Obama’s Radical New Plan To Combat Gun Violence Is Going To Make The NRA Go INSANE

The Obama administration is planning a bold new move in the wake of yet another year of horrible mass shootings, that is going to really piss off the NRA and similar Ammosexual groups. The Department of Justice is going to be devoting more effort to fight “domestic terrorism” by creating a new “domestic terrorism council”. It has not been indicated yet who the new appointee will be, but they will coordinate domestic terrorism trends and cases, as well as analyze our existing law for any gaps or opportunities for enhancement, to make sure these threats can be combated as efficiently and effectively as possible.

Assistant Attorney General, John Carlin, said in a speech at GW university, “We recognize that, over the past few years, more people have died in this country in attacks by domestic extremists than in attacks associated with international terrorist groups.” Carlin also went on to say that the terms “violent extremism” and “terrorism” can be used interchangeably, and that the threat of it can range from anti-government sentiment, eco-terrorism, and racism. “Anti-government” is a label that sure will sting the Right Wing masses. I can’t wait for the crying to start.

It is extremely important that this threat is called out for what it is, and not left for NRA to whitewash it, unchallenged, with the trope of the “crazed lone gunman” that we can do nothing to stop.

As you are probably already imagining, the NRA and other Right Wing terror groups like the Oath Keepers will be absolutely furious. There will be no end of fundraising, gun sales, bunker building in backyards, and who knows what else. Really, though, that is tough luck for them. They come up with 100 reasons every week why you should buy guns to overthrow the government that the rest of the nation elected democratically. I simply do not feel bad for them if end up being added to a no fly/terrorist watch list because they made this choice.

There are going to be a lot of Republicans upset over this. They will go on and on about how you can’t hold an organization like the NRA responsible for the actions of a few of their members. When they do that, remind them of something. Every Republican always wants to blame Islam for Muslim extremism, even though the vast majority of Muslims are not extremists. Ask them how they can apply that harsh standard to Islam, yet be an apologist for domestic terrorists that are among their own ranks.


Custom featured image by Christian Drake for If You Only News

  • Ricardo Rebelo

    I wonder if he will start with Chicago…

    • BroadwayJoeFYVM

      Nice try. Why do you hate America?

    • LadyBligh

      They’ll probably start with your mom.

    • obadiahorthodox

      The recent bloody headlines out of Chicago relayed the sad tale of the city’s deadly weekend, where seven people were killed in shootings and more than 50 were victims of gunfire. Thanks in part to news coverage, America’s third largest city has become synonymous with runaway gun violence, and especially deadly weekend shootouts.

      Sadly, that type of shooting spree isn’t restricted to Chicago. Just this month in New York City, which has experienced an historic reduction in crime in recent years, 25 people were shot over a single weekend; six of the victims died.

      Nonetheless, the Chicago news triggered the usual response from conservative gun advocates, who love to mock the city’s homicide rate. In recent years Chicago gun victims have served as a macabre punch line for NRA fans as they scoff at the alleged futility of the city’s gun safety laws. (Chicago banned handguns decades ago, and has retained strong gun laws following the 2010 overturning of that ban by the Supreme Court.)

      Conservative conspiracists such as Rush Limbaugh even claim Democratic politicians, including Chicago’s mayor Rahm Emanuel, want the city’s murder rate to remain high so they can use the killings to advocate for stronger gun laws.

      But mostly, firearm defenders simply ridicule Chicago’s murder count. “Slaughter in
      Gun Control Chicago,” blogged Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich in the wake of last weekend’s gun attacks, while a Breitbart writer on Monday insisted city officials had “little to show” for their efforts to curb violence.

      But note what these commentators are careful not to mention while using the killings to make a political point: They didn’t mention that homicides in “Gun Control Chicago” are down dramatically this year; a trend that undermines the attack that the Second City stands as the ultimate symbol of gun enforcement failure.

      In early May, the Chicago Police Department released figures indicating the city marked a 43 percent decline in the number of murders over the first four months of this year, as compared to the same period last year. For the first quarter of this year, Chicago registered 93 murders, its lowest January-to-April tally since 1963.

      Then this month came news that Chicago experienced a 31 percent decrease in shootings for the month of May, which meant that through May of this year the city’s murder count had declined 34 percent from last year. Chicago homicides still outnumber those in larger cities, such as New York and Los Angeles; it suffers from weaker gun laws in both its home state and surrounding states than those two cities, allowing criminals easier access to guns purchased elsewhere.

      It’s true that Chicago’s crime is certain to spike in the coming summer months, and
      with it will come more heartbreaking headlines about tragic gun murders; killings that will inevitably involve young victims. But statistically, violent crime almost always goes up in warm weather months. So the question is, will Chicago’s murder rate go up more this year than during last year’s summer months? Or will the city be able to maintain its
      pattern of reduced gun violence throughout 2013?

      Skeptics say no, and point to the amount of overtime Chicago has already paid police
      officers this year to flood the city’s most dangerous neighborhoods with more personnel. When that overtime budget dries up homicides numbers will rebound, predicted Justin Peters at Slate this month.

      Time will tell. In the meantime though, there’s been surprisingly little media discussion about whether Chicago’s strict gun laws, routinely ridiculed by the right-wing, might actually be working. And as police continue to take thousands and thousands of guns off the streets (nearly 3,000 already this year), whether that policy has directly led to fewer killings. President Obama’s “conservative critics” insist gun control efforts don’t affect the crime rate.

      Note the press coverage: On January 29, a New York Times headline read, “Strict Gun Laws in Chicago Can’t Stem Fatal Shots.” The article detailed the city’s gun laws, which make it illegal to sell firearms or to possess assault weapons, and contrasted that with Chicago’s murder count in 2012.

      Then on June 11, The New York Times reported on Chicago’s sharply declining number of homicides through the first five months of this year. But the article never addressed the issue of gun confiscations or gun laws. So in January, the Times claimed gun laws weren’t curbing violence in the Windy City. Then in June, when
      statistics indicated Chicago’s homicides had declined precipitously, the Times ignored the possibility that gun safety efforts might be one reason why.

      It is notoriously difficult to determine why crime rises and falls. But to effectively blame a policy when rates rise and ignore it when they drop doesn’t make sense.

      Meanwhile, much was made in the media last year about the fact that more than 500 people were killed in Chicago, with the “shocking” mark treated as a stunning
      demarcation line. (Of the 500-plus homicides, 443 were gun-related killings.) And for gun advocates, the number served as proof gun laws are bound to fail. Missing from the 500 coverage however, was some important context.

      Fact: In 1992, nearly 950 people were killed in Chicago. Ten years later that number had fallen, but the homicide count still stood at 656.

      Note that the 433 homicides in Chicago in 2011 were the fewest in two decades, although you certainly wouldn’t know that from the media’s coverage of Chicago crime in recent years, or the right-wing media’s constant attacks on Chicago’s gun policies.

      And now comes news that it’s possible (possible) Chicago will register the fewest hometown homicides since John F. Kennedy was president. How does that square with the media’s portrayal of Chicago as a lawless city, and the far-right claims that gun laws do no good?

    • Jayneen

      How about Alabama?

      • Ricardo Rebelo

        It’s a State not a City…

  • Chrystal Myghty

    The Goat Keepers will be upset. I hope they don’t do something baaaaaaaad.

  • Eric Scott

    I really hope this is a satire site…
    islam is a danger to every society that is not islamic. I sleep well at night knowing my family is well protected…

    • LadyBligh

      Wingnuts are a danger to every society, including the non-Islamic ones.

    • Jayneen

      And the KKK is alive and well. Scared of them? Probably not if you are white.

    • Spades_Neil

      Eric, if what you said is true, my neighborhood would be a crater. The only danger the local Muslims post to anyone is to the drug dealing punks who used to infest the neighborhood like rats. These Muslims showed up and drove them all out.

  • nehpets123154

    So what, the NRA is already insane!!!

  • Ricardo Rebelo

    Chicago gun ban sure works! 😀

    • Spades_Neil

      “Highest murder rate in the nation.” Except it isn’t, dibshit. Get your facts straight.

      • Ricardo Rebelo

        You are right! of course! It’s DC, also with very strict gun laws… How dumb of me!

    • Beth Jones

      The reason it doesn’t work is it’s fifty miles to Indiana which has really lax gun laws - easy access to Chicago….

      • Ricardo Rebelo

        So why hasn’t Indiana not nearly as much violent crime as Chicago? Stnds to reason that it should have… Why not? Here’s a cartoon if I used complicated words… But please answer…

    • no2rdifferent

      A domestic terrorist council has nothing to do with Chicago or your town or your guns. I wish you would try to add to the conversation or keep quiet. This is a very serious matter.

  • Ricardo Rebelo

    He wants to replicate Chicago everywhere! He hates America

    • DundeeU

      TROLL ALERT!

    • Spades_Neil

      Hey. Ricardo. Somebody needs a fact check. This is incorrect. If you
      weren’t a dumbass parroting everything you hear, you’d know this.

      • Ricardo Rebelo

        So saying that Chicago combines a very strict gun control law with very high murder rates (with firearms) is wrong? Yes or no? Simple question…

        • Spades_Neil

          tl;dr

  • Otto Greif

    Make it illegal for blacks to own guns.

    • no2rdifferent

      and whites too

  • Jayneen

    Let’s put the longest running terrorists on that list…the KKK.