President Obama: To honor Washington Navy Yard shooting victims, we 'have to change'

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Sept. 24, 2013 11:04 a.m.

    @dbrbmw--with Biden?

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Sept. 24, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    To "atl134" but it is already illegal to sell a gun to a person that cannot legally own a gun. The problem isn't that we don't have the laws meant to stop the sale of guns to people that shouldn't have them. The problem is that we don't enforce the laws that we have.

  • dbrbmw Orem, UT
    Sept. 24, 2013 7:36 a.m.

    Just change Presidents.

    Sept. 23, 2013 9:59 p.m.

    Sorry that was suppose to. Be first not forts.

  • MiddleRight Orem, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 9:30 p.m.

    This guy had all the warning signs happening around and they gave him a clean slate and security clearance. The Joker in Colorado had all those signs flashing out front of him and they ignored them. All these happen in those Gun Free zones. Sorry folks, it adds up after a while.
    Gun control: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." (Benjamin Franklin)

    Sept. 23, 2013 9:29 p.m.

    Forts people claim that guns are not any part of the problem but rather it is only the criminals that use them. Then they claim that if law abiding citizens are not allowed to own guns the gun crime rates will go up. So if it is true that guns are not a factor in the crime then why would law abiding citizens need guns as a response, why would a knife or a bat not do just as well to defend ourselves if the gun is not an important factor?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Sept. 23, 2013 8:34 p.m.

    We have to change?

    Why is Obama sending weapons of mass destruction to other countries? That's going to kill thousands.

    Why were guns sent to Mexican cartels?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    "There is only one way to enforce universal background checks: a universal registry. I can't think of any country implementing such a registry that hasn't later abused it to deprive its citizens of their rights and arms. "

    Switzerland. By the way, the NRA actually has a gun registry. Funny how that works...

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 4:47 p.m.

    "Background checks are already required. "

    Not on all gun purchases. Private sales are exempt, for instance. And I really don't care if they'd have prevented one of these mass murders, there's 30,000 a year who die from guns in this nation, 10,000 of them by murder (the rest are mostly suicides, some are accidents). Most people who are murdered in this nation aren't in those mass shootings, and I'm sure some of those 30,000 would've been prevented with a background check requirement on ALL gun purchases, not just purchases from gun dealers.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 4:44 p.m.

    "Anyone who believes the way to make a safer society is by taking away rights, is either living in la-la land, or believes that all men are noble."

    I'd agree, except of course we disagree as to what our rights entail. I wouldn't consider a magazine capacity limit to be an infringement on rights, for instance.

    "Change in this case means gun banning. "

    Except that's not what... ah forget it, you're just proof of that study that says that when someone is presented with factual evidence to the contrary they become more entranched in their position.

  • podunk utah DRAPER, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 4:42 p.m.

    I bet Barach packed heat when he was walking around Chicago, that place is like Nam in the 60's and they have strict gun control, of course criminals do not usually buy guns down at the old walmart, now do they

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 4:22 p.m.

    I want to say sorry for your loss to the family and friends of the military people that died. I didn't see any thing that anyone remembered the living. Manners,is what you do, polite is how you show it.

  • Paul in MD Montgomery Village, MD
    Sept. 23, 2013 4:03 p.m.


    Not sure how guns and cigarette vending machines equate, but I'll respond anyway. Roughly 80 million people have guns which they have acquired legally. 5 of them committed mass shootings this year, about 20 in the last 20 years. Because of those few, you would have everyone give up the right to have a gun?

    How many people are killed each year with a hammer (intentionally)? How about knives? Baseball bats? Cars?

    Each of these tools is used to kill more people each year than guns, yet no one calls for universal background checks on Louisville Sluggers or Honda Civics. You don't even have to show a license to buy a hammer or a set of steak knives. Why not? Because they don't look scary, and most people are used to seeing them used safely, and are used to using them safely themselves.

    If I'm not mistaken, this year's mass shooters passed background checks, which means they aren't being done right.

    And no, I DON'T propose continually testing gun owners. Doing it once, right, would have stopped this year's shootings.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 3:19 p.m.

    The problem is particularly acute when the authenticity of our religion is diminished in the face of what is by normal standards a widespread political fanaticism of unfounded irrational thought and fringe behavior. At its core lies a blinkered mistrust of the unfamiliar and disrespect of others, when in reality it is our extremism that is more properly the enemy, not others.
    Andrew McDonald
    DN letter September 21, 2013

    lsd liberal
    “pro-gun 2nd amendment nuts”

    Yep, Andrew’s reprimands only apply to conservatives, because liberals are NEVER fanatical, irrational, or hateful in ANY of their comments.

  • Shane333 Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 2:26 p.m.

    LDS Liberal,

    There is only one way to enforce universal background checks: a universal registry. I can't think of any country implementing such a registry that hasn't later abused it to deprive its citizens of their rights and arms. From Nazi Germany to Great Britain, every time a gun registry is created it has later led to some level of confiscation.

    Of course, a disarmed public is much easier to subject and control....

  • Shane333 Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 2:23 p.m.


    I wear a seatbelt every time I get in my car. I keep two fire extinguishers in my home. I pay for insurance for my family's health and dental needs, and insurance on my home. The chances of my being in a car accident aren't very high on any given day, and the probability of my home catching fire is even lower, yet I doubt anyone would accuse me of, "compensating for some personal or psychological failing," for taking those just-in-case precautions.

    It is wise to avoid projecting one's own issues on others.

    I don't desire to ever need to use a firearm against another person just has I have no desire to ever need to use a fire extinguisher in my own home. However, it is better to have some things and never need them, than to need them and not have them.

  • BYR West Bountiful, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 2:22 p.m.

    "...Obama called on Americans not to give up on trying to change gun laws that he argued are to blame for an epidemic of violence..." Show me a single law that leapt off the paper or the computer screen and killed someone. It cannot be done. It is not the law. It never has been the law. It is the person.

  • AzPete Mesa, AZ
    Sept. 23, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    @LDS Liberal: Background checks are already required. PLEASE explain how your so called "universal" background checks would have prevented Aurora, Sandy Hook, Navy Yards, etc.

    We don't need more laws. Obama is trying to duck the executive branch's failure to enforce the laws as they are currently written.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Sept. 23, 2013 1:50 p.m.

    The shooter, incidentally, *passed* the background checks "LDS Liberal" wants to make universal.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 1:43 p.m.

    People who cry at funerals are horrible hypocrites, unless they pass Obama's gun legislation.

  • Aggielove Cache county, USA
    Sept. 23, 2013 1:27 p.m.

    He ordered the special swat team to stand down. Why?

  • Mark from Montana Aurora, CO
    Sept. 23, 2013 1:14 p.m.

    The shooter at the Navy Yards was in violation of federal law, I believe, since he was carrying a sawed off shotgun. Would additional laws have stopped him?

    The change that needs to happen starts in each state by removing from office every politician that has been there for more than two terms. We can beginning in Utah with Mike Lee, Jason Chaffetz and the rest.

    It is up to us to remove them.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 12:44 p.m.

    Will the pro-gun 2nd amendment nuts PLEASE let us require universal background checks?

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    Sept. 23, 2013 12:33 p.m.

    Some of the commentators suggest that there should be better mental health screening. If every gun holder must submit to continuing, comprehensive mental health exams in order to be certified for a weapon, that sounds like a very expensive proposition. I wonder if these mental health professionals would milk this economic bonanza further by insisting on annual or semi-annual testing for as long as the person is registered for a gun.

    By the way, a few weeks ago there was a fatal knifing at our local High School. By eye-witness accounts, the actual stabbing was unintended; the teen was swinging the knife in the air to keep the opponent away. I guess we now need to register knives and broken glass shards. Of course, more teens die from cars than from weapons, yet teens are routinely granted licenses to drive. We just don't learn.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 12:31 p.m.

    beside the second, what other amendments or provisions of the constitution do you consider to be "crapola"?

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Sept. 23, 2013 11:57 a.m.

    To "AChapin" there is something else that they all had in common that is not addressed.

    They were all in "Gun Free Zones".

    Those are probably the worst idea that government has come up with. They might as well just put up a sign that says "if you want to go on a killing spree with any weapon, this is the place". Those signs announce that any crime will not be met with force.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    Here is Barack once again calling for change. Anytime you hear that word come out of the mans mouth it is best to just run the other way. Change in this case means gun banning. Never let a good crisis go to waste Barack has said and that is exactly what this latest tired old speech was mostly aimed at. Ban gun ban guns ban guns ..... The man's mind only thinks one way. America needs a leader to solve these vexing problems of violence not a demagogue.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Sept. 23, 2013 11:13 a.m.

    What's the new normal?

    The President says we have to change, do a better job of securing military bases, improve mental health services, and address gun laws. Wayne Pierre sticks with his simpler strategy of calling for more good guys with guns.

    That’s the normal but I don't see anything new about it.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 11:01 a.m.

    Mentally ill persons only commit a crime when they pull the trigger. Accessible triggers cause peoples death, not guns.

  • JLFuller Boise, ID
    Sept. 23, 2013 10:39 a.m.

    I carried a firearm for 25 years as part of my job and I can tell you I was danged glad when I could stop. Carrying a pistol is uncomfortable and it gets in the way too many times. Some folks need one for legitimate reasons but this whole Constitutional-right-to-carry crapola is just that - crap. People who want to carry a gun when they don't have to have something else going on in their heads. This whole nonsense argument about protecting public and personal safety is a ruse. They actually have a "Dirty Harry" complex or may be compensating for some personal or psychological failing.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    tell me, please, where in the second amendment cigarette vending machines are covered.

    "the best we're allowed is to accept every gun owner is a good, decent, responsible, law abiding person until they prove otherwise." sounds like you don't like that concept.

    so you want to do away with "innocent until proven guilty"? how totalitarian of you.

  • Rick2009 MESA, AZ
    Sept. 23, 2013 10:00 a.m.

    The only thing we need to change is the President and his cronies. It is not the guns but people that need to change. We need people in office that understand the Constitution. Take Reed with you out out out.

  • JLFuller Boise, ID
    Sept. 23, 2013 9:59 a.m.

    There is nothing on record that says anyone was killed by a gun. Guns do not do anything by themselves. You can put a new born baby in a room filled to the rafters with AK47's, missile launchers and hand grenades and the little tyke will be just fine. The problem comes when you give a firearm to someone who has no business having one such as someone who is mentally ill or sociopathic. The problem any logical, a-political thinker will conclude is mentally unstable people should have no access to these things. The solution is the require all prospective firearm purchasers to undergo a mental health screening before being allowed to own one. The same goes for people who currently own a gun. People with a penchant for violence and act out on violently already are prohibited from owning a gun upon conviction for a violent offense. In all states any felon is likewise prohibited. It is now time that we take the next step in preventing gun violence.

  • FrankSegesman ,
    Sept. 23, 2013 10:00 a.m.

    I agree. It is definitely time for a change. Arm military troops and require them to be armed ON base AND while OFF base. Let's start making the streets safer for all of us.

  • Anti Government Alpine, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 9:55 a.m.

    All hail the great oblamo!

    After all, he comes from Chicago home of some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. And the results speak for themselves. It is the murder capitol of our country.

    There are less gun murders for our troops at war than for the citizens of Chicago. Wow.

    For years it has been the same. There are no republicans in Chicago to blame and there hasn't been for generations. The violence continues with small children being shot almost every week there. The Liberals control everything there and yet it is the worst. Hmmm.

    When will the people who vote democrat realize they are simply being manipulated? Used as pawns for corrupt liberals to get power. You get promised safety and what do you have in the liberal democrat stronghold of Chicago? Death. You are promised good schools? You get some of the worst in the country in Chicago and DC that are absolute locked down democrat areas.

    You people ought to wake up and face reality and admit that the liberal promises you have been fed for generations are miserable failures when democrats have total control to implement them.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 9:33 a.m.

    "If we really want to honor these 12 men and women, if we really want to be a country where we can go to work and go to school and walk our streets free from senseless violence without so many lives being stolen by a bullet from a gun, then we're going to have to change," This is the best thing I've ever heard the President say. I think it is unfortunate that the President and many others believe that the way to change things is by taking away a God-given right. There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus would prefer that there be no guns. Until, however, men are living the way Jesus lives, no one can deny someone's right to defend him/her self,including the President. Anyone who believes the way to make a safer society is by taking away rights, is either living in la-la land, or believes that all men are noble. A quick glance in either direction from where they stand should cause them to throw that thought right where it belongs, in the garbage.

  • AChapin Albany, Linn, OR
    Sept. 23, 2013 9:14 a.m.

    The idea of having a firearm while on guard and no ammo is treasonous act. I would have gotten a DD if I had done this while doing guard duty. Almost all the killing do have something in common and that is drugs.
    Paul in MD was spot on for what he had to say.

    We don't need a pot head from Punahou High School in Honolulu to tell us how to live.

    Aloha / Shalom

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 9:03 a.m.

    "As the 80 million or so people who own guns, BUT NEVER COMMIT CRIMES WITH THEM prove, it isn't the gun, it's the few people using guns wrong that is the problem. THAT's the problem we need to work on." If this argument held any water there would be no opposition to street corner cigarette vending machines. Instead, we restrict availability. Tax and obfuscate. "Clamp down" on the problem. Gotta love that; there's always a call to further "clamp down". Can't do that with guns, though, can we? No, the best we're allowed is to accept every gun owner is a good, decent, responsible, law abiding person until they prove otherwise. Then it ends up on the news. But, we're told, that was an isolated incident, and we're not going to be able to make any changes. So, we're going to keep getting what we've gotten in the past.

  • Paul in MD Montgomery Village, MD
    Sept. 23, 2013 8:47 a.m.

    Every mass shooter this year, and most if not all of the ones in the last 20 years, have been found to be mentally unstable in some way. There were indications of this recorded by one official source or another for each one. Why were they able to get their hands on guns?

    Because the mental health profession's lobby has made it nearly impossible to use this information in any way. This began with their efforts starting in the 1970's to ban public institutionalization. It used to be possible for people to be put in a mental hospital by the court without their consent. This change has led to mass homelessness, and has contributed to some degree to the mass shootings the liberals are now using to argue that NO ONE should have guns.

    As the 80 million or so people who own guns, BUT NEVER COMMIT CRIMES WITH THEM prove, it isn't the gun, it's the few people using guns wrong that is the problem. THAT's the problem we need to work on.

  • Rosco SANDY, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 8:35 a.m.

    I find Obama, like most politicians to be quite disingenuous. If Government really does represent the wishes of the people, we would not have Obamacare. Politicians inevitably tend to promote legislation that is proffered and supported by those (contributors) that got them elected or which presents an opportunity to play on the emotions of the electorate. We should not expect otherwise. Term limits and campaign reform would help solve that problem.

    As for the Naval Base tragedy, the cause was mental illness, not guns. We have in place checks and balances that should have precluded this individual from having a security clearance and from purchasing a firearm. The system failed and needs to be corrected.

    Those with serious mental illness will often be a threat to themselves and at times to society. Let’s promote more research for dealing with this health problem that plagues millions of Americans. I envision a day when those who suffer from mental illness will be able to get permanent relief and enjoy a healthy life--free from the demons that otherwise possess them.

    Had the President made that observation and pitch, I think most of America would rally behind him.

  • I know it. I Live it. I Love it. Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 7:15 a.m.

    His version of change was to force people to pay for something millions didn't want to pay for and to squeeze us with heavier taxes to pay for it. I don't believe Obama is qualified to tell us we "have" to do anything.

    We need to be a better people, yes. But I don't care what Obama thinks about that because he isn't leading us to be a better people. And we'll probably be in worse shape if he tries to.

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 7:05 a.m.

    as always, vague ideas stated with no solution.....have to change? what does that mean? unless it is govt. involvement. straight from the emanuel/obama playbook, don't let a crisis go wasted. barry and company will not be happy until govt. controls every aspect of our lives. this is the change that he campaigned on and that a majority of voters fell for. chane will only come when this guy is out of office and the uninformed voter becomes informed including takers understanding that someone has to pay for the stuff they are getting.

  • Shane333 Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 6:40 a.m.

    After the horrible school shooting at Sandy Hook, Vice President Biden publicly encouraged Americans to get a shotgun for self defense, as a politically correct firearm. The recent navy yard shooter used a shotgun which was deemed "safe" enough by even Senator Dianne Feinstein that it wasn't included in her list of firearms that she seeks to ban nationwide.

    Utah and Idaho have very "relaxed" gun laws compared to places like California, Washington DC, and Massachussetts. Yet Utah and Idaho's gun murder rates are only a small fraction, per capita, of the rates seen at those states with draconian gun laws. So this irrational mentality of solving violence by punishing inanimate objects obviously isn't the solution.

  • md Cache, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 6:39 a.m.

    Obama- Yes, we have to change.

    Resume arming our military on base. Duh.