Gun control outlined

Plan includes assault weapon ban, clip limits

“This is an assault on our natural right of self-defense. Five rounds in a .38 are not enough to stop a home invasion. An AR-15 is an appropriate weapon.” Woody jenkins,   East Baton Rouge Parish  Republican Party chairman

Louisiana’s congressional delegation responded in a partisan fashion to President Barack Obama’s gun control proposals Wednesday with the Republicans in staunch opposition and the two Democrats supporting at least portions of the package.

Obama proposed the largest gun control effort in 20 years — since the previous, now-expired assault weapons ban — to request universal background checks and bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the Newtown, Conn., school massacre.

Specifically, Obama wants to limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds as was the case in the 1994 assault weapons ban.

The president’s plan also includes beefing up mental health services for students and young adults.

Obama also used his presidential powers to enact 23 measures that don’t require the backing of lawmakers.

The president’s executive actions include ordering federal agencies to make more data available for background checks; appointing a director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; and directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to research gun violence.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., argued in defense of her “strong” support of Second Amendment rights.

“That said, last month’s tragedy in Newtown, Conn., has become all too familiar,” Landrieu said in a prepared statement. “We must find a way to balance our Second Amendment rights with the challenges of mental illness, criminal behavior and the safety of our schools and communities.”

Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-Baton Rouge, said the primary focus should be on mental health issues and not gun control.

“The common thread in these crimes was untreated mental illness,” Cassidy said.

“Funding for mental illness is often misused and ineffective. If we are serious, this should be our focus,” he added.

But the other congressman who now serves Baton Rouge as well as neighborhoods along the Mississippi River into New Orleans, Democratic Rep. Cedric Richmond, said the gun control and mental health problems all need to be addressed.

“These senseless shootings must stop. Our actions moving forward will have a lasting impact on the safety of our families and communities, whether it’s in Colorado, Connecticut or Louisiana,” Richmond said.

The president, speaking at White House ceremony, focused his attention on the divided Congress, saying only lawmakers could enact the most effective measures for preventing more mass shootings.

“To make a real and lasting difference, Congress must act,” Obama said. “And Congress must act soon.”

The president vowed to use “whatever weight this office holds” to press lawmakers into action on his $500 million plan.

He also is calling for improvements in school safety, including putting 1,000 police officers in schools and bolstering mental health care by training more health professionals to deal with young people who may be at risk.

Even supportive lawmakers say the president’s gun control proposals — most of which are opposed by the powerful National Rifle Association — face long odds on Capitol Hill.

The office of House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, was noncommittal to the president’s package of proposed legislation, but signaled no urgency to act.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said ahead of Obama’s presentation that he didn’t know whether an assault weapons ban could pass the Senate, but said there are some measures that can, such as improved background checks.

Acknowledging the tough fight ahead, Obama said there will be pundits, politicians and special interest groups that will seek to “gin up fear” that the White House wants to take away the right to own a gun.

“Any attempt by President Obama to take away the gun rights of law-abiding Americans will be met with strong bipartisan opposition in Congress,” said Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson.

“President Obama has no business interjecting himself in the doctor-patient relationship by pressuring medical professionals to ask their patients what kind of guns they own in their homes. President Obama’s latest executive orders give new meaning to the term ‘house call,’ ” he added.

Likewise, Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-Quitman, said he opposes any proposal that “tramples” on the Second Amendment.

“This proposal will not stop criminals from getting their hands on weapons and using them for harm. Instead, the suggested policy will punish law-abiding citizens by placing undue restrictions on valid activities involving firearms,” he said.

In Louisiana, Gov. Bobby Jindal said in prepared statement released by his Press Office: “As a strong supporter of constitutional gun rights, I believe the president is wrong to use a school shooting to undermine the Second Amendment. … I support common-sense legislation that will protect our kids and keep guns out of the hands of the seriously mentally ill through enhanced mental health reporting standards.”

Associated Press writers
Julie Pace, Erica Werner, Ken Thomas and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (56)


1) Comment by nimby? - 18/01/2013

Tea_Slayer , so have I . tho we've had our differences I trust and respect your words . but if I'm getting a vehicle repaired I take it to a mechanic , not someone who's read a few books ....

2) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 18/01/2013

Well, nimby... I've handled everything from a .22 pistol to .50 cal machine gun so you can vent all you want.

3) Comment by nimby? - 18/01/2013

sorry to vent , but lately I've noticed a steady stream of "intellectuals" who've never held a gun all of a sudden become weapons experts , amazing .

4) Comment by billynurse - 18/01/2013

Isn't it cute how the prez stages his background with a selection of children. The show must go on.

5) Comment by billynurse - 18/01/2013

To those who want to blindly trust the intentions of a central government, I guess it's easy to label others as "paranoid gun-toting whatevers". You can tell yourself that this administration is altruistically acting only to protect from the violence. This is ALL about government power. It's taken...one...step...at...a...time....

6) Comment by billynurse - 18/01/2013

I can agree with universal background checks , as long as the buyers(law-abiding, mind you) aren't placed in a government "watch list" with red flags, etc.

7) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 18/01/2013

Sandy is wrong. None of the President's proposals includes forfeiture upon death. Sen Feinstein introduced that as part of her legislation well before the President put out his proposal.

8) Comment by HerbF - 18/01/2013

Sandy: That's interesting, and it sounds as if it could be true. Where did you find that information?

9) Comment by Sandy - 18/01/2013

Actually, you are wrong about that DMJ. If you own a firearm that is on the list of those banned, you are allowed to keep it, but upon your death, it becomes the property of the government. You are not allowed to pass that firearm (your own private property) on to your son or daughter. I call that seizure of guns.

10) Comment by DMJ - 18/01/2013

For those short of attention span and thick of skull... none of the President's proposed policies involve siezing guns or outlawing all guns. And I'll point this out yet again- what good are gun laws in one city when that city is surrounded by a country with lax gun laws? Gun control can't work on a city-by-city basis. And by the way ScotB, yes we have free speech, but there are limits when it comes to public safety. We don't have unfettered, unlimited free speech. Don't believe me? Go threaten the governor and see what happens. Go lie in court, file a false police report... Starting to make sense?

11) Comment by ScotB - 18/01/2013

Yep. All we need is a law outlawing guns. Like they have in Chicago. See how well that works? Or like those laws that outlaw heroin, marijuana, and cocaine. Works great! "The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." The founders had a suspicion that the government might want to take away the people's weapons one day and decided that it was one of the first limits to government power in the bill of rights, right after the right to tell the government what you think.

12) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

Ahh, I see.. Well....Whatever reduces accessibility (which, in my opinion, is the source of the problem) is cool with me. I'm surprised and a little disheartened that a new excise tax on ammunition isn't included in this round of gun control measures. This would disincentivize the buying of lots of ammo and the proceeds could go to law enforcement. Whenever President Obama returns my phone call, I'll make sure and mention it.

13) Comment by nimby? - 17/01/2013

DMJ , you missed the point . if I bought a handgun for my wife or daughter I'd prefer something reliable , and will pay for it . a quality weapon is going to cost more , making it less accessible .

14) Comment by brhope - 17/01/2013

I blame the NRA and gun nuts for this. The NRA is like the kid on the playground with toy everyone wants, but knows the teacher will take it away. So instead running around bragging about it and showing off and make phone apps and demanding armed guards at schools. Shut your mouth and be cool. The NRA should have been a little more "humble" with the "Assault weapon" Marketing. Because THATS ALL THIS! ...MARKETING. No you payed for a future cache of weapons for the gov., when they come get them, cause they know who has them and where to get them.

15) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

Nimby, glad you agree. And about selling weapons of quality.... we wouldn't want some nutjob buying a gun that didn't work, now would we? Indeed, the last thing we want is someone buying a dangerous gun.

16) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

I didn't come up with the figure. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence did. Maybe you've heard of it. It was founded by and named after Ronald Reagan's Republican press secretary who was shot in the head by someone who bought a gun legally.

17) Comment by The_Host - 17/01/2013

DMJ can you please cite where you get this 40% of guns being bought are at gun shows figure? I have heard it said many times by liberals but for the life of me can not figure out how anyone could know what the % might be. That is like saying you know you are catching 12% of the drugs coming into the country. How can you lay a claim to a certain percentage of a totally UNKNOWN number? I realize you are all mathematically challenged. I will give you a simple example. I have a 3 digit number in my head, please tell me what 40% of it amounts to? You can't do it and you never will be able to do it. In order to know what % of something is happening you have to know the total number to begin with. For things that are not known where exactly does one go to get the % of that number? Nowhere that is where.

18) Comment by HerbF - 17/01/2013

Mark: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151226122356275&set=a.180479986274.135777.177486166274&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf

19) Comment by nimby? - 17/01/2013

DMJ , agreed on the gun shows . I'd prefer that if someone wants a weapon they pay more for something of quality , dependable . not something that could jam or explode in your hand .

20) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 17/01/2013

hey guys, ever heard of the Militia Acts of 1792? or eh Militia Act of 1903? Of course not because the gun nuts ignore the fact that 5 months after the Bill of Rights were ratified, Congress enacted legislation REGULATING the militia... and it codified the President's authority to federalize those militias, and get this...gun owners were required to show up for muster where their weapons and gear were inspected... so anyone who wants to follow the Constitution, just follow this link... http://www.nationalguard.com/car

21) Comment by Chucky - 17/01/2013

The one-eyed man is king in the valley of the blind, please give up your guns.

22) Comment by Whatnow - 17/01/2013

Letters from children to Obama: Dear President Obama, We wrote you a letter asking for you not to leave us all your debt. Can we be on TV, too?

23) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

Ok, so no smaller magazines? Hmm... what about closing the gun show loophole? After all, 40% of all gun sales are conducted without any background check whatsoever.

24) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 17/01/2013

Maybe Herb can teach us all the constitutional basis for Emperor Obama to be doing any of this. What REALLY should be discussed is impeachment.

25) Comment by Whatnow - 17/01/2013

This guy makes sense.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3t7j2tUec&sns=fb.

26) Comment by nimby? - 17/01/2013

the larger the magazine the more likely it will jam . many of the assault type weapons purchased at gun shows or over the internet are made in China . they are of poor quality , unreliable . true gun enthusiast would not consider owning them . close that loophole . only allow sales of guns made in the U.S.

27) Comment by HerbF - 17/01/2013

And, it's amazing the number of constitutional "scholars" on this thread. First, there was ALREADY a law that limited assult weapons. It was not unconstitutional, so why do you think this one will be? Second, NO one on any of the talk shows is even remotely entertaining the possibility that these laws would be unconstitutional. Do you think that maybe they just overlooked that? If so, please call them and tell them. I'm sure they'll be greatful. >>>> It seems that willfully exposing obvious ignorance doesn't bother you at all.

28) Comment by Whatnow - 17/01/2013

The one time Democrats wouldn't use children as a prop is at a pro-choice rally. Before a robber robs a store or kills someone, I'm sure he is very sure that he follows the law and only has a gun with seven bullets. He surely wants to make sure his gun is legal.

29) Comment by HerbF - 17/01/2013

gman: The fact that other nations with gun control have much, much less gun fatalities, indicates that gun control laws are nor "useless".

30) Comment by gman70726 - 17/01/2013

DMJ-"Cassidy said the common threat was untreated illness? That's impossible to say, as Adam Lanza was never diagnosed and is now dead." Absolutely, totally sane people grab weapons and kill their parents and dozens of other strangers in an afternoon. Embarrassing is the fact that you think this kid could possibly ahve been sane and you attempt to advise everyon that already failed laws will be stronger with more useless laws.

31) Comment by HerbF - 17/01/2013

It's a good start, but it'll probably take some time to get Congress to go further. Probably after the 2014 midterms we can get something done.

32) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 17/01/2013

2 DMJ first it is a magazine, not a clip, secondly..... smaller magazines = more magazines. This would not have changed a thing in the recent shootings and speaking of embarrassing, the rate YOUR people are killing each other is very embarrassing.

33) Comment by Whatnow - 17/01/2013

Bans on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones given to the drug cartel CITIZENS of Mexico by our government? Obama forgets there's a Constitution. Yes, he keeps telling us he won reelection. Congratulations, but guess what? The Constitution wasn't up for election, it's not up for a referendum. He has to comply with it, too.

34) Comment by nimby? - 17/01/2013

or if guns from one country happen to find there way into another , such as .... if someone gets guns from Virginia, Maryland or over the internet and brings them into D.C. they are breaking the law and should be arrested , period .

35) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 17/01/2013

Poor DMJ, and others. They just cannot comprehend and accept the fact the federal government has NO authority to do any of this. None.

36) Comment by phil - 17/01/2013

half a $billion added to the expenses of government for something that has already been studied over and over? For me that is also big news. While we are trying to solve the national debt problem, another $500 million program is added? We might need to solve this problem, but what is really out of control is spending by our President.

37) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

Seriously though....what's the problem with limiting clip size? Smaller clips would have lessened the damage in Tuscon, Aurora and Newtown....not to mention all the regular gun violence in which large capacity clips were used.

38) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

The D.C. handgun ban always comes up... Ok, first of all, how long was the ban in place? Right. Secondly, city-by-city regulation of guns is almost pointless. Think about it. What good is a one-city ban in a city that's surrounded by a country without said ban? People can just as easily get guns from Virginia, Maryland or over the internet. Gun control has to be nationwide for it to do any good.

39) Comment by Springer98 - 17/01/2013

Why isn't there outrage over the almost monotonous black on black killings in the inner cities? Many young lives are snuffed out regularly. How many of the killings that I'm referring to will be prevented by an assault weapons ban? Did the total ban in Washington D. C. make any difference at all in the homicide rate?

40) Comment by DMJ - 17/01/2013

Cassidy said the common threat was untreated illness? That's impossible to say, as Adam Lanza was never diagnosed and is now dead. Maybe... But the common thread that we KNOW about was guns. Guns are always the common thread in ALL shootings. Duh. Cassidy shouldn't have said that; he's a smart guy and he shouldn't pretend to be a yahoo just to please his base. As for the new proposals; they seem to be completely reasonable to me. People will still have their guns. Even previously purchased guns that don't fit the new guidelines will be grandfathered in. I'm sure people will stiil feign outrage, as they do whenever someone mentions their guuuuns, but this is to be expected...and promptly ignored. Let's hope these provisions become law. We're too rich and developed as a nation for us to have 3rd World gun violence statistics. It's embarrassing.

41) Comment by Chucky - 17/01/2013

What was that crazy guy doing ? It was a gun free zone, what, he could not read ?

42) Comment by BoiledCrabs - 17/01/2013

If gun control is so effective, why do criminals have guns? There are already so many gun control laws throughout the country that it's crazy. And statistics indicate the more laws there are the more murders there are. This is just another presidential photo op and an excuse to spend money going all around the country running his mouth in an effort to make us forget about his spending addiction.

43) Comment by gofigger - 17/01/2013

His private military will be dressed in British military attire.

44) Comment by nimby? - 17/01/2013

what is upsetting to many folk ; although they have done nothing wrong they are seeing snippets of freedom taken away to pay for the sins of others . we all have the potential to kill , or cure cancer . suppositions , are we now basing laws on such ? with that thought we should remove all guns from the public , meaning law abiding public . and since home invasion is only a slight possibility we shouldn't worry with alarm systems or locking our doors , windows .

45) Comment by Chucky - 17/01/2013

Loyalty to country ALWAYS! Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.* Mark Twain.

46) Comment by agagent - 17/01/2013

In one moment the Presidential spokesman criticized the NRA for bring the Obama children into their ad criticizing Obama for being an elitist and a hypocrite and in the next moment you could see Obama using children as political props for his press conference. If Obama does not want anyone to use children as political props or in a political discussion, he should follow his own advice.

47) Comment by agagent - 17/01/2013

Obama’s friends in the entertainment industry get a pass from Obama in the discussion of effects of violent movies, violent video games, and music that glorifies violence on American culture. We know this has impacted several of killers as they were obsessed with violent video games or mimic characters from their favorite movie. Obama does not dare say anything negative about those who gave him millions of dollars for his reelection campaign.

48) Comment by markedwardmarchiafava - 17/01/2013

What The Obamination has done is well beyond the scope of his very limited powers. How much longer till the next Amerikan Revolution?

49) Comment by agagent - 17/01/2013

If Obama wishes to change the 2nd amendment, let him do it through legislative action and not by executive order. One of the biggest obstacles Obama must face to pass his legislative objectives is his own party. Democrats talk a good game but Harry Reid will not bring it up for vote in the Senate and many Democrats in the House cannot vote to restrict 2nd amendment rights and go home win their next election. Let New Orleans try a gun ban like Chicago or Washington and let them see than gun bans do not work. Let’s talk about banning criminal from the streets with harsh sentences when they use a gun to commit a crime.

50) Comment by tball - 17/01/2013

Tell Obama do something about the 532 murders in Chicago(2012), and they have gun control laws in-place. Yeah those kids around him wrote letters, what a joke! This president think he's the King, he will continue to manipulate laws to circumvent the amendments.

51) Comment by 8point6 - 17/01/2013

Well, praise de lawd! With one stroke of hussein's mighty pen, he stopped the gun violence in BR. I just read the police report and there were no guns that killed anyone last night. All hail hussein!

52) Comment by The_Host - 17/01/2013

Well Elderly Man one thing is for certain. It impinges on the 2nd Amendment 100 times more than it will ever be affective at stopping anything. IMO you are just asking for even more crazy people to not seek help at all. Which means you either think there is no helping them or you want them to go off the deep end. Even mental health people are saying they think this may very well backfire on the mental health side of things which is really where the problem lies. Sane people don't go on shooting sprees.

53) Comment by zealer99 - 17/01/2013

Read the 10th Amendment and the 2nd Amendment and remember that the Constitution was adopted in 1787, with these provisions having never been Amended. They may be out of date but we have chosen never to amend those amendments. But that is only for intellectual curiosity, they are going to do what they want to do and when this is added to the Patriot Act, they can do anything that they wish and we have to like it, They = the government, the rulers.

54) Comment by CountryBoysCanSurvive - 17/01/2013

Have you thought of how many 10 round magazines a person could carry into a public place? All it takes is a push of a button, a clip falls to the floor and another is shoved in. This takes about 3 seconds.

55) Comment by gofigger - 17/01/2013

Some people love to live with their head stuck in the sand. Do you honestly think the government will start off by confiscating you guns?

56) Comment by Elderly Man - 17/01/2013

I do not see how any of this impinges on our sacred Second Amendment rights.