iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert David Jaffee

GET UPDATES FROM Robert David Jaffee
 

Calling for an Executive Order Banning Assault Weapons

Posted: 07/22/2012 12:04 pm

President Obama has said that he would rather be a good one-term president, than a mediocre two-term one. If he really means that then, in the wake of the massacre in Aurora, Colo. that has left at least 12 dead and 58 wounded, why doesn't President Obama issue an executive order banning assault weapons and high-capacity gun magazines?

Not long ago, due to the failure of the Congress to pass the DREAM Act, he issued an executive order to stop the deportation of undocumented immigrants. So why can't he do something similar now? Were he to direct federal authorities to stop the sale of these firearms and magazines, he could become not only a great president but also one of towering courage in the face of the gun lobby. And my guess is that he would still be reelected.

Yes, we all know that Al Gore may have lost votes to independent voters in swing states when he called for a ban on assault weapons in 2000, but Gore did not have the political gifts of Obama, who has shown that he can be a master storyteller. His ability to define Mitt Romney as an out-of-touch job outsourcer who has yet to release all of his tax returns and may be hiding something, demonstrates Obama's storytelling assets.

President Obama has also shown a very sophisticated understanding of criminality. For instance, after the Tucson massacre in January 2011, he cited the Book of Job ("When I looked for light, then came darkness") and stated that we need to "guard against simple explanations." He was not reckless with his language and did not blame the incident on mental illness. As he famously said in 2008, "language matters." He was right then, and he is right now.

Since the massacre in Colorado, many have called James Holmes, the suspected gunman in the case, a madman, crazed, deranged and mentally ill. I recognize that it is in the vernacular to do so.

Moreover, mental illness sometimes may play a role in these massacres, as appears to have been the case with Jared Loughner, the alleged Tucson killer, who was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Other times, as in the present case, there may be zero connection to mental illness.

Holmes was withdrawing from the University of Colorado because, according to reports, he was struggling academically in the neuroscience PhD program. My guess is that the onetime UC-Riverside honors student may have never faced the prospect of failure before, and he did not know how to handle it. For some people, like Steve Jobs, failure can be an opportunity to reassess your life and your priorities, to pursue something that you really love and to do so within a moral compass.

I dropped out of law school years ago at a time when I first started taking Prozac for my lifelong, major depression. I would later become psychotic in my early thirties, believing that I was going to be blamed for a series of murders sweeping across the nation.

But I have never been violent in my life. I got back on my medication, and I realized that I had to pursue writing, my true love, as a career.

Holmes, on the other hand, clearly lacked the character to rebound from whatever academic, personal and job failings he may have experienced.

Some, like NYC Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, have suggested that Holmes may have been delusional in that he reportedly dyed his hair red and proclaimed to law-enforcement that he was the Joker, a villain in the Batman franchise.

That he dressed in a costume to the premiere of The Dark Knight Rises does not tell me that he was delusional or psychotic at all. Many people wear costumes to films, particularly films based on comic book, science fiction or cartoon characters. Many dress as villains. Consider all the Darth Vader impersonators on Hollywood Boulevard.

I would doubt that any of them are psychotic. They are simply engaging in their version of fun.

While I understand the desire for many to cite mental illness when a violent crime occurs, it is, as I have argued before, wishful thinking if we assume that only mentally ill human beings commit atrocities such as occurred in Colorado. Studies show, as I have stated many times before, that those with severe mental illness are more likely to be the victims than the perpetrators of violent crime.

Still, I have been forced to accept that those in the throes of psychosis sometimes may premeditate their acts of violence. People can be in and out of psychosis at times. Perhaps, it is in those non-psychotic times that they rigorously plan their murderous rampages.

However, I want to emphasize that the vast majority of violent crimes are not committed by the mentally ill.

President Obama, sophisticated man that he is, knows that, and he also knows that if we are ever to end these massacres, he is going to have to issue an executive order banning the sale of assault weapons and high-capacity gun magazines.

 
FOLLOW POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 97
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
04:26 PM on 08/06/2012
1st off, Obama never stopped the deportation of undocumented immigrants. He simply signed an order establishing priorities for deportation. The vast majority of deportations of undocumented immigrants are done through SECURE communities. That hasn't and will not change.

Secondly, even if the sale of assault weapons was banned before this, it would not have changed a single thing as no weapon used in this shooting was an assault weapon.

Also if the liberals were actually serious about cracking down on gun violence, they would stop complaining about prison overcrowding and racism when gun enhancements are strictly used against prior offenders, gang members, parolees, ex-felons, etc. The vast majority of deaths by firearms are caused by these people.
04:45 PM on 07/24/2012
I am assuming all of you leftists would have applauded the presence of a police officer in the room, but let's not lose sight of the fact that a police officer is merely an armed, responsible adult. In fact any armed, responsible adult would have been capable of taking the same sort of action that one acting on behalf of the people could. The fact that the city of Aurora, in all of their wisdom, passed a law (no lawful concealed carry of firearms permitted) which effectively guaranteed that there would be NO such armed, responsible adults unless an actual police officer were present pretty much made that theater into a one way shooting gallery, didn't it?

How many more innocent, unlawfully yet legally disarmed people have to die at the hands of madmen before government at all levels gets the hell out of the way and allows us to look after our own safety? The NRA was not responsible for this massacre-liberals and marxists were!
09:14 PM on 07/25/2012
A police officer is an agent of the state, trained to handle such threats accordingly.

You are not.

A disarmed society is a happy society. Confiscate firearms, re write the constitution, level the death penalty at any stragglers who refuse to join the rest of us in the 21st century.

Then you won't have to worry about getting shot at the picture show!
02:27 PM on 07/26/2012
Yes, yes, you're right. Best we all disarm posthaste, because we all know nothing bad has ever happened to a disarmed populace....

...that is, unless one happened to be at Srebrenica, Potocari, the Warsaw Ghetto, Wounded Knee, in Soviet Russia, Communist China, the Homolodor in Ukraine, Khmer Cambodia, Nazi Germany, present day Mexico etc etc ad infinitum to the tune of something like 100 million victims of democide in the last century alone.

Look here: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM

Your assertions are horrifying. Advocate the state murder of peaceful people merely because they don't agree with you? Really? I thought we had moved beyond that in todays world. Learn, think, THEN write.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
swatcapt
12:30 AM on 09/06/2012
How much time do you think police spend traing with their duty weapon, how much time do you think they learn about there weapon at the acadamy. Let me help you they only have to qualify once maybe twice a year and about a week at the acadamy.
01:40 PM on 07/24/2012
Let's set aside that such an EO would be unconstitutional. Let's also pretend you don't care about the liklihood that such an EO would almost certainly lead to him being defeated in the elction. Let's even set aside that it might incite civil war.

Let's just look at the actual act. If a President can issue an EO to ban "assault weapons", then a President can also issue an EO to ban abortion. You want to open that can of worms??

Next time think, THEN write.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
swatcapt
12:30 AM on 09/06/2012
or a Eo on free speech
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:18 PM on 07/24/2012
Seems strange to me that someone that wants to decrease violence would advocate for the passage of an executive order that could only lead to a massive civil war.
01:07 AM on 07/24/2012
Not all shotguns have chokes. Cheap ones don't.
01:05 AM on 07/24/2012
Amnesty for illegals encourages employers of illegals. And now you want a war on guns? How's the war on drugs working out?
09:48 PM on 07/23/2012
Fact: An Executive Order may not override or conflict with any standing law as passed by Congress. Where such conflict exists, the law takes precedence and the EO is null and void.

Obama could write that EO today and it would be more worthless than the paper he wrote it on.

You seriously write for this blog? Do you have *ANY* understanding of basic civics? Do you know what an Executive Order can do and cannot? It amazes me who can be a professional blogger these days.
09:45 PM on 07/23/2012
I would never comply with such a executive order and so would millions of other Americans. Such a executive order would be patently unconstitutional and illegal. A illegal law is no law. Such a order would essentially turn the office of the president into a rule by decree dictatorship
09:18 PM on 07/25/2012
Then you would find yourself in Jail, your assets stripped, and your home given to an immigrant who actually needs a large home for his large family!

Dictatorship isn't bad, better than allowing johnny rambo to vote!
08:40 PM on 07/23/2012
And to the person that said a shotgun can kill 6 people at once.. It just goes to show you people watch to much TV and have NO IDEA what your actually talking about when it comes to firearms. Just to give you alittle fact, The average shotgun shell group will expand 1inch for every yard it goes down range, so at 5 yards, it will leave a 5 inch pattern of shot [what shotgun bullets are called] in a circle. At 10 yards, 10 inches ect ect...so no, inside a small space the shot pattern would still be very small and out past 50 yards a shotgun is usless with normal shot as it looses to much energy and speed and will likly not kill you...thats why police use buckshot for short range and slugs for long [slugs turn the shotgun into a basic rifle as it shoots one bullet compared to the buckshots 9 pellets]....just so you know, Id hate for you to sound totally stupid while attempting to restrict the rights of your fellow americans
08:03 PM on 07/23/2012
Fact: An Executive Order may not override or conflict with any standing law as passed by Congress. Where such conflict exists, the law takes precedence and the EO is null and void.

Obama could write that EO today and it would be more worthless than the paper he wrote it on.
07:53 PM on 07/23/2012
You seriously write for this blog? Do you have *ANY* understanding of basic civics? Do you know what an Executive Order can do and cannot? It amazes me who can be a professional blogger these days.
06:08 PM on 07/23/2012
white House Petition: http://wh.gov/CrAl
03:25 PM on 07/23/2012
Please help SIGN and SPREAD this petition to Congress on Change.org --
https://www.change.org/petitions/the-u-s-house-of-representatives-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-now
07:38 PM on 07/23/2012
Not stiff enough.

We need to execute gun bunnies like the Chinese do, they have no place in civilized society. Sorry, if you want to hunt go live in Iraq.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:20 PM on 07/24/2012
Those same Chinese like to roll right over political dissidents with tanks. Thats what the government can do when the people have been disarmed.
05:02 PM on 07/24/2012
Sir (I assume), if you are incapable of differentiating between violent criminals and peaceful law abiding gun owners, I would suggest that you take the time to understand the ethical difference between a rapist and an armed citizen who intervenes on behalf of the victim. They are not the same. I am a gun owner who has never harmed another human being and who has signed a check for my country good for any amount up to and including my life. I deeply resent your implication that peaceful gun owners are murderers. It is inaccurate, unfair and deeply divisive. Please take the time to think through what you are saying.
01:46 PM on 07/23/2012
"Assault weapons" are already banned. High Cap mags though prevalent haven't benefitted the shooters that used them. Loughner, missed a lot. Holmes likely fired too quickly and jammed and didn't know how to clear it. But the Virginia Tech shooter, armed with 10rd magazines enacted far more damage then either of them because he trained himself to do fast magazine changes. And his main gun if I recall was a .22 calibre pistol. Under your ban, what he had would still have been perfectly legal. Holmes intended to kill, he was obviously well versed in explosives. With the right amount he could have taken out the whole theatre complex and not just one screening room. People that want to do this, regardless of bans will find a way to do so. Those that don't want to do this, will never want to do this (whom are the far vast majority) do not need to be punished for the likes of individuals that do.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Great Intellectual
12:55 PM on 07/23/2012
Typical Liberal/Progressives. If people truly aren't worried about Liberal/Progressives they should be. Here is a Liberal/Progressive calling for the President to overstep Congress and ignore the Second Amendment and enact a Executive Order to take rights away from Americans.

I truly can't believe people voluntarily will give up their rights because of FEAR.

Thomas Jefferson warned the Government will use Fear and this false sense of Protection to take your rights away. You can ignore this I will not.