David Axelrod: Obama Will Be Jumping Into Gun Control Debate

WASHINGTON -- Although President Obama avoided talking about the contentious issue of gun control in Tuesday's State of the Union address, his top advisers say he will soon be jumping into the debate.

In a discussion with a small group of bloggers and reporters on Wednesday at the White House, Senior Advisor David Axelrod said there was "no doubt" the President will address the gun issue at a later date.

"I don't know exactly how we're going to approach it," he said when asked by The Huffington Post whether Obama would be giving a speech on it, "but obviously these issues are out there and have been extenuated by the tragedy in Tucson. And so we will -- he will engage in that ... debate."

Axelrod added that the reason the president omitted gun control from his State of the Union address was that he wanted it to be "focused as much as possible on the economy."

"It wasn't the typical State of the Union speech, which is generally like 70 one-off issues connected by some weak connective tissue," he said. "This was an argument and it was an argument about a specific challenge facing the country. And so that's why it wasn't there. But obviously this is an important issue and he'll speak to it."

In a briefing with reporters aboard Air Force One on Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs also said, "I wouldn't rule out that at some point the president talks about the issues surrounding gun violence. I don't have a timetable or, obviously, what he would say."

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who runs the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns, said he was disappointed that Obama didn't take on gun control in his address.

"In discussing the terrible tragedy in Tucson, he missed an opportunity to bring the country together on an issue that has support among the vast majority of Americans: fixing the nation's broken background check system that is designed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people," he said in a statement. "Its absence was disappointing, but it will not slow the momentum we are building around the country, and in both parties, for common sense measures to strengthen law enforcement and improve public safety."

Another notable absence in Obama's State of the Union speech was any mention of housing or the foreclosure crisis. Axelrod said that in the address on Tuesday, Obama "wanted to talk about the discrete areas of growth and job creation and the elements that go into it that are just absolutely essential to a long-term strategy." He and National Economic Council Deputy Director Brian Deese, who was also at the meeting, said the administration would be talking more about housing in the coming weeks.

Comments

[Just4]

06:27 PM on 03/04/2011

3/3/2011 and now we know.

“Well, the Second Amendment in this country is part of our Constitution and the President of the United States is bound by our Constitution. So I believe in the Second Amendment. It does provide for Americans the right to bear arms for their protection, for their safety, for hunting, for a wide range of uses.”

-Barack H. Obama

[LouGots]

04:21 PM on 03/06/2011

Here's an account of that, to put it in context http://www.cnsnews.com/node/82239

Does that comport with Axelrod's promise, or do we need to settle down and enjoy the crickets?

[LouGots]

09:04 PM on 02/27/2011

Waiting for Obama::"Do you think he'll come?"

[OMEGA MAN]

09:37 PM on 02/27/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFGQN2-oS3Q

[LouGots]

04:49 PM on 02/07/2011

February 7, 2012: [Crickets--crickets--crickets]

[Time Before]

03:08 AM on 01/31/2011

In the USA domestic War
1) Let go ten years out: 150.000 dead
2) 700,000 a year go to the hospital the wounded
3) Many will be put on SSI for life
4) Others will need psychological help
5) 356,000 gun related crimes $$$ to deal with
6) Between 1976 and 1998, of the over 1,800 officers killed-- Most law enforcement officers are killed with firearms, particularly handguns
Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 282, no. 5, August 4, 1999). When lost productivity, lost quality of life, and pain and suffering are added to medical costs, estimates of the annual total cost of firearm violence range
from $20 billion to $100 billion.

LegalEagle points out that gangs states 80% of death are gang related: Wonderful! She leves out the fact that since the Mexican community is scared to report crime many are shot and go missing. She also leaves out poverty! Then from their she misses the fact that FBI states it has % of unknown events - say 3% they are not sure. For example many hookers in NY went missing but since they were poor, and runaways no one reported them missing -till it became to prevalent!

The GOP and Gun rights people want small GOV and to reduce the entitlements - pension system. But we have spent 1 to 2 billion on year on medical for gun wounds a year.

USA At War, 10 Years of War in Iraq, Afghanistan
8,000 Dead
30,000 Wounded

[Dimensio]

10:04 AM on 01/31/2011

For what reason should your claims be considered to be credible after you have relied upon demonstrable lies as a means of advocating your position?

[Time Before]

08:53 PM on 02/05/2011

The only lie given here is your lack of ability to reach for the truth and so lower yourself to the oldest trick in the book - you lie! GW Bush stated he cherry picked the information or was that Carl Rove?

There have been no lies - one fact was misread, but still the fact remains more people die a year and are wounded with guns then in Two on going wars.

You pay from your taxes - 1 to 2 billion a year for the medical from guns. You pay all the infrastructure costs - that is the police, the firemen, the ambulances, the social workers, the workman's camp, the SSI and food stamps for the wounded ...add in the families. What is the cost?

We tax the guns and bullets for the lose of life!

We sell rubber bullets, only people with good reason or a proven track recored can be live ammunition!

The constitution stands in my view I am more worried about the loss of habeas corpus, freedom of speech, the 14 amendment. Let me be clear you - you read the screed sent to the British King on the Reasons for revolt of the colonies - guns was not on the list- keep your guns, without habeas corpus, freedom of speech the 14 amendment - you have nothing! You read that screed and you get back to if you have the guts. Call me a lier - you better back it for the pen

[legaleagle 45]

02:24 PM on 01/31/2011

Time Before wrote: " Most law enforcemen­t officers are killed with firearms, particular­ly handguns"

Most law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty, were killed in traffic incidents, not firearm incidents.

Time Before wrote: LegalEagle points out that gangs states 80% of death are gang related:

Incorrect. What I said was that, according to the FBI, 80% of ALL CRIME in the ENTIRE USA is gang related and I provided a link to establish exactly that. I further indicated that almost 60% of all honicides in Los Angeles is related to gang activity.

The remainder of your post is totally irrelevant. In fact worse than irrelevant because it was indeed my intent to change the conversation away from guns as a boogeyman which is demonstrated as an ineffective method of controlling crime based upon your own link, to actually discuss the underlying root causes of crime, which are poverty, poor education and the like as much more effective and efficient methods of reducing crime.

Yet you rant on about guns...

BTW, for the 2nd time, I am a male.

[jackbutler5555]

11:51 AM on 02/01/2011

I agree with you that poverty and poor education are major problems that must be solved.

But all that may take a while, won't it?

In the meantime, who don't we find more direct ways to prevent gun crimes committed by the poor and uneducated. 

Let's say we solve poverty and poor education in say, 2020.  Those nine years might be a good time to reduce the gun crime rate by other means, no?

[Time Before]

06:55 PM on 02/05/2011

First, my hard drive crashed - so I have been gone for that reason, I had to get a new one and set up new OS system - all.

I want you to know ask yourself - again what are the numbers of deaths a year - homicide by guns?

I want you to think again about the number of offerers lost in the field by hand guns!

I will say again suicide- most people who fail at are happy they did. More women try then men - the are not successful - they like drowning, cutting and pills - hanging. they get rescued allot and survive the jumps off bridges.
On the other hand, men use the gun and it is final.

Rape, domestic violence are not included in the gun report.

Alright 1 to 2 billion a year in medical alone for the survivors of gun shot wounds. Tax payer money for your right to shoot.

Add in police, firefighters, social workers and SSI and ambulances - for each victim and the cost to the system from guns. What is that?

Again the police miss a huge amount of crime in the poor areas so the numbers are much higher. Huge!

Gangs are a social issue. You walk away from.

The hutree, militia. Do you think a black militia, a Muslim militia could stand in the USA? How about Workers party militia? Militia is a gang - You remember the Black Panthers? They did a lot of good

[Time Before]

03:35 PM on 01/30/2011

FBI Home Page

The surge in the level of violent crime in the Nation over the
past decade corresponded with a significant rise in firearm usage
by the criminal population. The main focus of this study is
to examine this dynamic nationally and regionally and to discuss
trends for other types of weapons used in violent crimes.
The data in this report are based on Uniform Crime Reporting
(UCR) weapon information collected for the offenses of murder,
robbery, and aggravated assault. These crimes constitute
95 percent of all violent crimes. Weapon data are not collected
for forcible rape. The weapon categories are (1) firearms,
(2) knives or cutting instruments, (3) other dangerous weapons,
and (4) personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.)
National Experience
During 1994, based on crimes reported to law enforcement
agencies, there were 544,880 offenses in the United States in
which victims were murdered, robbed, or assaulted with firearms.
In other words, nearly 1 out of 3 (31%) murder, robbery,
and aggravated assault offenses collectively involved firearms
as the weapons used. Further, Table 5.1 shows that from 1985
to 1994 violent crimes committed with firearms increased by a
much wider margin than those committed with other weapons.
During this 10-year time period, firearm-related offenses were
chiefly responsible for the overall 42-percent increase in murders,
robberies,

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/1995/95sec5.pdf

[RobD407]

05:23 PM on 01/30/2011

Aside from a history lesson, does 15 year old data have any real meaning? I don't see any comparison with current data that would show relevence to conditions today.

[Time Before]

06:23 PM on 01/30/2011

Data is more stating that guns are 95% of the fatal crimes and crimes and they don't add in rape with that!

Go to Time Magazine. If you don't like it e-mail the editor - those are all current stats in their - nothing has changed.

Crime has been cut in half - show that! Also note that police think people are so poor they are not going out. Yet, desperation will increase the use of a gun! Wall Street Crime - Gang- sucking down Martini's in the Baatrats Ski lodge in Germany at 3,000 a night for a room to 6,000.

Also look at the crime rates in gun use by region. Go get your Goodies World Index - get back to me!

[legaleagle 45]

05:49 PM on 01/30/2011

More recent data for 2009 discloses that the number of violent crimes committed with firearms was cut nearly in half.

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_15.html

Yet the number of firearms in private hands substantially increased in the interim.. In 1997 the feds estimated 200,000,000 privately owned firearms:

http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/165476.txt

The current estimate is around 300,000,000.

[Time Before]

09:07 PM on 02/05/2011

You left out the economics of the time. You left out the gun smuggling!

Also the Hutree a right wing Christian gang took part in plot to kill people - police to hold a rebellion.

Alright then let the black communities form a militia, the Muslims and the Unions or workers Party and Atheists.

What would be the FBI's response?

Were the Black Panther's a Militia? Were they all bad?
I mean the FBI by public record went to war with them- even when they called for truce and negotiations. Hey they fought for the same reason you guys call your rights.

Fact we still lose more people a year in the USA by guns then we do in outright war! We have more wounded. You cut that in half and the 1 to 2 billion in medicals we are all paying.

The more guns - the more accidental deaths, the more rapes, more domestic violence - all using hand guns, but hey they keep that data separate - why?

Next tell me the amount of ammunition in the USA - by year and by total thought to be. Then compare that to a standing army in South America Central Asia, South East Asia ----E. Europe. Get back to me.

Also show me the % of guns use not known - unreported crimes and deaths.

Show me, the medical save rate for gun shots now and again show me from Goodies World Index the demographics of your area.

[Capo di tutti Capi]

08:42 AM on 01/30/2011

Ever notice the more gun control is brought up, the more guns are bought up?!?

The week of the AZ shooting weapon sales jumped 63%. So all the rara and statistics mean nothing. I also will be purchasing a new rifle before this preposterous debate comes to a head and I will be informing everyone I know! Good luck on disarmament!

[RClydesdale]

11:56 AM on 02/01/2011

Kudos to you. We must remember that Ms. Giffords, although a Democrat, was an advocate and owner of handguns.

[Time Before]

09:14 PM on 02/05/2011

She believed in the constitution - that part I like - that she died - I mean that - she had 25% her brains blown out. - from her own stance is a poetic justice.

Here she should be fighting for habeas corpus, due process the 14 amendment, and freedom of speech. Why? Guns want help if you don't have that...you have nothing with out that. You read the screed sent to the British about the reason for revolt - guns are not there!

The Egyptian's revolted - with out guns - even if they had them the Military is everything in that country- they own lots of land and title - if the USA goes the same way - game over.

[Capo di tutti Capi]

08:37 AM on 01/30/2011

I don't understand why this particular right is up for debate due to an individual's actions. And as far as the SCOTUS decisions. They CAN be hacks, activists, corrupted, and just plain partisan!

WE THE PEOPLE are the rightful MASTERS of BOTH Congress & the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution, but to OVERTHROW MEN WHO PERVERT THE CONSTITUTION.

Abe Lincoln

The Constitution is the first & final say-so unless amended! But the Bill of Rights is not part of what is up for debating, it is the catalogue of rights! During the debates the Federalists didn't even think 2A needed inclusion. They couldn't imagine an ilk of subhuman statists attempting to strip away GOD-GIVEN rights! Gun control is the ruse of impending iron fist dictators! Check yourself on denying rights JUST BC you don't exercise it!

[Capo di tutti Capi]

08:18 AM on 01/30/2011

Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and having them under the management of Congress?

Patrick Henry

We should not forget that the spark which ignited the American Revolution was caused by the British attempt to confiscate the firearms of the colonists.

Patrick Henry

      A strong body makes a strong mind. As to the species of exercise I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks.

Thomas Jefferson

When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...

George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention

HEY....COMMIE!!!

MOLON LABE

[RClydesdale]

12:01 PM on 02/01/2011

Good post.

Ben Franklin once said "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety" and "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

Thomas Jefferson said "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

The intent of our founding fathers is clear.

[elizlucinda]

07:36 AM on 01/30/2011

I have looked at a lot of statistics on here and my conclusion is so what? the United states has a huge number of injuries and deaths from firearms...and a huge number of firearms. Apparently people are more interested in stats than they are in reducing these numbers.

It makes outsiders wonder why you seem to value your right to have guns more than you value the lives of your citizens.

By the way...please don't give me the hooey about how free you are. It's just that...hooey

[Capo di tutti Capi]

08:23 AM on 01/30/2011

If that's the case why are you posting, howse about you give at that free speech! You can't pick & choose which part of America you want to accept. Take it or leave it!

You just solidified what I always hear about libs...no facts unless it tailors your results and if it lacks, your emotions rule the day! Sorry lib, you don't get to arm govt and leave the PEOPLE defenseless! ASININE comments from some of you! Wow

[elizlucinda]

09:16 AM on 01/30/2011

Capo...you lack of insight is both amazing and frightening.

[RClydesdale]

12:19 PM on 02/01/2011

The United States is NOT the leader in firearm deaths. Less than 1% of accidental deaths in the U.S. are the result of a gun. From 1981 to 2001, accidental deaths by gun dropped by over 60%. (Source: 2001, Center for Disease Control, WISQARS.)

Deaths and injuries from mass public shootings fall dramatically after right-to-carry concealed handgun laws are enacted. Between 1977 and 1995, The average death rate from mass
shootings plummeted by up to 91% after such laws went into effect, and injuries dropped by over 80%. (Source: Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement, John Lott and William Landes, Law School of the University of Chicago, Law & Economics Working Paper No. 73).

The U.S. is far from the most violent country. In a study of contact crime victim rates, the U.S. ranks 13th - behind Australia, England, Scotland, Wales, Canada, Finland, Poland, Ireland, Denmark, France, Sweden, Switzerland and the Netherlands. (Source: 2001 Dutch Ministry of Justice, Criminal Victimization in Seventeen Industrialized Countries).

You can't stop insane people from doing insane things by passing insane laws, it's insane. The AZ shooter could easily have rented a Ford Expedition and run down hundreds of people in his crazed frenzy. Shall we regulate the Ford Expedition? Pretty soon you'll need a license to posses a plastic SPORK.

Anyone want to challenge my numbers?

[Time Before]

02:34 AM on 01/30/2011

Time magazine 24 January 2011

In one day in American Life: Gun deaths and violence:

8 children and teens die

286 People Die from being Shot: Murders, Assaults Suicides, Accidents, and from the Police

86 a day die from the Gun 35 of that number is murder.

IN One year 12,632 people are Murdered by a gun in the USA.

In one year 100,000 + will die by the gun.

10 Years of war and we lose 8,000 men

10 years of American Life we lost a million!

The EU has its stats page. You can see the numbers as clear as day.

Christian Science Monitor

“We can absolutely draw a fact-based conclusion about [whether there’s a correlation between declining crime rates and increasing gun ownership], and the answer is no,” says David Kennedy, director of the Center for Crime Prevention and Control in New York. “There are very consistent findings that the acquisition and obtaining of carry permits by ordinary law-abiding people has either no or very little impact on the crime rate.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2009/1223/More-guns-equal-more-crime-Not-in-2009-FBI-crime-report-shows.

The United States with 2.5 million in Prison - more them all EU, Russia Combined = with the highest death rates from hand guns in the W.World. Funny DC is the worst area - home to republic's guardians!

[mackbolan]

03:01 AM on 01/30/2011

the stats you posted from time magazine are complete lies...

[Time Before]

04:04 AM on 01/30/2011

Send a post card to the Time Magazine; call them and tell them. Then call FBI and the USG where they got the data and tell them!

Complete lies - why would they do that? Why would they print it? I will give you this the Media in the USA should always put a bibliography in the back - so you can quickly see where they get their data and who wrote it - Right Wing Or Left ,,,,,,you want to see who pays for the study - that tells allot. Your guy is known AS the Jersey Conservative -funny he is for guns!

[hagenjr]

04:31 AM on 01/30/2011

your numbers are way off.

[Time Before]

04:50 AM on 01/30/2011

There not my numbers! They are the USG and US Universities, and NGO's numbers! They all have notes and Bibliographies and peer reviews. If you want to throw stones throw them at them.

Or give me a source with repeatable research methods - not one with a Conservative backed NRA logic. The numbers are ugly and the Europeans know them,too! That is why they think we are nuts and Tocqueville was right in his book, "Democracy In a America."

[hagenjr]

11:34 PM on 01/29/2011

Let us hope the President uses reason and common sense in addressing this issue. There is room for strengthening NCIS and certianly some improvement in reporting potentially unstable people could be made. Let us hope he sticks to a rational response to the issue instead of proposing blanket bans which will not work.

Gun control laws only disarm the law abiding.

[RClydesdale]

12:27 PM on 02/01/2011

I agree. The shooters at Columbine violated 20 state and federal firearm laws in committing the worst school mass shooting in history. Does anyone on here believe that another law would have stopped them? Once again I submit that they could have rented a Ford Expedition and run down many more students at the end of the day. Insane people will always find a way. Sane people must be allowed the means to defend themselves.

[rickroland]

08:11 PM on 01/29/2011

What could Obama possibly add to any such debate? Answer: Absolutely nothing. Thanks for playing.

[Time Before]

04:08 AM on 01/29/2011

Homicide rates in the United States are two to four times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it.

Higher rates are found in developing countries and those with political instability.[21][25][26]

Prevalence of homicide and violent crime is greatest in urban areas of the United States. In metropolitan areas, the homicide rate in 2005 was 6.1 per 100,000 compared with 3.5 in non-metropolitan counties.[27] In U.S. cities with populations greater than 250,000, the mean homicide rate was 12.1 per 100,000.[28] According to FBI statistics, the highest per capita rates of gun-related homicides in 2005 were in D.C. (35.4/100,000), Puerto Rico (19.6/100,000), Louisiana (9.9/100,000), & Maryland (9.9/100,000) .[29] The Bureau of Justice statistics from 2004 do not include D.C or Puerto Rico. see "Gun violence in the United States by state".

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[

See Gun Laws in Europe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law

Go to the International stats for crime and compare the USA

The Bradly Hand Gun Bill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Handgun_Violence_Prevention_Act

The USA Kills more people a year at home then war. That is a fact!

[OdinsEye]

04:19 AM on 01/29/2011

The countries the US gets compared to have very different societal and cultural norms, history, ethnic and racial demographics, etc. And most had very low rates prior to the adoption of strict gun control laws. Thus, concluding that gun control laws in those countries are the reason for their low rates is completely erroneous.

The CDC also looked at more than 50 studies of gun control and could not find conclusive evidence that gun control had any significant effect on the rates.

Those are facts.

[enlightened45]

09:31 AM on 01/29/2011

And concluding that the gun control laws are not a reason for the low rates is equally erroneous.

[blueman00009]

11:15 AM on 01/29/2011

Why throw in ethnic and racial demographics? What on earth does that have to do with anything?

By the way, I get they have a better society and cultural norms then the us. Why shouldn't we aspire to something better?

[JimInHouston]

10:26 AM on 01/29/2011

Before you go waxing on about international studies, you should learn that these countries count their crimes differently. Unless you have ensured that counts are being done in a uniform and consistent manner, everything you say is suspect.

http://www.mcrkba.org/InternationalCrime.html

[RobD407]

11:28 AM on 01/29/2011

"The 1996 U.S. murder rate is vastly higher (nearly six times) than England's,"

"According to 1996 police statistics, firearms were used in 68% of U.S. murders but 7% of English murders,"

The statistics are dated but if you compare non-gun US murders to UK murders, our rate would still be nearly three times as high. Apparently we are simply more likely to kill each other than open a can of "whoopass". I guess we pefer permanent solutions to our problems.

[RobD407]

03:05 AM on 01/29/2011

Another point in favor of the "individual right" interpretation of the Second Amendment.
From the Supreme Court Decision, Dred Scott v Sanford 1857

The excerpt refers to citizenship.

"It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went."

Why would the Supreme Court express concern that Black men, given citizenship, would "keep and carry arms" if it wasn't recognized as an individual right? This isn't the so called Conservative dominated Supreme Court of today, that twist the meaning to suit their masters in the NRA. The NRA wasn't founded until 1871.

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=29&page=transcript

[Rooster Coburn]

08:25 AM on 01/29/2011

You are right, although the part about rights is what is known as "inter alia", not part of the central decision and therefore not considered to create precedent. It does show that the right to keep and bear (carry) arms was considered so basic as to be taken for granted by the Court. I have often asked, "What other rights which are enumerated by the Court in the Scott decision do you think no longer apply, and if your answer is 'none' then why in the name of John Moses Browning do you single out the right to keep and bear arms for exception? "

[Rooster Coburn]

10:49 PM on 01/28/2011

To remain credible, any new "gun control" measures must first prove to be "demographically neutral."  That is to say they must be proven not to lessen the number of firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition sold to the people nor to lessen the  number of firearms owners in America.
Why? Because the right to keep and bear arms movement is strongest in areas of our nation where firearms ownership is highest, and weakest where firearms ownership is lowest.  So any so-called "gun control" measures which work to reduce the number of gun owners will also work to weaken the gun-rights movement.  A weakened gun-rights movement will then be less able to prevent further restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms, which will in turn result in the passage of further "gun control" laws, which in their turn will further reduce gun ownership and thus further weaken the right to keep and bear arms movement, resulting in an vicious circle ending in a disarmed populace, leaving only the government and the criminals in possession of modern arms.