Ever wonder why Liberals say “gun” violence when they push for more gun control?

Simply put, they are trying to make you afraid of guns. Saying gun violence over and over and over puts the notion into people’s heads that ALL violence is committed by bad guys with guns. In truth gun control laws are not, and never have been successful in curbing violence. In fact, the gun “control” movement is about control, of you. In fact, Liberals pushing for gun control also lie when they spout their “gun deaths” propaganda. In those numbers, they include criminals killed by police officers, concealed license holders, and by Americans who kill home invaders in self-defense. 

If you are an advocate for gun control ask yourself why you should believe people who must lie, and lie deliberately to further their cause. Also look at what banning guns does to violent crime rates vs allowing people to own and in many states carry guns Gun control proponents love to point to the UK and say “see, their gun violence rate is so low. We should follow their example”. Yet, the truth is that disarming the people does not lower violent crime rates. Do not believe the lies folks.

1

 

 

Democrats trying to use high taxes to punish gun owners

They are dead set on destroying our most basic human right

GunsSaveLives reports the following:

There is a new anti-gun bill sitting on Capitol Hill, and it doesn’t deal with banning particular models of firearms or even universal background checks.

The Gun Violence Prevention and Safe Communities Act of 2013, was proposed by U.S. Reps. Danny K. Davis, D-Ill., and Bill Pascrell, D-N.J. The bill seeks to raise the tax rate on gun sales from 10% to 20%.

Perhaps even more disturbing is that the bill also seeks to raise the tax rate on ammunition purchases to 50%.

Davis released the following statement in a press release,

Gun violence is a daily reality for America and, in particular, for urban cities like Chicago. The crisis should outrage us all. This legislation is a pro-active approach to reducing gun violence by using proven preventive programs which have been starved for funds until now. As part of a comprehensive, multidimensional strategy to reduce gun violence, this legislation closes major loopholes in tax law and lays out an equitable, long term, sustainable strategy to provide the requisite resources.

Note how Davis fails to correlate the high crime in Chicago with the extreme gun-control laws that prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting their own life and property.

If Chicago politicians REALLY want to curb violence they might try going after guns, but that is not what they really want

Pacifism: The intellectually bankrupt solution to violence

Danny Devito is short, but who cares, he is a talented man, and funny. But, a recent comment by Devito inspired this post. Devito, commenting on “gun violence” said this

No, the It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia star is more gracious than that, and certainly more efficient. Here’s DeVito’s Twitter solution to horrific headlines like those out of Newtown, Conn. late last year:

“….Violence begets violence…” How can we expect anything else… Aim to Disarm

Ah, the argument that screams PACIFISM! Violence only begets violence after all right? Wrong! Violence is neither inherently good nor bad. A rapist assaulting a woman is an example of brutal violence. A man, shooting the rapist is also violent. But in that case the violence is not only justified, but it should be lauded and celebrated. Now, on first blush you might say that celebrating shooting anyone, even a rapist is a bit much. But consider that that rapist will NEVER harm another woman, or anyone else. That rapist will never cause any more harm or pain will he? Is that NOT something to celebrate?, Is a team of U.S. Marines or special forces taking out a group of terrorists not reason for jubilation? Certainly those terrorists were evil, they hunted children, innocents, and now they will do that no more.

Now, of course, to a pacifist, such logic would seem crude. After all, a pacifist sees all violence equally. A man is raping your wife, you respond by cracking his head with a baseball bat. To a pacifist you are just as bad as the rapist. That is, moral retardation at it’s worst. In fact, I can think of no better words to describe pacifism. A pacifist would say that if you respond to a violent criminal with violence you have “sunk” to the criminals level. Hogwash! If you were to NOT defend yourself, or another, then THAT is as bad as what the criminal is doing. Think of it. In acting as a pacifist, you not only allow a rape, or assault, to happen, you allow the criminal to d it again. Rather than being the “high road” pacifism is the moral low road.

The other problem with Devito’s longing for disarmament is this. A disarmed society has no recourse. The right of self-defense is surrendered at that point. Citizens would become totally reliant on the government for protection, and, at that point, all our rights are in mortal peril. when Benjamin Franklin famously said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” he was offering up wisdom to men like Devito. To Devito, giving up your human right of self-defense is OK if it comes with a promise of safety. Yet, history has shown that nations where people ceded their right to gun ownership received no security, only ultimate slavery, suffering, and totalitarianism.

The wisdom of Franklin though, is lost on Devito. Where Franklin could see results before they came, Devito refuses to see what history ensures us will happen.

 

What fools believe

Chris has a great example of just how clueless the Left is. And about how so much of Liberalism is about “feelings”

At churches throughout Caldwell today parishoners were asked to pray for new and stricter gun control laws. I did not join in. Not because I am pro-violence; but because I am a realist.

Here’s their spiel:

Enhanced regulation of guns by state or federal law will promote the saving of lives and the promoting of loving relationship within a healthy community.

Enhanced regulation of guns by law places the highest priority upon preventing the loss of life.

Enhanced regulation of guns by law accepts the fact that media saturated gun violence diminishes the dignity of the human person.

Enhanced regulation of guns by law acknowledges a dire need within a society prone to suicide by guns and accidental death by guns.

Enhanced regulation of guns by law is mandated for a society in love with its children and their healthy, safe upbringing.

Go read the whole thing. Chris destroys the feelings-based nonsense gun control advocates have been selling for years.

 

 

Obama the Exploiter-in Chief

Depiscable

President Obama will hold an event Wednesday with law enforcement officials and mothers of gun violence victims, marking the 100th day since the Newtown, Conn., mass shooting.

The president is looking to build momentum for a package of new gun control measures to be considered by the Senate early next month.

First off let me clear up something. To use grief-stricken mothers for this is deplorable, but the Left does deplorable very well. Those mothers are easy targets for the vultures on the Left who will do anything to get their achieve their ends. Secondly, those “law enforcement officials” are political tools, not real cops. They are walk-behinders, puppets who say exactly what they are supposed to say. 

This is going to be another episode of Kabuki Theater starring our president

 

Does the Left REALLY care about victims of gun violence? Or do they care about exploiting them?

Matt at Conservative Hideout lays it out very clearly. 

In yet another example of self defence using a firearm, a man used a gun to defend himself, and his toddler son from home invaders.  Yet, the national media chose to take a pass on covering it.

Funny how these stories NEVER make it to national news isn’t it? Media bias anyone? But Matt has more thoughts

My last post about guns and self-defense caused a big stink on some sites, where people took issue with the comment that the liberals would prefer people to be dead, as it is better for the narrative. Allow me to expand a bit: Democrats, liberals, regressives (whatever you want to call them) will not stop at taking ugly guns-they want them all.  So, at some point, their desire is to have a 100% disarmed populace.  When considering that, any example of the lawful use of firearms is detrimental to the confiscation narrative.  However, dead civilians, and especially dead children, are easily exploitable-they are convenient emotional justifications to ban guns.  However, if they ever did get all the guns, and only criminals had them, there would be even more dead children.  But, I would wager that those dead children would no longer be worth covering.  Dead children only have propaganda value in certain contexts

I hate to say it, but I believe Matt is correct. I have seen and heard too many Liberals dismiss self-defense, mock the very idea that self-defense is even possible, and even question if self-defense with a gun is moral. For the left, the only important thing is destroying the Constitution and replacing it with a Marxist Utopia. Anything that aids that cause is moral in their demented minds.

 

Biden to go on gun control tour?

Well, someone get a Gaffe-O-Meter ready, but I find this interesting because this the rhetoric Biden is talking

Vice President Biden delivered a message for rural America: He’s coming to talk about gun violence.

“I’m coming, I’m coming,” Biden said here after saying he’d read a skeptical comment in the local newspaper about the White House outreach to rural areas. “The one thing I want to make clear is this is, this message of rational gun safety is a message that will be embraced by rural communities as well as urban communities simply because it makes sense. But we cannot wait. The still voices of those children require us, requires us to speak now.”

And this is what the American people think about theeffectiveness of gun control laws

Via Breitbart:

In a Pew Research Poll listing 21 things the public believes should be government priorities for 2013, passing more gun laws is number 18 out of 21.

The majority of Americans simply do not see gun control as a pressing concern problem like President Obama and the Democrats do.

Instead, the American people are worried about the economy (first on the list), jobs (second), the deficit (third), and terrorism (fourth).

So, maybe it is not about the will of the people, but the fetish for control that Democrats have. Speaking of control, guess which issue is dead last on the list. Go on, guess, here is a hint, Al Gore would be very upset.

A list of President Obama’s 23 executive orders on gun violence

Via the Lid, who sums up the usefulness of these EO’s

What a pile of nothing. Both the POTUS and the SCHMOTUS had been warning that Obama would take hard constructive action on gun control.  For days advocates of the constitution were worried that Obama would seek to destroy the Second Amendment by executive fiat. Instead his actions were the typical political “We will do better and we will study.” One thing the POTUS missed…there is no executive order preventing the Federal Government from selling weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels…everyone would support that one. 

Basically, these 23 EO’s are a pile of emptiness. Of course, the Democrats can use these later when they do nothing at all to stop the next high-profile shooting. They can then tell us that they did not go far enough. Of course, they can say the very same thing if they get a new assault weapon ban pushed through too. They new that new gun laws will not prevent the next school shooting, but, they are hoping they can get some more restrictions in place now. Then, when those restrictions are ineffective, they can use their emotional appeals to aim for even more restrictions in the future. The Left is all about getting what they want incrementally folks. This is why we must never sleep on them. They are persistent if nothing else.

Chris, at Wyblog points out two troublesome items from the list

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.  

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

I do not like these either. I have never had a doctor ask me about guns in my home, and I would never answer such a question, but, again, this is one of those cases where we might rightfully wonder where these two executive orders could lead.

Your doctor is spying on you. And depending on what you tell him, he’ll rat you out to Dear Leader faster than you can say “Second Amendment.” Because it’s now his duty to ask you about your guns.

Newark, NJ Mayor Cory Booker started us down the fascist trail by offering a $1,000 bounty to folks who turn in their gun-owning neighbors. Dear Leader took it one better. Your doctor can’t tell you if your teenage daughter asks for birth control pills. But now he’s required to tell the feds if you own a gun.

Remember when asking librarians to report “suspicious” reference requests was tantamount to detonating the pillars of our civilization? Me neither.

Yeah, so much for that patient confidentialty and “right to privacy” thing. It only applies when it doesn’t conflict with progressive groupthink. Like I said, fascism.

As I stated above, never trust the political Left. Always assume they have ulterior motives. And remember that their number one priority has always been total control of our lives. 

Another day of pimping tragedies at MSNBS

First up Al “Pimp My Hair” Sharpton

Next, via Weasel Zippers is Ed Schultz

Via Newsbusters:

It seems as though MSNBC’s Ed Schultz has taken Rahm Emanuel’s belief that, “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste” to heart.  Speaking on Monday prior to President Obama’s final press conference of his first term, Schultz disgustingly suggested that the tragedy at Sandy Hook could be “the 9/11 of gun violence.”

Bottom feeders, both of them.

 

When your gun is not your gun-The Other McCain

Stacy McCain explains the “gun show loophole”

Your firearms are your private property and you have the right to sell your private property, right? Well, not if Joe Biden gets his way:

“[T]here is a surprising – so far – a surprising recurrence of suggestions that we have universal background checks. Not just close the gun show loophole but total, universal background checks, including private sales.”

Last week, I explained that when liberals talk about “closing the gun-show loophole,” they mean prohibiting inviduals from selling their own guns — so that your gun isn’t really your gun anymore.

Gun control=people control. And, once the guns are controlled……all your rights are in peril

 

Might President Obama try to bypass Congress and use executive orders to curtail gun rights?

I would pray not, but, would it surprise me, given this president’s record of ignoring the will of the people, and the letter of the Constitution, well……

Well, that is what this and several other reports say floating around on the web.  Here’s the Weekly Standard:

Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns.
 
“The president is going to act,” said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. “There are executives orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”
 
Biden said that this is a moral issue and that “it’s critically important that we act.”
Remember this folks, Obama is not worried about reelection now. He is not concerned with what the people say either. We saw how little value he and his fellow Leftists in the Democratic Party had for the will of the people when they shoved Obamacare down our throats. Now, though,unlike during the battle over Obamacare, the Republicans hold the House, so that would not succeed. There is some thought that the Senate might not even support gun registration. But, the threat of executive orders hangs over our heads, it is something I have worried about. Also recall that Obamacare was passed because the Democrats saw a chance to instill a “fundamental change” in America that they had been seeking for a long time. This time they see another opportunity to further alter the direction of America. 

 

Why yes, Mr. President, there will be resistance

To the “you knew this was coming” gun grab effort by the Left, an effort that Stacy McCain notes Obama has vowed to put his weight behind

Never let a crisis go to waste:

Recalling the shooting of 20 first graders as the worst day of his presidency, President Barack Obama on Sunday pledged to put his “full weight” behind a legislative package next year aimed at containing gun violence.
In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Obama voiced skepticism about proposals to place armed guards at schools in the aftermath of the Dec. 14 deadly assault at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. . . .
Obama said he intended to press the issue with the public. . . .
“Will there be resistance? Absolutely there will be resistance,” he said.
“The question then becomes whether we are actually shook up enough by what happened here that it does not just become another one of these routine episodes where it gets a lot of attention for a couple of weeks and then it drifts away. It certainly won’t feel like that to me. This is something that – you know, that was the worst day of my presidency. And it’s not something that I want to see repeated.

Note that Obama discounted the idea of armed security in schools. That is no surprise, , Liberals have all ridiculed,  the suggestion of armed guards. Not because they do not think it will work, but because they want stricter gun laws. For them this is about getting legislation they want, and not about protecting kids.

 

Arne Duncan explains Collectivism

Here you go, our Education Secretary, Arne Duncan touts our rights, as secondary to common values, in other words the common good that Marx and Engels espoused

Americans value their children, their safety, and the right to pursue their dreams without fear — and those “common values” trump the rights set forth in the U.S. Constitution, Education Secretary Arne Duncan said last Friday in aspeech at a Washington, D.C., elementary school.


In the coming weeks, Duncan said he plans to spend a lot of time visiting schools and communities — to talk about gun violence:

“I want to talk to gun owners and hunters and sport shooters and ask them, what should we do? I want to talk about community and responsibility, and I want to talk about values — because we have common values that go far beyond the constitutional right to bear arms.

There you are, Collectivism defined by a Collectivist. Individual natural rights? Not if our “common values” are offended. Of course, once we as a nation sacrifice our natural rights on the Altar of Collectivism, we will seal our fate, soon no one will have any right that the government does not grant us. Rights that same government will then hold the power to revoke at their whim.

 

Ah, in Liberal Fairy Tale Land no one ever kills anyone with a knife, a club, or any other weapon. People ONLY die if a gun is involved

I have enjoyed Jason Whitlock, a sports writer, I have enjoyed a number of his columns. I have not always agreed with his take, but, his latest piece, written in response to Javon Belcher’s murder and suicide is a perfect example of how Liberals live in an alternate reality.

I would argue that your rationalizations speak to how numb we are in this society to gun violence and murder. We’ve come to accept our insanity. We’d prefer to avoid seriously reflecting upon the absurdity of the prevailing notion that the second amendment somehow enhances our liberty rather than threatens it.

How many young people have to die senselessly? How many lives have to be ruined before we realize the right to bear arms doesn’t protect us from a government equipped with stealth bombers, predator drones, tanks and nuclear weapons?

Our current gun culture simply ensures that more and more domestic disputes will end in the ultimate tragedy, and that more convenience-store confrontations over loud music coming from a car will leave more teenage boys bloodied and dead.

In the coming days, Belcher’s actions will be analyzed through the lens of concussions and head injuries. Who knows? Maybe brain damage triggered his violent overreaction to a fight with his girlfriend. What I believe is, if he didn’t possess/own a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.

See, ONLY guns are used to commit murder. Whitlock just KNOWS that if belcher had not had a gun, he would never have stabbed his girlfriend, or strangled her, or beat her to death with a tire iron because in Whitlock’s world, that NEVER happens. If not for guns, well  all violence would stop I suppose. Ah, but that fantasy is not the only one that exists in the mind of Whitlock

That is the message I wish Chiefs players, professional athletes and all of us would focus on Sunday and moving forward. Handguns do not enhance our safety. They exacerbate our flaws, tempt us to escalate arguments, and bait us into embracing confrontation rather than avoiding it.

But we won’t. We’ll watch Sunday’s game and comfort ourselves with the false belief we’re incapable of the wickedness that exploded inside Jovan Belcher Saturday morning.

See, handguns NEVER enhance our safety. Whitlock knows this because, well, he wants it to be that way. Of course, when I stepped into the alley behind the restaurant I ran in 1998, Jason Whitlock was not there to defend me from the thug hiding behind the fire escape. Neither was any other Liberal. But for that Colt .45 I had, I would have been a victim. Years before I was born, my grandmother answered a knock at her screen door. A man claiming to work for the phone company said he needed to check her phone. She told him no, and he proceeded to come through the door. And you know what, Jason Whitlock, was not there, but my grandfathers rifle was, and her pointing that rifle at the would be intruder seemed to have a stark impact on that intruders mindset. Just last week, in Grand Prairie, Texas, a few miles from where I live, a thug decided to break into a home there. Was Jason Whitlock and his moral outrage there to stop him. No, but, the homeowners 40 caliber handgun was, and it was the thug that was shot, not the homeowner.

So, perhaps Mr. Whitlock should do a bit of research into defensive gun uses. Of course, that would require a bit of thinking, rather than emoting, that might be too much for Whitlock.

 

 

Bill Moyers What a bitter little man, and awful bitter decrepit man-stump.

That is how Donald Douglas describes Moyers, and he is right on the money. Moyers is the walking definition of a Leftist fool. Watch the video that fired Donald Douglas up, the let Douglas sum his rantings up.

Bill Moyers is so over the top he’s about blast off to Mars. What a freak! He’s contemptuous of the Constitution and he completely ignores the real facts of gun violence in this country, which I’ve discussed here in recent days. He rants about how the U.S. used to be the “arsenal of democracy” but is now the “arsenal of death.” And he attacks the NRA as death’s “enabler … paranoid, delusional, and as venomous as a scorpion.”

I am so glad that I never, ever see this man on television. Seriously. Is he even on PBS anymore? I would personally show up at his studio, weekly, to stage a one man protest, I find him so repulsive. But he’s got the right to rave on as such, just as much as any person retains the right to own a gun for protection against the real lone killers out there, killers for which there’s little explanation other than the grip of evil.

Progressivism is a disease, and Moyers is its embodiment. 

US journalist and commentator Bill Moyers

Devoted Leftist, and Useful Idiot Bill Moyers

BINGO! Moyers does not possess one clue about the founding principles, and take note that Moyers, like all gun control zealots lies about the number of gun “deaths”. First they lump ALL gun deaths together, including when a police officer shoots a criminal, or armed citizen kills in self-defense. Then they exclude from debate ANY defensive gun uses. And, in over 90% of defensive gun uses the weapon is not fired, or only a warning shot is fired. There are several estimates on how many defensive gun uses happen every year. The lowest number I have found is 108,000, back in the late 1990′s. Now, that is the LOWEST estimate. Do the math folks, that equals about 300 Americans using a gun in self-defense every day, or a little over 12 every hour. People like Moyers would like to disarm those Americans to “reduce violence”. Think of those 108,000 Americans (note the number is definitely higher, the highest estimate was 2.5 million but I am using the lowest total I could find) what would they have done without the gun they defended themselves with? Would Bill Moyers have come to their aid? Maybe talked the criminal to death with tired Leftist propaganda? No, many of them would have been harmed, killed or victimized in some other way. So the crime rate would be higher. What would Moyers and his ilk blame then? Or would they even care? No doubt Moyers would only care that less Americans had guns. And if that cost more American lives would that matter to Moyers? Likely not! Would he be ranting against the criminals? Likely not.

What fools like Moyers are seeking is a Marxist Utopia, which, of course, will never exist. And to be certain, Moyers would care not one whit if the price of his “Utopia” was an america less safe for its citizens. As long as  Moyers could pat himself on the back and marvel at the tough gun laws he would be happy, no matter how many American lives it cost. To Moyers Individualism is bad. Gun ownership promotes bad things like self-defense, which is the ultimate act of Individualism, and, again, Individualism is bad in Moyers world. Collectivism, on the other hand, where big government, and not God, grants rights, and provides and protects for all of us is Utopia to Moyers. And Moyers will keep desiring that Utopia of Collectivism, and reality will not get in his way.

Everyone should go to Starbucks on Valentines Day!

I plan to, and here is why. A group that advocates gun control AKA disarming Americans, is boycotting Starbucks on that day. Texas Fred has the scoop

Green logo used from 1987-2010, still being us...

Image via Wikipedia


(CNSNews.com)— The National Gun Victims Action Council (NGAC) will lead a national boycott of Starbucks Coffee products on Valentine’s Day, Feb. 14, to try to change the company’s “open carry” gun policy at its locations. Starbucks currently allows guns to be openly carried by patrons in its stores in the states where it is legal to do so.

“Starbucks allowing guns to be carried in thousands of their stores significantly increases everyone’s risk of being a victim of gun violence,” said Elliot Fineman, CEO of the NGAC in a statement. “Open and conceal-and-carry are among the reasons there are 12,000 gun homicides each year in the U.S.”

The NGAC further stated that Starbucks has the legal right to ban guns from their coffee shops but the company “clings to this policy that puts millions of Americans at risk every day and encourages the spread of guns being carried in public.”

The NGAC says that its boycott will, “90% of the time,” reduce Starbucks stock price.

Full Story Here:
Anti-Gun Group to Launch Nationwide Boycott of Starbucks

So, in order to help a company that RESPECTS our right to self defense, I am going to go to Starbucks on that day, and I am going to start buying their products, even though I am not much of a coffee guy. And I am definitely not into Mochafrappochino lattes or whatever you call those girly coffee drinks. But, I respect businesses that respect my rights! So, there you are, GO to Starbucks this Valentines, and CONTACT Starbucks, let them know you are thankful for their policy!

You know, one more reason to visit on that day? No whiny hippies to deal with!

A look into Obama’s gun grabbing agenda

Gun control has become a back burner issue. Liberals seldom harp on taking away our guns as they once did. But, despite their new silence, the Left still wants us disarmed. Maggie’s Notebook has a good piece that sheds some light on this

Had you forgotten, or perhaps never knew that Barack Obama was director of the “non-profit charitable” Joyce Foundation from 1994 to 2002? Along with “education,” one of their focuses is gun control which they charaterize as “gun violence.” Never mind that a gun can’t be “violent” without a person being violent first. Barack Obama worked diligently to take down the Second Amendment. There was a clear path for doing this at Joyce. They targeted future Supreme Court decisions and began funding lies and deceptive law articles about the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Go read it all, and also check out this piece, about the possibility of the government seizing your property

Agenda 21 was the only document that was not an international treaty. It was, instead, a non-binding “soft-law” document that was designed to avoid the necessity of Congressional debate or Senate ratification. Bill Clinton issued an Executive Order to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) — especially to implement Agenda 21 administratively — without oversight or interference from Congress. The agencies of government have done a masterful job of infecting almost all urban communities with some form of government control under the guise of “Sustainable Development,” which is the objective of Agenda 21.

Now, the Obama regime intends to impose the same kind of control over rural America through his White House Rural Council, also created by Executive Order.

The rather bland 18-page Convention on Biological Diversity came with an 1140-page instruction book called the Global Biodiversity Assessment. Page 993 of this instruction book says that the Convention’s plan for protecting biodiversity is “…central to the Wildlands Project recently-proposed in the United States.” Page 15 of the Wildlands Project says:

… at least half of the land area of the 48 conterminous states should be encompassed in core reserves and inner corridor zones … assuming that most of the other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer zone.

FINALLY! Obama calls for tougher enforcement of border laws!!!

Oh, wait, I read that headline wrong, go figure!

WASHINGTON (AP) – Two months after the shooting of a U.S. congresswoman, President Barack Obama called Sunday for more stringent enforcement of existing gun laws, citing the “awful consequences” of gun violence in American society. In an op-ed essay in The Arizona Daily Star, Obama says legislation to bolster criminal background checks for gun buyers hasn’t been properly implemented, with too many states providing “incomplete and inadequate” information.

He suggested rewarding states that provide the most comprehensive information to the criminal background database.

“We should make the system faster and nimbler,” the president added. “We should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can’t escape it.”

Interesting that the Arizona shooter was never ruled mentally ill by a judge and was never committed to an institution. So, how would, these “instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks” have helped prevent the Arizona shootings exactly?