January 30th, 2013
09:43 AM ET
2 years ago

Live Blog: Senate hearing on gun violence


























































Here's an AR-15:

















































Filed under: Gabrielle Giffords • Gun rights • NRA
soundoff (140 Responses)
  1. Lynn

    Ban Sylvester Stallones new movie, "Bullet To the Head." Opening SOON! Not our 2nd Amendment Right!
    In Brazil guns are OUT LAWED! Brazil has the HIGHEST murder rate in the world from murders by GUNS . Banning our weapons, taking away our right to bare arms is not the answer! Look how many cases have arisen in the news here of late that if the person at home did not have a gun to protect them selves they would now be dead! All gun control is, is a way that our GOVERNMENT IS CONTROLLING US! Assault weapons were banned in Colorado..Then the Columbine shooting happened. If some angry nut is wanting to kill they will find any means to get their violent act done. By a car, bomb,bow and arrow,gas,how ever they can find a way they will accomplish it. I find it difficult for me even writing those things I just did.

    What needs to be controlled is how we bring up our children in the world today. BAN VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES! mOVIES. Like the new Sylvester Stallone movie, "Bullet in The Head." Nothing is being said, or recalled or banned on this move to open in movie houses soon! Discipline and morals, good values must happen. Instead the government is taking God out of everything and our children of today are being raised by the Time Out generation! We see what taking God out of our schools and lives has done. Bring God back into our lives and honor Him and see what wonderful changes will then come. These terrible things going on today is mostly because people have turned away from God and from our government taking God away. Wake up America DO NOT LET OUR GOVERNMENT CONTROL US! WE THE PEOPLE! OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE FOR THE PEOPLE! NOT CHANGE OUR CONSTITUTION IN ORDER TO CONTROL US. NOT CHANGE OUR AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

    January 30, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  2. rs


    does anyone else see something wrong with a mentally disabled permanently traumatized woman advocating for gun laws?

    Does anything seem odd to you about her getting shot by a deeply disturbed individual with weapons he bought locally, with ammo he bought at WalMart?

    Hint: It should be disturbing!

    January 30, 2013 02:23 pm at 2:23 pm |
  3. Freedom

    I find this very funny... the polarity and the justification from the NRA.
    Now before i get into a huge idiorcacy I am warning this is long ... and let me make 2 point.

    1. the NRA Child Program... has anyone bothered to look at what communities have had access to this... demographics? Might want to look at that.

    2. NRA needs to stop being used as a credibale source for gun owners. After today I have found the NRA to be more damaging than beneficial to gun owners. The level of absolute no compromising for the sake of everyone because of the "my way or nothing" attitude was just embarrassing.

    3. When the NRA talks about how they speak for gun owners... I find this miss leading. Have you ever applied for the NRA. Might want to take a look at their membership application process. When they state they speak for the "rational person" how do they know? As the Officer said, and many other officers i know say, you dont know your neighbor, you think you do, but you dont!!! In sight, your neighbor lives next to you everyday, you probably even exchange words, you probably have dinner together now and then. So please tell me about this double standard. How can the NRA speak for rational minded people when it does not know the majority of the people in its affiliation. KKK, Black Panther, other national terrorist people are in the group... but they dont know them, because their member ship is not a meet and great. Its a apply send a check. So to state (my point) that NRA speaks for the majority of rational minded americans who are law abiding citizens.... how do you know that for sure????

    Last point. I was on the fence about the gun issue. I have a gun in my house hould. I have served this country. Here is what i know. That the military, national security people, and federal employees that utilize weapons are all HOPEFUL sane (because i have met nutjobs in uniform or civil positions). I know that people change. I know that someone is sane today, but could loose their marble due to extreme or pressing circumstances... ohh say... WAR and PTSD. I have seen military personnel attack each other, threaten each others lives, and attempt murder too... they are all human. Yet they went through gun saftey. When i think of what happened in TX where a guy went on a kiling spree at a base... I can say, and he was supposed to be "rational minded person" and he was accepted in the military. I know ex criminals in the military. So i am sorry NRA... there needs to be a compromise.
    I have made a stance now, and that is better enforcement of gun laws, stronger punishment (not 5 yrs but 20yrs etc), and no mass chamber round guns. If it can shoot off more than 4 shots with one trigger press.. then its OVER kill. I dont care about the look of it (which i agree intimidation is a great tool) i care about the damage.

    I ask my conservative americans and gun rights fanatics this question. If you want to say it is a percentage or sub group of people (be it mentally ill or criminal) that is ruining the reputation of gun owners and there for NO BANS what so ever should be applied, to reconsider your position on Social programs. Ex.. it is a percentage in social programs (unemployment, welfare, social security) that is ruining the reputation for those that utilize it. So there for, just like guns, the percent of some is damaging the rights or abilities of others. If Guns are not to be banned (instead of reforming laws, or some banning) then social programs are not to be stopped (instead of reforming laws, or stopping) Its called a compromise. But here is the kicker... people on welfare or social programs (ohh say veteran hospitals) are asking for something that has not killed people... its dented your wallet.. and for every tax payer that has contributed maybe those tax dollars have provided medical care to assist in someone recovery! Which had they not had, they would have been another killer?

    just a thought.

    January 30, 2013 02:26 pm at 2:26 pm |
  4. GulpOff

    NRA should be outlawed.
    ALL guns should carry 75% state tax, nationwide.
    P.S. pun intended.

    January 30, 2013 02:35 pm at 2:35 pm |
  5. Rudy NYC

    what does NRA not understand about a "WELL REGULATED " militia?

    The 2nd amendment gives us the right to bear arms as part of a "well regulated militia ". Clearly the founding fathers intended for the government to be the regulator of the militia they were creating (not the NRA) so if the gov. deems AK 47s not necessary equipment fot their militia then the 2nd amendment gives the right/responsibility to the gov to ban that firearm.
    Many on the right would argue that the term "regulated" in this context means "controlled", as in "well trained".

    Consder the era in which it was written, something which 2nd Amendment fanatics choose to ignore. There were no local police forces, mrely militias made of citizens. There was no national army. In fact, Pres. Washington had just given a State of the Union address calling for the formation of a national militia.

    They wanted the same style of army that won the freedom of the new nation. They didn't want an army of conscripts and mercenaries; whose allegaiances could be easily compromised. They wanted an army comprised of citizens to the exclusion of none. The 2nd Amendment defined how the process of creating a national militia to defend the nation was to proceed.

  6. Scare The Pilgrims

    The Mess In Connecticut – For Your Information, The AR-15 was made by The Colt Industries Firearms Division, The Colt Company is in Hartford Connecticut and The Colt Firearms Company is a UNITED AUTO WORKERS UNIONIZED work force that being the UAW LOCAL 376...WHO BOUGHT the company and re-named it The Colt Firearms Manufacturing Company.
    ending a 50 month dispute,,Why has CNN Not made this news ????

    January 30, 2013 02:37 pm at 2:37 pm |
  7. kd

    As far as the second admendment goes, when statements within a sentance are seperated by commas they are a separate part of the complete sentence(the right of the people to bear arms)(shall not be infringed).

    January 30, 2013 02:41 pm at 2:41 pm |
  8. Canuck

    "Save the children... save the children....... but let's support "Pro-Choice." "

    Come on, you are comparing walking , breathing children to fetuses – they are not the same thing (refer to the recent decision by the RC church) – please stay on topic.

    January 30, 2013 02:59 pm at 2:59 pm |
  9. Liza

    God Bless her!

    January 30, 2013 03:00 pm at 3:00 pm |
  10. Rashad James-Davis

    I agree with an above poster with how things currently operate that if someone wants to harm another person with a weapon they will obtain it by any means, but violence is a "war" I believe and with out the proper education of this situation what can we expect to accomplish? I strongly believe all weapons designed to kill should be banned and outlaw and this "war" (what I'm calling it) should really be fought in this nation by all means. And the way you fight this "war" is by attacking all the things that spark violent acts like poor living conditions and environments, the lack of education of people, mental health issues, drugs and substance abuse, and teach and treat people how to treat and live amongst each other. As a person of faith it's hard to convey gods message as a mere person but I also believe god should be apart of the government. Aren't we one nation under god? And if we are we need to try to have a better understanding for what he wants for us as people and a nation.

    January 30, 2013 03:34 pm at 3:34 pm |
  11. Cwhat'sNew

    THE single most effective and simplest solution is to SEPARATE guns, any types of guys from criminals/mentally-ills. Therefore 1) Strict and universal background check; 2) Laws require secure storage of all guns by legitimate gun owners; 3) Annual license review on issues, including gun storage and updated mental and criminal status. PERIOD.

    This is as simple as separating drunk driver from driving, by removing their driving licenses.

    January 30, 2013 03:53 pm at 3:53 pm |
  12. Evelyn Connaway

    After reading many comments, I wonder where people get the idea that liberals or democrats don't have guns and know how to use them for the purpose they were intended. I used them to defend myself and property, kill snakes, etc., My husband used them to hunt, as did my Father and my brothers and I when we were young and lived on a farm in Alabama 52 years ago. As long as I could walk my property, I always had a gun strapped on or in my hand. People have strange ideas about our government and how we should live our lives, my democratic president isn't trying to take our freedom and rights away. We have laws to live by in everything we do, and the proper use for a gun should be one of them. We have always had laws, but no one really enforced them. It's time we do and the majority wants gun control.

    January 30, 2013 03:58 pm at 3:58 pm |
  13. Thaddeus Kozubal

    After the NRA has come so close to having each citizen arm her(him)self to the teeth with concealed carry restrictions being lifted in almost all states and all that money being lavished on Congressmen by lobbyists, it will be almost impossible for LaPierre to turn back now. After all, he has NOT achieved his goal of having every citizen carrying an AR-15 slung on their shoulder and a pistol on each hip. Until every school child carries a sidearm, he cannot rest. Next, he will work the zoo route to see how many monkeys he can get to carry firearms. It's part of the republican philosophy to enable all firearms manufacturers to make as much money as possible from the "presents" and graft and corruption that's been lavished on Congress. Don't you find it hypocritical that NO firearms are allowed on Capital Hill? Why, I think each and every Congressman be required to carry firearms so we could cut out all the police protection and cut the cost of government, don't you? That's where LaPierre and the NRA should turn their attention next, don't you think? You can't enter the visitor's balcony without a firearm. If you don't have one, you can rent one in the lobby before entering for a nominal fee which is donated pro rata to each congressman in attendance that day. That's only fair and equitable to do so. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Anyone caught in the balcony without a firearm should be fined and/or imprisoned for attending not properly armed. We need that written into the law. We also need a 100% surcharge on ALL gun publications so that we can use those funds to force the state governments to follow suit. If you are not carrying in public, you are NOT dressed properly to be there. There should be nowhere you can be without carrying. Wild Bill Hickok would be proud!!!!

    January 30, 2013 04:01 pm at 4:01 pm |
  14. what does NRA not understand about a "WELL REGULATED " militia?

    "they wanted the same style of army that won the freedom of the new nation"

    ok but at that time to accmplish this it was necesary to to rely on a well armed citizenry. As the federal gov. faced other challenge, indian wars, war of 1812, Civil War, Mexican War, WWI and WWII it had to rely more on full time military (supported by taxes) to defend the new nation and its citizens.

    January 30, 2013 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  15. sonny chapman

    Yes, the ban on Assault Weapons & high capacity clips may be "Feel Good " Legislation. But it would honor the slaughter of all those who have died or been wounded since Macho Man George W. let the previous ban expire in 2004. P.S.-that's a lotta folks !

    January 30, 2013 04:58 pm at 4:58 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6