, legislation? I suggest that politicians and other gun control nuts go to the library and get a copy of “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine and read why We the People need to be allowed to keep and bear arms. They need to stop wasting time, effort and money pursuing the innocent and go after the gang-bangers, illegals, drug dealers and others of that ilk. Leave the rest of us alone.

Comments are closed.