Local News

Locals react to Obama's plan to curb gun violence

Posted January 16, 2013

— The battle over gun control moved front and center in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday with President Barack Obama saying he'll do whatever it takes to reduce gun violence.

Breakdown: Obama's plan for curbing gun violence

Obama signed 23 executive orders on gun control and called on Congress to pass a number of measures, including a ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines and universal background checks.

But at Fuquay Gun & Gold in Fuquay-Varina, the president's announcement caused concern among gun-rights proponents, who say some of the measures do nothing but take away Second Amendment rights from law-abiding citizens.

"The bad guys are not going to stop having them, whether the president bans them or not," gun owner Cindy Rosipko said.

Q&A: Gun terms, laws

Opponents said their biggest concern is not only the assault weapons ban but the proposal to limit magazines to 10 rounds.

"It will slow down the sale of a rifle, for sure, if folks aren't allowed to get high-capacity magazines," shop owner Clay Ausley said. "The gun's not going to be as nearly as desirable with a 10-round magazine."

Although he's been busy in recent weeks as customers, concerned that their gun rights will be violated, line up to buy assault rifles, Ausley says they are generally not a big part of his business.

Hundreds rally for gun rights at Zebulon steakhouse Hundreds rally for gun rights at Zebulon steakhouse

Weapons accessories are, he says, and business would likely suffer with a ban.

"There are flip-up sites, electronic sites, magnifiers, slings – tons of accessories that we sell to clients," he said.

If people can't buy the guns, there's no need for them to buy the accessories, he says.

But Ausley and others at his store are in favor of universal background checks, which are already part of sales by registered gun dealers. They do not apply to private gun sales.

Gun owners say they believe the gun violence debate has been unfairly framed around the Newtown, Conn., school shooting.

"It's a very emotional topic for a lot of people especially with children being killed in the mix," said gun owner Mike Cirioli. "Emotions sometimes speak louder than rational thought for a lot of people."

Guns Local gun owners concerned about Obama's plan

Republicans from North Carolina's congressional delegation agree.

Sen. Richard Burr released a statement Wednesday afternoon, pledging to fight any efforts that infringe on the Second Amendment.

"I am open to having a conversation about ways in which our nation can address mental health issues and reduce violence, but I will not stand by while the president and others try to restrict the rights of law-abiding American citizens," Burr said.

Rep. Renee Ellmers echoed Burr, adding that she believes Obama is "exploiting a tragedy for political gain and eroding our constitutional rights for the sake of an extreme liberal agenda."

North Carolina Democrats, however, say they support Obama's plan.

Rep. Melvin Watt called it a "comprehensive and common-sense series of administrative and legislative proposals."

"I can see nothing in my quick review that causes me to react in any way other that positively," he said in a statement.

Rep. David Price, who is a vice chairman on the House Democrats' Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, called the recommendations "carefully crafted."

Sen. Kay Hagan she will look at the president's proposals with an open mind and work toward "a comprehensive approach that ensures our communities are safe" while "respecting the rights of responsible gun owners."

Spring Lake Police Chief Troy McDuffie Assault weapons ban could be good for law enforcement

Obama's plan goes beyond gun control. Among the executive orders he signed Wednesday is to address legal barriers in health laws that bar some states from making available information about people who are prohibited from having guns. He also signed orders that ensure young people get needed mental health treatment and that insurance plans cover mental health benefits.

The plan also provides improvements in school safety and better support to law enforcement agencies across the country.

Heads of many local law enforcement agencies declined to comment on Obama's recommendations, saying it is too political or too early to know the ramifications. But many, including Spring Lake Police Chief Troy McDuffie, agreed on preservation of the Second Amendment.

"I'm not against a person's right to bear arms," he said.

Despite concerns, recent national polls show support for legislative proposals that the president placed before Congress.

A weekend poll from the Pew Research Center found 55 percent of Americans support renewing the ban on military-style assault weapons, and 54 percent approve of a ban on high-capacity ammunition clips. It also found that 85 percent of Americans agree with background checks before buying a gun.

A new Associated Press-GfK poll had similar results. Nearly 60 percent of Americans want stricter gun laws. Three-quarters of Americans said they reacted to the Connecticut shooting with deep anger, while 54 percent said they felt deeply ashamed it could happen in the United States.

The poll also shows that 51 percent said they believed laws limiting gun ownership infringe on the public's right to bear firearms.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • fishon Jan 18, 2013

    But you voted for a guy that actually did ban guns to be President. It just doesnt make sense to me. If it meant so much to you why vote for a gun banner?????

    You keep saying that and it is true. By the time conservatives had the opportunity to vote in the primary Mitt had already won the nomination. Guess we thought having someone who had a chance to fix the economy was more important at the time, since both Mitt and Barack said they would not take our guns even though their past words and actions said otherwise.

  • superman Jan 18, 2013

    Gun control is like school security. Anything you do will only give you a false sense of security. Some people just dont obey the laws. They found that out with prohibition and drugs. Until they find a way to make people obey the laws they are just words on paper. You cant stop a train.

  • junkmail5 Jan 18, 2013

    What's funny about the conspiracy nuts is they contradict themselves.

    What actually happened is Lanza had an Bushmaster XM-15 and 2 handguns in the school (a sig and a glock). And a shotgun in the trunk of his car.

    But one set of nuts thinks he didn't use the Bushmaster despite the autopsys clearly showing he did, and the fact it was found in the school, all because they found a month-old report back when everyone was still confused on details that said the XM-15 was left in the trunk.

    Problem with that is- there was another confused report that the gun in the trunk was an XM (before it became clear there was one in the school) and the conspiracy nuts THEN pounced on that... because there's a video SHOWING them taking the gun out of the trunk. And it's VERY clearly a SHOTGUN.

    Because that's what was in the trunk.

    Here's a link with the video-

  • BubbaDukeforPresident Jan 18, 2013

    Listen folks, we don't need 10 bullets to take down deer. We need 15-20 rounds to protect us from criminals and anyone coming to take our guns.

    That sheriff that said "No rights are absolute" had better look for another job. He's not going to get reelected. And Obama just ensured that a Republican will win the presidency in 2016 with his assaults on so many of our fundamental rights. Anyone who doesn't see that gun control is not about preventing violence but is all about imposing tyranny is not qualified to have an opinion.

  • Crumps Br0ther Jan 18, 2013

    Otherwise, it is not a militia at all but an angry armed rabble. Flow Easy

    Do yourself a favor and Google "george mason militia", just cut and paste what I put in quotes and be enlightened.

  • Crumps Br0ther Jan 18, 2013

    Not that it matters now, you all have your marching orders and talking points and are firmly entrenched in your opinion so any new TRUTHFUL information that comes to light will be disregarded because its too late to turn back now. but NBC has done it again much like the doctored Zimmerman 911 call. The AR15 was in the trunk of the car at Sandyhook and was not used. But you keep trying to take them because you just dont like them


  • Dnut Jan 17, 2013

    One way to solve this problem and keep the 2nd Amendment: Register all guns. If you use a gun in a crime, whether you have registered it or not, you will go to jail for life unless you are found that you were defending yourself. Period. Good guys have nothing to worry about if they are protecting life and household. Bad guys have everything to worry about because most crime is with hand guns that are not registered in the inner city.
    lost in translation
    OH, your definitely lost.....

  • Dnut Jan 17, 2013

    The rights of the individual are natural rights and if they were granted at all they were granted by God and can not be taken away by any legal authority regardless of what act of legislation may of passed declaring otherwise. Rights are most certainly absolute, what is not absolute is that every individual will fight for their rights.

    Which is obvious from the uneducated to true meaning of the second amendment on these posts....but I will be fighting for MINE!

  • Dnut Jan 17, 2013

    Because we have asked the Govt and LEOs to protect the civilian population and expect them to have the proper tools to do so. If someone's job requires a gun and putting themselves in harm's way on OUR behalf, such as LEO or military, then we the people owe it to them to make sure that they have the tools they need.

    The big Gub'ment conspiracy theorists need to go outside and get a good dose of reality.
    Flow Easy
    .....You do know that by law there not required to defend you or I? Ever heard the term, "where's a cop when you need one", there's a reason for that.....just sayin'

  • junkmail5 Jan 17, 2013

    Because we have asked the Govt and LEOs to protect the civilian population- Flow Easy

    No we haven't. LEOs have no obligation to protect you, so sayeth the supreme court even.


    People expecting the police, who won't be there until after a shooter has done his work, to protect them is part of the problem.

    So where are your meetings? What is the plan? If you're well-regulated, there must be some organization. Otherwise, it is not a militia at all but an angry armed rabble.
    Flow Easy

    Again, the supreme court disagrees with you... and their opinion is a lot more important in this case.