To think Obama needs to "man up" to the NRA?

[inabizzlefam]

I don't get this pandering to the NRA and not just by Obama. It seems that everyone in the US government system is frightened of standing up to them.
I mean, who actually runs the US, the president or the NRA?

What exactly do you suggest he does? I'm sure he'd be all ears.

The president doesn't run the country. There are three branches of government, not one.

The NRA heavily funds many senators and representatives. Under the Constitutional system of checks and balances, the president cannot unilaterally pass laws without the support of those congress.

Those senators and representatives also need to keep their constituents happy, so that they are voted in again - many constituents want to keep their guns.

On top of that, the third branch of the government - the Supreme Court - can overturn any laws passed that they deem not to be constitutional. The Supreme Court has historically supported the second amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's the republicans blocking gun control who need to change.

Stop allowing supermarkets /corner shops to sell guns with groceries might be a start.
This whole "the right to bear arms" shit needs to be gotten rid of.
Obama is the President, right? So why is he letting the NRA tell him that gun law cannot be changed> Surely as the Leader of the Free world and Commander In chief, that should be his decision, not theirs?

Even if he tried to issue an executive order or whatever it is he could do, it would be blocked by Republicans, somehow dragged through the courts and would almost certainly end up in a Republican president overturning it in 9 months time.

So basically, the US government puts money above lives?
Nice.
I think I am going to have to accept that I will never understand these people.

I think you're failing to understand how legislature is passed in the US government. I whole heartedly agree it should change but there are huge road blocks one of which is the constitution. Obama cannot change the constitution!

So who can change the constitution if not the "most powerful leader in the western world"?

inabizzlefam I agree with your sentiment on guns but I think the first thing you need to accept is that you have no grasp on the system of Government in the USA.

The President can't say "I'm the leader of the free world, and I say no more guns." That's a nickname, not his actual role. Changes in law happen in the Congress or, when it comes to the interpretation of the Consitution and its Amendments, in the Supreme Court. The President signs bills into law, the President can veto a bill so it won't become law, and the President can take some limited executive actions to affect the ways that laws are enforced. Obama has taken several executive actions with regard to gun control, that's why the gun nuts hate him so much and because he's black .

President Obama isn't perfect, but he isn't the problem when it comes to gun control. But as I said I agree with your overall "for fucks sake when is enough enough" sentiment and I sympathise with your apparent sense of increduility that this is allowed to go on and on and on in a supposedly developed nation. It's a disgrace.

Well I don't know if it's money over lives but there's certainly a mindset that some US citizens have that puts their right to bear arms on a par with their right to life.
And it's their country. Every country does things that are inexplicable to other countries. Admittedly playing cricket and the NHS aren't as mad as mass gun ownership...

Well I'm no Stephen Hawking but even I am amazed that americans cannot see the link between 173" reported" gun crimes in the US this year amd the ease in buying guns.

The NRA is like a brotherhood that extends over any segment of society from rich to poor, from the educated to the ignorant, from the mad to the sensible.

I think that being Ametica so rich we often think they are open minded and progressive but in reality, out of the big cities in the East coast, it is still quite a wild place.

And by wild, I don't mean you need a gun to protect yourself from the roaming bears.

And no, they don't see the link, there is always someone to blame.

There was Rubio saying today that thougher gun laws would have not prevented the massacre but then, I expect massacres won't be possible if the only weapon the disturbed or terrorist can legally acquire is a kitchen knife.

I read an NRA journal once. It twisted statistics and played shamelessly on fear to support the idea of gun ownership being a good thing. Was very peculiar to British eyes. But if that's your reality and you don't think independently then you get suckered in.

There is a pet shop near me that sells rifles and "bushido blades!"
Sorry but I don.t know anyone who finds it necessary to pick up a lethal japanese bushido blade whilst getting their 5 year old a goldfish.
I have listened to a lot of podcasts where americans argue that thy need to have the freedom to buy a gun as there are so many whackos out there (with guns also) ready to invade their homes and steal their property.
I just cannot understand why they don't just ban the guns.

The US is not like Europe.

Once you're away from the east/West coast cities, you're dealing with a very very different kind of mentality where government of any kind, but particularly the federal government, is deeply mistrusted. Many people believe they should be allowed to live their lives without interference of any kind - and fundamental to that is the right to bear arms to protect yourself and your family. And for hunting too.

I personally think its something to do with the geographical vastness of the US. Washington seems very far away.

I imagine Russia is a bit like this too.

As others have pointed out, the president doesn't have a magic wand. It's not a dictatorship where he makes the law! Nearly everything needs approval by the house and the Senate - which are controlled by the Republicans, who don't want changes to the gun laws.

Obama has tried to introduce gun control laws. Congress blocked them

I'd really like to know, but haven't seen any comments on, if his gun control laws had passed, would the Orlando killer have had access to the gun he used to kill everyone?

In his speech after the shooting he said something about "actively doing nothing" is don g something. I think he d really like to see Americans who want gun control to start making a noise about it and letting their representatives know they want change as he knows that nothing will happen without an obvious groundswell of support.

My heart goes out to all those affected x

In his speech after the shooting he said something about "actively doing nothing" is don g something. I think he d really like to see Americans who want gun control to start making a noise about it and letting their representatives know they want change as he knows that nothing will happen without an obvious groundswell of support.

Believe me, it's happening, and it's been happening for a long time. We've been making a lot of noise. There's a very obvious groundswell of support.

I just cannot understand why they don't just ban the guns.

The comments section on the Fox News site is a pretty good place to start if you actually want to understand why they don't just ban guns.

Obama has done a dozen never again speeches imo the man is trying his best to change gun laws but it's more than a president that runs America right to bear arms is constitutional