Democratic lawmaker: To get gun control, Obama must ‘exploit’ shooting

[jimnyc]

A veteran Democratic lawmaker believes the nation will go along with stronger gun control laws if President Obama “exploits” the Newtown, Conn., tragedy and nudges Congress to action.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who represents portions of New York City, said he was encouraged by Mr. Obama’s statement on Friday afternoon that the mass shooting, which claimed the lives of 20 young children, requires “meaningful action” by Congress, but hopes those words turn into concrete legislation.

“These incidents, these horrible, horrible incidents … are happening more and more frequently. And they will continue to happen more and more frequently until someone with the bully pulpit, and that means the president, takes leadership and pushes Congress,” Mr. Nadler said during an appearance on MSNBC’s “The Ed Show” with Ed Schultz.

Mr. Nadler was asked whether the Newtown tragedy could be the turning point in many Democrats’ longstanding struggle to enact stronger gun laws.

“I think we will be there if the president exploits it, and otherwise we’ll go on to the next” incident, Mr. Nadler said.

Mr. Nadler joins New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten and others who quickly turned their attention to gun control laws in the hours following Friday’s shooting, one of the worst campus massacres in U.S. history

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/14/dem-lawmaker-get-gun-control-obama-must-exploit-sh/

[gabosaurus]

Nice sensationalist reporting by the Moonie Times. Not much of a basis in reality, though.

[mundame]

“These incidents, these horrible, horrible incidents … are happening more and more frequently. And they will continue to happen more and more frequently"

Well, that statement is surely true. I don't think this is necessarily because of guns, however. The trope of violent shooting permeates our society now and is closely associated with powerful, admired behavior in all male minds. They actually train young men with these shooter video games; it must work, the military uses them, too. Training films. And the games give hands-on practice, for hours a day.

It's a doom. It's sure to change by itself eventually, but I can't imagine now what would cause such a change, while everything young males play, watch, or read glorifies killing everyone in sight.

[Robert A Whit]

Nice sensationalist reporting by the Moonie Times. Not much of a basis in reality, though.

I am at a loss how you pick suitable sites for news.

Are you claiming that the report is a lie?

Did you have purpose to smear a newspaper?

Did you expect that the correct media that you follow has not found out about this and if they have not reported, if honest, they will report it?

Your standards seem to be very narrow.

I have a tip. The editors and reporters there are professionals.

[Robert A Whit]

Well, that statement is surely true. I don't think this is necessarily because of guns, however. The trope of violent shooting permeates our society now and is closely associated with powerful, admired behavior in all male minds. They actually train young men with these shooter video games; it must work, the military uses them, too. Training films. And the games give hands-on practice, for hours a day.

It's a doom. It's sure to change by itself eventually, but I can't imagine now what would cause such a change, while everything young males play, watch, or read glorifies killing everyone in sight.

We all manage to get the same news sooner or later.

If the reports are now correct, since the reports jumped all over the place, this could be what took place.

We know he killed his mom first.
We know she owned the guns. And he lived with her.
She went to shooting ranges pretty often it is reported. I assume he had gone with her too.

What set him off? Well, since he and she are both dead, nothing is likely to be said that is solid gold true.

I suspect that he and his mother got into some fight. And since he would be angry in my work up, he ended her life but ambushed her. She was proficient with guns. I doubt he gave her a chance.

Then from the looks of it, something about the school came to mind. Was it something she told him? Maybe she wanted him to go to school and they fought. And she talked agout the school in a way that he got angry about.

I am trying to connect some vague dots that started at his home, involved his mother and dotted right to the classes he shot up.

It was not money. I don't see how he could know those tiny kids and decide somebody keeded killing.

I feel as if something between him and his mother made the school a target. Something said between him and his mother.

She died.

And so did 20 kids and 6 other adults.

A hell of a note I say.

About this leading to more school shootings.

This is not the first time a school got shot at by either a student or some guy like this one.

If you think a lot more kids will die this way due to this shooting, who knows for sure.

No law would have saved those kids. Being in bullet proof classes and with locked steel doors would work. So, make classes bullet proof. No need to change the law.

[mundame]

No law would have saved those kids. Being in bullet proof classes and with locked steel doors would work. So, make classes bullet proof. No need to change the law.

Well, that's an idea.....combine bullet-proof classrooms with Gabby's school that has a switch that the principal can click and lock everyone inside every room all at once.

And if that doesn't work we could try Secret Service protection for every classroom..........


Anyway, I read Lanzi shot his mother in the head while she was sleeping, in her bed early in the morning. I guess that's true; hard to say.