GOP responds to gun grab
Here are a few of the more powerful responses to President Barack Obama’s gun control agenda from leading Republicans.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry: “The Vice President’s committee was appointed in response to the tragedy at Newtown, but very few of his recommendations have anything to do with what happened there. Guns require a finger to pull the trigger. The sad young man who did that in Newtown was clearly haunted by demons and no gun law could have saved the children in Sandy Hook Elementary from his terror.
“There is evil prowling in the world – it shows up in our movies, video games and online fascinations, and finds its way into vulnerable hearts and minds. As a free people, let us choose what kind of people we will be. Laws, the only redoubt of secularism, will not suffice. Let us all return to our places of worship and pray for help. Above all, let us pray for our children.
“In fact, the piling on by the political left, and their cohorts in the media – to use the massacre of little children to advance a pre-existing political agenda that would not have saved those children – disgusts me personally. The second amendment to the Constitution is a basic right of free people and cannot be, nor will it be, abridged by the executive power of this or any other president.”
Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida: “As the father of four young children, I was deeply saddened by the murder of innocent kids at Sandy Hook. In the aftermath of this terrible tragedy, I expressed my hope that President Obama and our elected leaders would take a sober look at how we can prevent such heinous murders in the future. Doing so would require addressing the underlying causes of these evil acts, and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill without curtailing the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.
“Nothing the President is proposing would have stopped the massacre at Sandy Hook. President Obama is targeting the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens instead of seriously addressing the real underlying causes of such violence. Rolling back responsible citizens’ rights is not the proper response to tragedies committed by criminals and the mentally ill. Making matters worse is that President Obama is again abusing his power by imposing his policies via executive fiat instead of allowing them to be debated in Congress. President Obama’s frustration with our republic and the way it works doesn’t give him license to ignore the Constitution.
“Guns are not the problem; criminals with evil in their hearts and mentally ill people prone to violence are. Rather than sweeping measures that make it harder for responsible, law-abiding citizens to purchase firearms, we should focus on the root causes of gun violence and keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. As a strong defender of the 2nd Amendment, I will oppose the President’s attempts to undermine Americans’ constitutional right to bear arms.”
Rep. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas: “The Second Amendment is non-negotiable. The right to bear arms is a right, despite President Obama’s disdain for the Second Amendment and the Constitution’s limits on his power. Congress must stand firm for the entirety of the Constitution – even if, but particularly so, when President Obama seeks to ignore his obligation to ‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ Taking away the rights and abilities of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves is yet another display of the Obama Administration’s consolidation of power.”
“Washington and all of America must have a serious debate and honest discussion about what fuels a very small segment of the population to inflict harm and instill fear. This means holding Hollywood accountable for its culture of violence and death, and talking about mental health issues and the responsibilities of families and communities. Furthermore, Americans demand the Obama Administration enforce current laws. The latest information, according to Syracuse University, shows that federal weapons prosecutions are down dramatically – meaning that the Obama Administration is neglecting its obligation to enforce current law. Apparently public safety matters only when there’s political gain to be had. How can we expect them to act on new laws if they cannot even enforce the ones that currently exist?”
Rep. Tom Graves of Georgia: “As the father of three and the husband of an elementary school teacher, it has been devastating to see the loss of life at the hands of armed madmen. In the aftermath of these tragedies, our nation has at once been united in grief and divided by a political agenda put forward by the president. The political agenda disregards the reality that violent criminals and murderers do not live by the laws of our land. It focuses on the re-regulation of lawful gun use, with the least consideration given to the rights of people to protect themselves, their families and their places of community gathering. I will continue to defend Second Amendment rights and oppose legislation that seeks to infringe on or intimidate people from exercising those rights.”
Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas: “Gun bans and anti-gun laws have always lead to one thing – more gun violence. We owe it to innocent people to make this country as safe as possible. Sadly, in President Obama’s announcement every tragedy he mentioned was either in a state that aggressively restricts the right to keep and bear arms or was in a location that banned guns completely.
“The White House has indicated they are willing to use Executive Orders to infringe upon the God-given right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment from government intrusion. President Obama announced the specifics of his anti-gun sneak attack today, though he refuses to answer questions regarding his own illegal transfer of weapons to Mexican drug lords.
“Among the Executive Orders issued are tracking of your firearms, which creates a de facto national gun registry, and a White House demand for laws regulating the private transfer of firearms. In other words, if you give your son his first hunting rifle, you may face a prison sentence if you fail to get approval from the government.
“Those proposals, along with others floated by the White House as presidential decrees, are cutting attacks on your right as a peaceable person to keep and bear arms for your defense. The ability to defend one from aggressors is a basic human right.”
Rep. Stockman went on to vow that if he finds President Obama’s executive orders infringing upon the basic human rights of his constituents, he is “prepared to fight back with peaceable legislative force,” up to and including articles of impeachment, if absolutely necessary. “Impeachment is not something to be taken lightly,” said Stockman. “It is a grave and serious undertaking that should only be initiated in a sober and serious manner. It should be reserved only for most egregious of trespasses by the President. I would consider using Executive Orders to engage in attacks on a constitutionally-protected right and violating his sworn oath of office to be such a trespass. The President cannot issue executive orders depriving the people of full access to an enumerated constitutional right.”
He therefore encouraged concerned Americans to “please contact your elected representatives at House.gov and Senate.gov, and politely urge them to support legislative efforts to overturn and defund the President’s Orders, and to defeat his legislative proposals.”
Rep. John Fleming of Louisiana, responding to the President’s notion of having doctors question their patients about the presence of guns in their homes: “I came to Congress as a family physician with great concerns about the federal government intruding on the doctor-patient relationship. By his executive actions today, President Obama is pushing the government further into the exam room. He’s trying to press doctors into government service by pushing them to ask patients, even child patients, if there are guns in their home. After more than thirty years of operating a family practice, I can tell you it should not be the business of a family physician to take inventory of the guns in a patient’s home.
“There are existing laws which ensure that doctors alert law enforcement to criminal activities that they become aware of in the course of their practice. And, we certainly need to be sure that people who are a known danger to others do not have access to guns. But, calling on doctors to ask patients if they have guns in their homes is another step toward the nanny state that Washington liberals dream about.”