Surprise! NY Times Pushes Obama On Gun Control

This is what the NY Times editorial board runs with the day after Thanksgiving, cause it’s a super duper most important issue, unlike America being broke, facing the fiscal cliff, a stagnant economy, Iran, post-Sandy cleanup, housing still in the dumps, etc

President Obama’s fleeting mention of the need for stronger gun controls at a presidential debate last month was hardly the kind of forceful political statement needed to address the scourge of gun violence in this country. Even his tepid remark was considered by the nation’s gun owners as a threat to take away their firearms. In what amounts to a buyers’ panic, they are again ramping up gun and ammunition sales as they did four years ago, convinced that Mr. Obama intends a gun-control crackdown.

Mr. Obama talked about starting “a broader conversation” about reducing gun violence. The best place to start is in Congress, which has been grossly negligent toward constituent safety for the past 20 years as it bows to the demands of the gun lobby.

Yeah, because violating that pesky Bill Of Rights is no big deal in NY Times World. And it’s rather strange that the majority of gun violence tends to occur in Democrat held areas, eh?

Mr. Obama is free of the pressures of campaigning — and free to lead the nation toward sensible laws that can help reduce the flood of guns and related homicides.

Funny stuff, they actually linked Obama to leading. That would be a first.

The need for strong leadership on this issue is growing as statehouse politicians cave to ever more lethal demands from the gun lobby. State laws allowing students to go armed to class in Colorado, freeing owners in Oklahoma to wear holstered weapons in public, and letting people “stand your ground” in Florida and a score of other states have already damaged public safety immeasurably.

In Times World, citizens should not be free to shield themselves from criminals who carry guns obtained illegally. All of those measures mentioned allow law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families from people who would do them harm. I wonder if the NY Times editorial board would be willing to give up the armed guards in the lobby at the NY Times building.

The Times worries about the “30,000 lives lost to gun violence every year.” What they don’t tell you is that around half of those are suicides. Of the remaining, in 2010 (the latest year for data), 8775 were from crime, the rest accidental. That’s with over 270 million privately owned guns. I wonder how many crimes were prevented because someone owns a gun? Hmm, an estimated 2.5 million? And women are the most likely to be saved by owning a gun? And most shootings involved criminals killing other criminals? Oh, and women are the biggest recipients of being able to show a gun to someone who is looking to harm them?

Perhaps the Times should be concerned with the 1 million plus abortions this year.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “Surprise! NY Times Pushes Obama On Gun Control”

  1. […] Planned Parenthood office in Florida offered $10 off visits to the abortion clinic on Black Friday.The New York Times is pushing Obama to push for gun control.Obama didn’t thank God in his Thanksgiving proclamation, but he did request that we all rally […]

  2. […] at Pirate’s Cove blasts the irrelevant NYT for their post on Obama pushing Gun Control. Go read […]

  3. The purpose of the Second Amendment is so the people can protect themselves from government tyranny. They need the tools to do this. The term “Well Regulated” in the Second Amendment meant “Well Manned and Equipped ” in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time. United States v. Miller also determined that the term “Arms” refers to “Ordinary Military Weapons”. American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control. The American people still have some work to do with regard to taking back their rights.

  4. A few Sunday morning links…

    No sex? Permission to speak freely, Sir. China to Build World’s Tallest Building in Just 90 Days Small-bank CEO: I spend 50-60% of my time dealing with regulatory issues Liberal Judges: Equality Is Unconstitutional Surprise! NY Times Pushes Obama On…

  5. […] The Pirate’s Cove – by William Teach […]

  6. Gumball_Brains says:

    Amen Pocono. Yet, Commie Socialists still determine to ban legal citizens from owning guns.

    I still find it ironic that these idiot liberal elites (I repeat myself) think that gun violence is just like a TV show where the serial number of a dropped gun leads to the police directly to the offender of the crime.

    Yeah, maybe at most 5% of the time.

    And, isn’t it ironic that a liberal communist rag desires our liberal commie president to lead on an issue that would take guns out of the hands of those same people they are afraid of deposing them?

    Oh, did I reference “lead” and “president” in the same sentence? Funny that.

    This libtard will do one of 2 things. 1) continue to campaign on the public dime for his future office, 2) be a lame duck president for 4 years and increase his golf and date outings.

    Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if he did both.

Pirate's Cove