Obama on Oregon Shooting: ‘This Is Something We Should Politicize’

 

Obama-Umpquah-ShootingPresident Obama delivered an angry statement on the Thursday shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, OR. “Each time we see one of these mass shootings,” he said from the White House briefing room podium, “our thoughts and prayers are not enough.

In a 15-minute statement, Obama stressed that the US is “the only advanced country on Earth that sees these kinds of mass shootings every couple of months.” He praised the gun control efforts in Australia, a nation that conducted a mass confiscation of firearms from its citizenry.

The President repeatedly complained about the Republican-led Congress and gun rights advocates. “There is a gun for roughly every man, woman, and child in America,” he said, “so how can you with a straight face say more guns will make us safer?”

Obama claimed that states with the most gun laws tend to have the fewest gun deaths and repeatedly called for “common-sense” gun safety legislation. “Somebody somewhere will comment and say, ‘Obama politicized this issue.’ Well, this is something we should politicize,” the President said.

Instead of offering a plan of his own, Obama told voters to change American politics on the issue. He even requested that the media make gun control more popular.

“I would ask news organizations — because I won’t put these facts forward — have news organizations tally up the number of Americans who’ve been killed through terrorist attacks over the last decade and the number of Americans who’ve been killed by gun violence, and post those side-by-side on their news reports. It won’t be information coming from me, it’ll be coming from you,” the President said, pointing to reporters in the room.

Published in Guns
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 240 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Barack Obama can go straight to hell.

    • #61
  2. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    Belt:Because the purpose is not gun control, but people control.

    And the truth is revealed.

    • #62
  3. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    There does seem to be a pattern, doesn’t there? When Jews are specifically targeted and killed, he or his proxies can’t bring themselves to say that. They just talk about “random people in a deli” or something. When Christians are specifically targeted and killed, he can’t mention that, either.

    A Muslim shooter is “workplace violence,” and the President can’t acknowledge the chants of Allahu Akbar!

    It was absolutely jaw-dropping that he’d go before the UN to say”Chanting Death to America won’t create jobs.” Oh . . . did you feel the burn Mr. Khameini?

    Geez.

    But you know, you can’t get on your high horse about ISIS, because the Crusades!

    Isn’t it long past time we acknowledged that we twice elected a jihadi-sympathizer to the highest office in the land?

    • #63
  4. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    DrewInWisconsin:There does seem to be a pattern, doesn’t there? When Jews are specifically targeted and killed, he or his proxies can’t bring themselves to say that. They just talk about “random people in a deli” or something. When Christians are specifically targeted and killed, he can’t mention that, either.

    A Muslim shooter is “workplace violence,” and the President can’t acknowledge the chants of Allahu Akbar!

    It was absolutely jaw-dropping that he’d go before the UN to say”Chanting Death to America won’t create jobs.” Oh . . . did you feel the burn Mr. Khameini?

    Geez.

    But you know, you can’t get on your high horse about ISIS, because the Crusades!

    Isn’t it long past time we acknowledged that we twice elected a jihadi-sympathizer to the highest office in the land?

    Drew,

    Agreed.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #64
  5. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    DrewInWisconsin:Isn’t it long past time we acknowledged that we twice elected a jihadi-sympathizer to the highest office in the land?

    Overstating it somewhat, no? Clearly, he doesn’t take the problem of jihadi violence as seriously as a president should. But sympathizer? Really?

    • #65
  6. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake:

    DrewInWisconsin:Isn’t it long past time we acknowledged that we twice elected a jihadi-sympathizer to the highest office in the land?

    Overstating it somewhat, no? Clearly, he doesn’t take the problem of jihadi violence as seriously as a president should. But sympathizer? Really?

    Midge,

    Sympathizer only implies an obvious pattern of behavior. It you look at his reactions to ISIS atrocities & genocides you immediately get the idea that anything these sick monsters do is just more water under the bridge. Meanwhile, Iran is a Jihadist State by any measure. He has fabricated a false idea of a relationship with them that even he admits is impossible. He brings a kid to the White House who has patently used a bomb look alike to provoke a response. Meanwhile, reports of massive increases in anti-Semitic acts are a yawn. Christians under an ongoing genocide in the Middle East isn’t anything “to get on your high horse about” and don’t forget the crusades.

    Midge what other conclusion is there to come to.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #66
  7. Mark Wilson Inactive
    Mark Wilson
    @MarkWilson

    James Gawron: Sympathizer only implies an obvious pattern of behavior.

    Sympathizer implies some sort of positive feelings and common goals, doesn’t it?  At worst he’s indifferent; most likely he finds jihadism abhorrent but just has a different set of political priorities in which dealing decisively with the issue is less important than, say, free birth control.

    • #67
  8. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    Mark Wilson:

    James Gawron: Sympathizer only implies an obvious pattern of behavior.

    Sympathizer implies some sort of positive feelings and common goals, doesn’t it?

    Yes. Sympathizer implies intent, not just a pattern of behavior.

    At worst he’s indifferent; most likely he finds jihadism abhorrent but just has a different set of political priorities in which dealing decisively with the issue is less important than, say, free birth control.

    Pretty much. Presidential fecklessness may enable jihad, but that isn’t the same thing as sympathizing with it.

    • #68
  9. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Mark Wilson:

    James Gawron: Sympathizer only implies an obvious pattern of behavior.

    Sympathizer implies some sort of positive feelings and common goals, doesn’t it? At worst he’s indifferent; most likely he finds jihadism abhorrent but just has a different set of political priorities in which dealing decisively with the issue is less important than, say, free birth control.

    Mark,

    Aren’t you just telling yourself a convenient lie. It is so much easier to rationalize a sitting President’s actions and words than face an unpleasant reality. Please observe the pattern more closely.

    Qaddafi must be taken out by cruise missile and Mubarak must go. American intel gave him clear indication that this would put Jihadists and The Muslim Brotherhood in power but that didn’t matter. When the Jihadist State of Iran was on the brink of collapse in 2009-10 we didn’t dare make even a strong speech about the Mullahs. We sat and watched the Greens getting beaten and gassed in the streets of Tehran for six months.

    I think there is a clear unmistakable pattern.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #69
  10. Roberto Inactive
    Roberto
    @Roberto

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.:In a 15-minute statement, Obama stressed that the US is “the only advanced country on Earth that sees these kinds of mass shootings every couple of months.” He praised the gun control efforts in Australia…

    Australia: Two Dead In Police Station Shooting

    A gunman killed an employee at a police building in Australia, before being shot dead by police in the ensuing gunfight.

    Friday 02 October 2015

    Right outside a police station, still not enough to save those two lives.

    • #70
  11. Solon JF Inactive
    Solon JF
    @Solon

    OK, let’s have one of the GOP candidates politicize this.  Sounds great!

    • #71
  12. Ralphie Inactive
    Ralphie
    @Ralphie

    The shortest speech Obama will ever make is telling us what shouldn’t be politicized.

    • #72
  13. Mark Wilson Inactive
    Mark Wilson
    @MarkWilson

    Solon JF: OK, let’s have one of the GOP candidates politicize this. Sounds great!

    That brings headlines of “Shame!” from left wing (i.e. mainstream) news outlets.  Just the other day I saw one that tried to shame GOP politicians for expressing public sympathy to the families of the victims, because those same politicians had, at some point in the past, voted against unspecified gun control legislation.  It’s their fault, you know.

    • #73
  14. Eric Hines Inactive
    Eric Hines
    @EricHines

    Robert McReynolds:

    Eric Hines:

    jonsouth:Here in Japan you’re hardly allowed to own anything more powerful than a BB gun. The last guy here who did a mass-killing simply drove his car into a crowd standing by the roadside, then jumped out and started randomly stabbing. We’re surrounded by objects that can be easily weaponized if the will to harm is strong enough.

    Indeed. There was a gas attack a bit ago in Japan, too, that demonstrated how easy it is to brew up lethality against the masses. You can get a good enough chlorine output from the stuff you have lying about in your house, too.

    Israel banned for a long time (not long enough) sugar from being shipped into Gaza–and was heavily condemned for it–because that’s a good bomb-making ingredient.

    Eric Hines

    What about the use of airplanes to commit mass murder like what happened about a decade and a half ago in New York City and Washington DC?

    Tough to find those lying around the house or a science supply store.

    Eric Hines

    • #74
  15. Solon JF Inactive
    Solon JF
    @Solon

    Mark Wilson:

    Solon JF: OK, let’s have one of the GOP candidates politicize this. Sounds great!

    That brings headlines of “Shame!” from left wing (i.e. mainstream) news outlets. Just the other day I saw one that tried to shame GOP politicians for expressing public sympathy to the families of the victims, because those same politicians had, at some point in the past, voted against unspecified gun control legislation. It’s their fault, you know.

    True, and the President himself is blaming GOP politicians too (what a noble leader!).

    My feeling is that on guns and late-term abortions, the GOP candidates have a fighting chance of convincing the proverbial swing-voter that the cruel, unreasonable ones are the Democrats.

    • #75
  16. iDad Inactive
    iDad
    @iDad

    Pelayo:Where is Obama’s outrage every week after 20+ people are killed in Chicago by rival gangs or other criminals? He is a disgusting hypocrite. I knew he was going to politicize this horrible shooting as soon as I heard about it.

    The vast majority of those shootings are done by and to people who look like Obama’s son, if he had one.  Hard for him to politicize those without offending his favored constituencies, so no faux outrage.

    • #76
  17. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake:

    DrewInWisconsin:Isn’t it long past time we acknowledged that we twice elected a jihadi-sympathizer to the highest office in the land?

    Overstating it somewhat, no? Clearly, he doesn’t take the problem of jihadi violence as seriously as a president should. But sympathizer? Really?

    Yes, really. Starting from the beginning of his Presidency, his seemingly incoherent Middle East policy can only be explained by a sympathy for jihadists.

    • #77
  18. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    James Gawron:Qaddafi must be taken out by cruise missile and Mubarak must go. American intel gave him clear indication that this would put Jihadists and The Muslim Brotherhood in power but that didn’t matter. When the Jihadist State of Iran was on the brink of collapse in 2009-10 we didn’t dare make even a strong speech about the Mullahs. We sat and watched the Greens getting beaten and gassed in the streets of Tehran for six months.

    I think there is a clear unmistakable pattern.

    Absolutely agreed.

    Or as others have stated, if he was sympathetic to jihadists, how would his actions be any different?

    • #78
  19. Pseudodionysius Inactive
    Pseudodionysius
    @Pseudodionysius

    Steynamite.

    • #79
  20. Mike Silver Inactive
    Mike Silver
    @Mikescapes

    iDad:

    Pelayo:Where is Obama’s outrage every week after 20+ people are killed in Chicago by rival gangs or other criminals? He is a disgusting hypocrite. I knew he was going to politicize this horrible shooting as soon as I heard about it.

    The vast majority of those shootings are done by and to people who look like Obama’s son, if he had one. Hard for him to politicize those without offending his favored constituencies, so no faux outrage.

    What was the shooter’s race? Must have been a white guy or Obama wouldn’t have jumped on it. If it was cops killed in a race riot there would be silence, or at best, a mild reproach a week later. Everything in the Obama mentality is seen through the prism of race. Everything! He, like others of his ilk, is a prisoner of his own bigotry. What fools Americans are not to have seen who he was once the Black Liberation Theology connection was revealed at the outset.

    • #80
  21. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Mike Silver:

    iDad:

    Pelayo:Where is Obama’s outrage every week after 20+ people are killed in Chicago by rival gangs or other criminals? He is a disgusting hypocrite. I knew he was going to politicize this horrible shooting as soon as I heard about it.

    The vast majority of those shootings are done by and to people who look like Obama’s son, if he had one. Hard for him to politicize those without offending his favored constituencies, so no faux outrage.

    What was the shooter’s race? Must have been a white guy or Obama wouldn’t have jumped on it.

    White-ish.

    • #81
  22. Son of Spengler Member
    Son of Spengler
    @SonofSpengler

    Obama behaves as if he is living in an Aaron Sorkin fantasy. After his truthtelling about guns, there will be a montage in which Congress bends to his will. Then mass shootings will be no more and he moves on to eliminating income inequality once and for all. with another speech and another montage.

    • #82
  23. Pseudodionysius Inactive
    Pseudodionysius
    @Pseudodionysius

    It’s like Harry Potter without the accent or the lighting for the castles or…

    • #83
  24. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Son of Spengler:Obama behaves as if he is living in an Aaron Sorkin fantasy.

    The West Wing is a fascinating look at how Democrats see themselves.

    Unfortunately for them, reality isn’t that contrived.

    • #84
  25. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    DrewInWisconsin:

    James Gawron:Qaddafi must be taken out by cruise missile and Mubarak must go. American intel gave him clear indication that this would put Jihadists and The Muslim Brotherhood in power but that didn’t matter. When the Jihadist State of Iran was on the brink of collapse in 2009-10 we didn’t dare make even a strong speech about the Mullahs. We sat and watched the Greens getting beaten and gassed in the streets of Tehran for six months.

    I think there is a clear unmistakable pattern.

    Absolutely agreed.

    Or as others have stated, if he was sympathetic to jihadists, how would his actions be any different?

    If I rear-end another’s car, I could do it deliberately (“road rage”) or accidentally. The damage I do is identical either way, but the crime is not. One is a criminal offense, involving mens rea; the other, an accident for which I am liable.

    The law distinguishes between these two scenarios because intent does matter when establishing guilt, even though lack of bad intent doesn’t undo the bad outcomes of actions.

    Saying that, whether someone sympathizes or not, he’s enabling, is one thing. Deducing from that enabling behavior that he must be a sympathizer is another.

    • #85
  26. Man With the Axe Inactive
    Man With the Axe
    @ManWiththeAxe

    I would like to hear from Obama exactly what laws he would recommend that would have prevented this particular massacre, and how those laws would have done so.

    • #86
  27. Man With the Axe Inactive
    Man With the Axe
    @ManWiththeAxe

    I would like to hear what Obama has done or plans to do to keep the rest of us safe from demented killers, whether armed with guns, knives, or other weapons.

    • #87
  28. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    I haven’t read all of the comments, but I’ve been thinking about this all day.

    I think we need to look at the “mass shootings”–people who shoot innocent people in theaters, colleges, schools, churches–differently.

    As a country, first, we need to look at this analytically and convene our best and most experienced minds regionally and then nationally, for the purpose of gathering as much on-the-ground information as we can about these seemingly random killings.

    Second, we need to separate out the killings by people who are under or have been under psychiatric care from the relatively small number of shooters–like yesterday’s–who are not ill but who are rather, frankly, evil.

    The left is hysterical because there are so many of these instances. But they are not all alike. There are two problems to address.

    The psychiatric cases we can solve. They need better supervision.

    I have no idea how to handle the terrorists, but I trust the American people to come up with some good answers if we put the right people in the same room.

    And until we solve these problems, if I were the president, I’d be handing more guns to the American people, saying, “No one has a right to take your life away. Here is a gun. Protect yourself.”

    • #88
  29. Robert Lux Inactive
    Robert Lux
    @RobertLux

    Does anybody have any good data on Australia and the UK and the claim that non-gun related crime and house break-ins increased in that country as a result of their gun ban?

    I did some research on this — alas, I don’t have copious amount of free time to do so — and I’m not coming up with anything in favor of conservatives’ argument.

    • #89
  30. Augustine Member
    Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    I would ask news organizations to tally up the number of Americans who’ve been killed because they couldn’t get guns to defend themselves.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.