The gun control measures a tearful President Barack Obama announced Tuesday would not have prevented the slaughters of 20 first-graders at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, or 14 county workers at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California.
Obama’s executive action expands mandatory background checks to gun shows, flea markets and online sales, adds more than 230 examiners and staff to help process them and calls on states to submit accurate and updated criminal history data.
Those measures are seen as crucial to stemming gun suicides — the cause of two-thirds of gun deaths — by blocking immediate access to weapons. But, an Associated Press review shows, they would have had no impact in keeping weapons from the hands of suspects in several of the deadliest recent mass shootings that have spurred calls for tighter gun control.
The shooters at Sandy Hook and San Bernardino used weapons bought by others, shielding them from background checks. In other cases, the shooters legally bought guns.
In Aurora, Colorado, and at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., men undergoing mental health treatment were cleared to buy weapons because federal background checks looked to criminal histories and court-ordered commitments for signs of mental illness. The Obama administration is making changes in that realm by seeking to plug certain Social Security Administration data into the background check system and by helping states report more information about people barred from gun possession for mental health reasons.
The suspect in a shooting at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, should have been flagged at the time, but errors and delays cleared the way for his purchase.
Though the moves probably wouldn’t have prevented recent mass shootings, Obama rejected the idea that undermines the changes.
“We maybe can’t save everybody, but we could save some,” Obama said.
A look at how some recent mass shooting suspects got their weapons:
Dec. 2, 2015, San Bernardino, California, 14 killed
Syed Farook and his wife used weapons that the FBI says his neighbor, Enrique Marquez, purchased legally from a federally licensed dealer in 2011 and 2012. Marquez, now facing conspiracy and other charges, told investigators that Farook asked him to purchase the weapons because he would draw less attention. At the time, the FBI says, the men were plotting to shoot up a community college and a highway.
(AP)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
3 Responses
Oh, Crimea River! “We can’t solve the problem, but we have to do something!” This Clown in Chief should get an Oscar for that heart rending performance.
Although this article is part of an Associated Press dispatch, it is at best, misinformation. The headlines scream when ever there is a mass shooting. If one looks behind the headlines, one can see other misuses of guns that are directly addressed by this executive order. It is EASY for known criminals to obtain guns. There are have been armed robberies, gang wars, as well as individual shootings. There are no laws “on the books” that would stem this flow. Moreover, there are no laws to prevent dangerous criminal from legally obtaining weapons. This is where this executive order comes into play. Forget the media buzz.
The problem is that most of what Obama and the Democrats have to offer is is anathema to our community. Aside from the fact that the Obama world outlook has caused the US to be a follower rather than a leader. On the other hand, the Republicans have most of the right ideas, but they are too tied in to the NRA.
To win, a Republican Presidential candidate needs crossover Democrats as well as Independents. It would be refreshing as well as encouraging, if a Republican candidate would finally reject the NRA stance and strengthen the gun laws on the books. That Republican would then gain support from many quarters and really have a mandate to properly govern.
He’s always frowning, it’s unavoidable for him to break down in tears one time or another.