Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

92 replies

inabizzlefam · 13/06/2016 23:28

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?

OP posts:
Baconyum · 14/06/2016 10:14

Hell of a task - bloody autocorrect!!

MrsJayy · 14/06/2016 10:20

Burgers and Bullets just gives an image of kids parties with party bags or a group of mates going for a laugh to shoot automatic rifles wearing camoflage so not the same as clay pigeon shooting our teens go to lazerquest they go to burgers and bullets

BaboonBottom · 14/06/2016 10:22

You don't stand a chance in a country where 90 out of every 100 people have a gun.
How can you convince the majority it's not a good idea? It's "I need a gun because my neighbour has one and I may need to protect myself against the neighbour" mentality

Bolograph · 14/06/2016 10:53

our teens go to lazerquest

Which isn't normalising killing people with guns at all, of course.

Egosumquisum · 14/06/2016 11:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Brandonstarkflakes · 14/06/2016 12:20

In countries where it is very difficult to acquire a gun due to strict gun laws, there are very few deaths caused by guns. In countries where anyone can easily buy a gun because the gun laws are not strict there are shit tons of deaths caused by guns.

It's really not fucking rocket science.

SenecaFalls · 14/06/2016 12:21

You don't stand a chance in a country where 90 out of every 100 people have a gun.

This figure is wrong. It's difficult to know for sure, but most studies and polls indicate that about 30-40 percent of Americans are gun owners. Most Americans do not own a gun.

BaboonBottom · 14/06/2016 13:24

That 90 out of every 100 is from BBC newsround this morning, admittedly not the most high brow but i would say fairly reliable. Although they didn't say where they got it from

thecitydoc · 14/06/2016 13:49

I mean, who actually runs the US, the president or the NRA? If Obama thought for 1 second he could get legislation through both Houses he would do so in a flash. But he knows he cant - the NRA is a very powerful lobby and has many many politicians who support them. In addition the US Constitution gives its citizens the right to bear arms - changing the constitution is a mammoth and lengthy process. It is not about manning up - its about was can be achieved. The majority of the US population would not support this - they have a totally different mind set to us.

wasonthelist · 14/06/2016 13:57

YABU Telling the Americans they need to ban all the guns is about as much use as them telling us we all need an AK47. Their history and culture explains how they reached this point, but the plain truth is there is not enough popular support for gun control to make it happen. Even Reagan famously opined there was no justification for assault weapons in general circulation - if he couldn't make a difference, Obama certainly won't be able to. It doesn't need him to "man up" - it will take a sea change in public opinion in the USA. Don't expect (whatever the rights and wrongs) that to happen any time soon.

BeALert · 14/06/2016 14:12

That 90 out of every 100 is from BBC newsround this morning, admittedly not the most high brow but i would say fairly reliable. Although they didn't say where they got it from

Even the NRA doesn't agree...
www.nraila.org/articles/20140326/2014-nra-ila-firearms-fact-card

"Gun owners in the U.S.: 100 million; 40-45 million own handguns

American households that have firearms: 40-45%"

Bolograph · 14/06/2016 14:17

That 90 out of every 100 is from BBC newsround this morning

It's more plausible that here are 90 guns for every 100 people.

Although that sounds a bit low, sadly.

Want2bSupermum · 14/06/2016 14:34

When a person registers for a firearm they normally have more than one. Our two friends have about 15 between them. I know one for sure has a semi automatic because they are required to know how to use it for their job as a specialist police officer in one of the worst neighbourhoods in America. He keeps one gun at home which is his 'on-duty' gun. All the others are kept at the gun club.

The crime here in bad areas is unbelievable. Obama should be ashamed that his administration has not been able to make changes to these communities.

RortyCrankle · 14/06/2016 14:39

Can you please stop with the 'Obama is leader of the free world' crap. He is not, he is President of the USA - that's it.'

I think he is demob happy and won't make any serious moves to solve this or any other problem until his presidency finishes.

I find it difficult to describe any country which has gun laws and the resulting massacres such as the USA as a civilized society.

FlyingElbows · 14/06/2016 14:53

Can someone with actual knowledge explain the second amendment please? Was it not established in a time in history when there was no organised protection such as the police so it allowed people the right to protect themselves and their property? Fast forward 300 odd years and that situation is no longer applicable to most but the right remains? Is that roughly it?

Bolograph · 14/06/2016 14:59

They'd just had a revolution against tyranny.

They didn't want to have the same problem twice.

Anna275 · 14/06/2016 15:01

I am originally from a state in the northeast where it is incredibly difficult to get a gun. I don't know anyone who owns one, except for the odd parent of a friend who had a few guns for hunting purposes (not automatic weapons). I've recently moved south and am around people who are pro-gun for the first time in my life, which has helped me see that the debate is a lot more nuanced than people make it out to be. I have a coworker who is a former police officer and drives around with an "extremely right wing" sticker on his car. He is an avid hunter and supports gun ownership.

However, he in theory supports stricter background checks and was outraged yesterday that the Orlando shooter was allowed to to purchase firearms after being on a terrorist watch list. I've found that a lot of people actually share his views, but there is a fear that if you give in on some aspects of gun control (automatic weapons) it will be a slippery slope and soon the right to bear arms will no longer exist. So while of course there are some gun nuts out there, a lot of it is just simple defiance and bristling at the thought of the federal government slowly trying to eradicate rights that are defined in the constitution. There is also a fear of the federal government having too much control. Because the United States is so large and diverse (the circumstances and needs of a person living in New England are completely different than those of someone living in Alabama) it is very difficult for the federal government to make laws that work for the majority. This is in addition to all of the cultural and historical issues that come into play. The situation is incredibly complicated.

Previous posters have covered the mental health aspect already but I've always thought the rise of social media has played a part in the increase in mass shootings (Gun ownership is actually declining in the U.S. yet we've seen a surge of mass shootings. Peak gun ownership was in the late 70s.). People see all the press these shooters get, and how they are able to draw attention to their "causes". We live in a world now where everyone wants to be insta-famous and the idea of leaving a legacy appeals to some of these disturbed individuals. Access to automatic weapons has made it even easier for them to do more damage. I often wonder what would happen if the US followed the lead of other countries and didn't publicize the names of these murderers.

And as an aside, there are many areas in the US that are incredibly rural, where it could take law enforcement or an ambulance an hour or more to get to you if you needed help. If someone breaks into your home you would not be able to wait for help to arrive. So while I don't think there is ever a need for a civilian to own automatic weapons, there are certain circumstances where it does make sense to have guns for reasons other than hunting. (Gun ownership is "concentrated among older adults, rural residents, and whites, especially white Southerners." Coincidentally, the area where people own the most guns is also the area that feels most strongly about states' rights. The Civil War is still very relevant in the south).

MrsJayy · 14/06/2016 15:03

It is sounding like he killed them with the gun he had for work he had a security job

gravadlax · 14/06/2016 15:11

If only it was THAT simple.

Overrunwithlego · 14/06/2016 15:23

You should read 'Dunblane: Never Forget'. It was an eye opener as to how difficult it was to get the gun laws changed in the UK post Dunblane, and the threats and behaviour some of the Dunblane parents were subjected to by the pro-gun lobby in this country, within which so many MPs and members of the House Of Lords had vested interests. It is written by Mick North, the father of one of the children. He said he was told by John Major ( PM at the time) that if Thomas Hamilton had not had access to guns he would have used something else - rhetoric scarily close to what comes out of the NRA now.

I will be forever thankful to those people who stood up to the gun lobby to ensure our laws were changed. The key difference in the UK was that public opinion was very much anti-gun, particularly after Dunblane. I recently saw a tweet that said something like:"In retrospect, Sandy Hook ended the gun debate in America. Once they decided that the slaughter of children was an acceptable and bearable consequence of the right to bear arms there was nowhere else to go. No other argument that could possibly sway them".

Flashbangandgone · 14/06/2016 15:26

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

inabizzlefam. Before you seek to criticise Obama, you really should have made sure you understood the basics of how the USA legislates. Thinking that POTUS can just create whatever law he wants like some tin-pot dictator shows an embarrassing level of ignorance and an indictment of our education system!

Capricorn76 · 14/06/2016 16:11

Well if the Sandy Hook massacre where a class full of young children were gunned down didn't result in millions of Americans including Republicans protesting in the streets for change nothing will.

Capricorn76 · 14/06/2016 16:13

I would've thought Columbine would've forced a law change and that was about a thousand massacres ago. I don't think I'll ever understand American gun culture.

MrsTerryPratchett · 14/06/2016 16:18

I would've thought Columbine would've forced a law change and that was about a thousand massacres ago. There are a thousand between Sandy Hook (2012) and this one. There are many many thousands more since Columbine (1999).

specialsubject · 14/06/2016 16:27

Obama is president, not dictator.

as long as America allows purchase of these multiple-shoot weapons, they will continue to have a massacre a month, a week or whatever it is.

if you have a gun that shoots one bullet/pellet, and then you have to reload, you can't carry out a mass killing. You can kill one or two people but that's it before the rest overpower you.

The UK knows that. Australia knows it. Both have proved it following gun massacres. America doesn't want to know.

no wonder Obama has his head in his hands.

Swipe left for the next trending thread