Can I just say something real quick about Obama’s gun control speech?

I’ve had a busy day. I had a meeting, a trip to the airport, company coming for dinner…. In short, it was not the kind of day for careful analysis of the news. If you want to read a thorough review of the President’s gun control speech today, check out the National Review or the Washington Times or The Federalist.

All I can muster are some hasty observations-and I hope you’ll share your own [probably more thorough] observations in the combox.

FIRST, THE TEMPER TANTRUM

That’s what Rep. Diane Black (R-TN) called Obama’s staged performance this morning.

Obama has a fierce opponent in Congresswoman Black. She has been an advocate for gun owners’ Second Amendment rights, introducing legislation such as:

  • the FIREARM Act, which would bring an end to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ unreasonable demand that persons seeking to purchase a gun must report their race and ethnicity on the application form; and
  • the Nondiscriminatory Transportation Screening Act, which legalizes gun licenses as a proper form of identification for persons traveling by air.

Rep. Black didn’t mince words in describing the President’s histrionics. She said:

“President Obama’s contempt for the 2nd Amendment – and the Constitutional separation of powers – is well documented but that does not entitle him to this childish temper tantrum. This is nothing more than a cheap stunt by a lawless President looking to seal a political legacy in the last months of his failing Administration.

What’s more, the President’s actions lack any basis in fact, as even the Washington Post was forced to admit that not a single recent act of mass violence could be prevented by new gun laws. Congress cannot let this backdoor power grab go unchallenged. We must use every tool at our disposal, including the power of the purse and, if necessary, the pursuit of legal action, to put a check on this unconstitutional overreach.”

Pundits are lining up to echo that second paragraph. Sandy Hook, the Colorado movie theater, the Charleston church shooting, and other incidents which have scarred America in the recent past have one thing in common: All of those horrendous killings were committed by someone who was unbalanced. A recommitment to caring for the mentally ill, getting the mentally ill off the streets and into needed care programs, might actually make a difference.

And Now the Tears

The Washington Post called the President “amazingly emotional” because he appeared to cry real tears, just thinking about dead children.

But I ask you: In the six years of his presidency, have you ever seen this President weep over anything before today? I haven’t.

  • Not when Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans died under terrorist fire in Benghazi.
  • Not when it became apparent that more Americans were LOSING their health care coverage due to Obamacare than were actually being added to the rolls of the insured.
  • Not when a million children each year die as a result of abortion. In fact, he’s nonplussed at the sight of tiny arms and legs in a Petri dish, as were shown in the Planned Parenthood undercover videos by the Center for Medical Progress.

So I was more than a little surprised to walk into the room today and see big crocodile tears rolling down the President’s face.

My instinct? Check his pockets for lemon slices or a sliced onion, his fingertips for juice. I’m betting that he did something in the moments before the tears welled up to create the drama of a presidential meltdown, in hope of drumming up sympathy and emphasizing his bighearted horror at gun violence.

And One More Thing: These Newfangled Guns He Wants?

If we can protect our cell phones with a password, why can’t we do the same with guns so that only the rightful owner can fire them? If we can track a vehicle with a GPS system, why can’t we track guns so that any stolen weapons can be easily recovered?

These are two of the gimmicks which President Obama proposed to enact to ensure gun safety in America. (I believe there were others.)

My question: Who’s going to do this? Gun companies? Was he announcing a new law forcing Smith and Wesson to install this new equipment on any future guns? Will all guns need to be retrofitted? Who will cover the cost? Has anyone even INVENTED these contraptions?

Please, educate me. Share your opinions in the Combox below.

And just a reminder:

The sight of “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791.