Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, January 16, 2019

President Barack Obama addressed the shooting that left several people dead at the Washington, D.C. Navy Yard, during a Monday speech that primarily focused on the state of the American economy.

“We do know that several people have been shot, and some have been killed. So we are confronting yet another mass shooting,” the president said. “And today it happened on a military installation in our nation’s capital.”

“These are men and women who were going to work, doing their job protecting all of us. They’re patriots,” Obama continued. “And they know the dangers of serving abroad, but today they faced the unimaginable violence that they wouldn’t have expected here at home.” The president went on to offer his thoughts and prayers to the victims and their families, and promised that “we will do everything in our power to make sure whoever carried out this cowardly act is held responsible.”

“And as we learn more about the courageous Americans who died today, their lives, their families, their patriotism, we will honor their service to the nation they helped to make great,” the president added. “And obviously, we’re going to be investigating thoroughly what happened, as we do so many of these shootings, sadly, that have happened, and do everything that we can to try to prevent them.”

Video of the president’s statement is below:

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 0

69 responses to “Obama: ‘We Are Confronting Yet Another Mass Shooting’ [Video]”

  1. Jean Anne Lewis says:

    How many lives will be lost before Congress gets off of their butts!

    • Annemb says:

      A very good question!

      I wonder if Congress is waiting till someone THEY know is affected before they move.

      Faved

      • johninPCFL says:

        Won’t make any difference. Keeping their job is far more important to them than DOING their job, and the far right has plenty of money to make sure that anyone who crosses the NRA (or ALEC) has an immediate challenge.

  2. medford_resident says:

    lets see how the idiot left spins this into a gun control issue.

    • johninPCFL says:

      Simple. Fewer guns in bad hands makes for fewer mass shootings. Maybe the idiot right has another spin?

      • medford_resident says:

        get back to me when you have a law that keeps guns out of just bad hands. Your kind takes them out of good hands and wonders why you’re ridiculed.

        • jmprint says:

          Funny how you want to call people that want gun control idiots.
          I’m sure if it was your child or loved one getting killed, you would be thinking otherwise.

        • johninPCFL says:

          1) background checks.
          2) required safety training
          “My kind” owns 6 guns (black powder pistol to high-powered rifle), has undergone background checks and trains monthly. My guess is that “your kind” has never been trained, would shoot off your own foot and then whine about it while having your “free” treatment at the ER.

          • medford_resident says:

            No, actually my kind knows we already have background checks even though the constitution didn’t deem it necisary. And we don’t pretend our weekly shooting is “training”

          • Lynda Groom says:

            The Constitution did not address many of today reality issues. You are making a false argument.

          • medford_resident says:

            No I’m not. You’re simply not knowledgable on the subject. The second amendment was there to protect The People from an unjust government. It was not meant to be infringed

          • stcroixcarp says:

            NO! The Second Amendment was to protect the STATE with a well regulated militia.

          • medford_resident says:

            Odd, the word “state” can not be found in the second amendment to back up your claim

          • stcroixcarp says:

            Wrong again. The Second Amendment. This is a direct quote, the whole and complete sacred Second Amendment.
            “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and beat Arms, shall not be infringed.” Notice the word “keep” is not the same as “own”.

          • BillP says:

            See when you present the facts to the right wing trolls they don’t reply. I find it ironic that all of the RWTs call anyone that disagrees with them an idiot or moron. Medford claims an expertise on the Constitution especially the 2nd amendment but doesn’t know the actual wording of it. Great post.

          • JohnnyZ77 says:

            Get your head out of your azz, medford_resident. I guess you’re too stupid to know that guns are illegally being sold to criminals and nut cases every time a gun show is held somewhere. You and your numbskull NRA aren’t interested in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, just selling more guns to them. Somehow, you have no problem with people’s driving records being checked before selling them car insurance or selling them a car, but you have a big problem with a record check being performed for someone buying a gun. Your argument concerning the government being a threat to your freedom is idiotic at best, simply because it’s the people who elect all our government officials. If you have a problem with record checks for gun purchases, you’re the problem, not the solution.

          • medford_resident says:

            Automobiles are not mentioned in the constitution. Guns are. You’re failure to understand history makes one of our heads up our azz, just not mine

          • johninPCFL says:

            Yes, a Florida background check is performed, and if you haven’t been convicted of a felony in Florida, you can buy a gun. Even if you’ve been convicted in Colorado. How’s your false sense of security holding up now?
            The Constitution also mentions a militia in A2, which is a group of volunteers who are trained in weapons and tactics. Not a bunch of toothless droolers like your friends holding backyard beer-shoots.
            My monthly training is with the local PD. How about you?

          • medford_resident says:

            How wonderful that you shoot with a bunch of doughnut eating road tax collectors. I’m sure in your little world it makes you feel important.

          • johninPCFL says:

            I feel god that I routinely practice with people who know what they’re doing. Your mother’s brother, er husband, probably doesn’t qualify.

          • medford_resident says:

            And your classic idiot comment about what made up the “militia” when the constitution was written makes you either a liar or an idiot. Therefore, blather on. I’m late for happy hour

          • johninPCFL says:

            Yes, the dictionary definition of “militia” is a voluntary force composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.
            “happy hour”? You’re drunk all day in your mother’s basement.

          • johninPCFL says:

            I notice you still have no answer as to how to prevent (or at least slow down) the acquisition of lethal weapons by criminals. Does the “idiot right” even think about such things? Or has the NRA convinced you that the only answer is to arm everyone and let them shoot it out?

          • medford_resident says:

            Dear idiot, here amongst the intelligent, we understand that gun Vince has steadily dropped as gun ownership has steadily increased. We believe in jailing criminals, you know, the actual people committing crimes, not restricting a constitutional tight of citizens to suit your idiot ideas

          • johninPCFL says:

            You can’t speak for the intelligent, and 10-20-life is about as effective a law I can think of for “jailing criminals” who use guns. Gun violence rises and falls with the state of the economy. We happen to be on an uptick, and the uptick has been accentuated with the lapse of the “assault weapons” ban that allows the mentally defective to murder a hundred innocents before being burdened withg reloading.
            Is the NRA position that everyone, including criminals, should be armed? That seems to be your argument. If not, then how do you propose that we prevent criminals from becoming armed?

          • Sand_Cat says:

            Why are you bothering? Clearly, you’re getting nowhere. He may be making himself look stupid, but he’ll never know or acknowledge it.

          • jackoooo says:

            San Cat
            You must be using the word stupid a lot. Get away from the mirror and try to upgrade yourself and thoughts.

          • jackoooo says:

            They train daily shooting off their mouths.

          • johninPCFL says:

            Well, you do anyway.

          • jackoooo says:

            Great example of leadership………………

          • johninPCFL says:

            You know, a spell checker would add the double-f needed to your handle…

        • johninPCFL says:

          I also couldn’t help but notice that you, as the local representative of the “idiot right” didn’t have a suggestion as to how to mitigate the mass-murder of Americans. Maybe the right is completely bereft of ideas? Maybe that’s why governance for them has become all about what they’re against, but not a hint about what they’re for?

        • GerryL says:

          You must be either a criminal or a mentally disturbed person. Law abiding and mentally stable persons easily pass criminal and mental stability tests. – maybe you will fail both.

      • bhaggen says:

        Didn’t this nut see the signs? Didn’t he know no guns were allowed in this facility or in the city it’s in? He should have known that the police would arrive within 30 minutes. Didn’t Adam Lanza know that NO guns were allowed on school grounds? Didn’t James Holmes realize he was entering a theater that was a no gun zone? Can’t these people read? It says right there! “It is a felony to be in position of a firearm on these premises; punishable by a fine of $5000 and 6 months in prison” Or did these idiots misread the signs: “No person on these premises has the means to defend themselves or their property against attack” Or maybe the fine is insufficient. Why not raise the fine to $100,000; that should do it. They’ll think twice before they do THAT again. What doesn’t make sense is this never occurs at the range where everybody has a gun. But I know that can’t be!…….It just can’t…….I won’t let it, so there! You Americans are a bunch of punk asses. Back home in Switzerland every home comes equipped with a SIG 550 assault rifle in the kitchen closet. REAL full-auto assault weapons; not those AR-15 lookalikes. Obama’s right. Americans are NOT exceptional!

        • johninPCFL says:

          And your point may be valid if Switzerland had a wild-west history and heterogenous population. Your position is what the NRA advocates: arm everyone and let them shoot it out. No reason the mentally ill can’t join the party, right? No reason to discriminate against criminals, right?

          • silence dogood says:

            Hay — isn’t the h……. word a dog whistle ? Watch your step please.

          • johninPCFL says:

            “hay” – animal feed
            “hey”- attention getter
            you – home skuled

          • silence dogood says:

            Who/what bears responsibility — HIPPA laws(government)-Affirmative action(gov.)-Honorable discharge(gov.)-Failure to enforce 3 prior violations(gov.). Security clearance(gov.) And you sheep want the government to do more ?

          • bhaggen says:

            Wild west history? Switzerland had the Nazis right next door you fool! The only country in Europe that wasn’t overrun. Believe it or not the Swiss were the best armed country, 2nd only to Germany going into WWII. Every man is required to keep his mil-spec rifle at home. My position is similar to the NRA’s except I’m for mandatory training like I got. Pops enrolled me in an NRA sanctioned Lockheed sponsored class at 13. You Americans are stupid reckless with everything, not only guns. You allow idiots to operate deadly weapons; CARS! THAT wouldn’t roll in Switzerland. Speeding fines are based on your income. Nokia’s CEO got fined $120,000 for 100 in a 60 so they confiscated his Ferrari! Heterogenous? You mean Heterogeneous? The Swiss are German, French, & Italian. You bring up an interesting point. Japan & Switzerland both have extremely low crime rates. Japan has no guns, The Swiss are armed to the teeth. So you must concede, it’s NOT the guns. Do I or the NRA advocate everyone shooting it out? No, that’s your narrative. Every one of these shootings has taken place in a NO GUN ZONE. As soon as someone shows up with a gun the perp takes his own life. These people are inherent cowards. They prey on the defenseless. The one in the Portland mall? It also was a no gun zone but a citizen had a 9mm. He didn’t fire because of the bystanders but when the perp saw him behind the kiosk with his gun, he offed himself. Only one person was shot. The US can’t even control their borders, how can they keep guns out of the hands of criminals? The police arrive after the crime. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.

          • johninPCFL says:

            Yes, we have a history repleat with folks killing one another for no reason whatsoever. The Swiss do not.
            Yes, the Swiss require each ABLE-BODIED ADULT to own a firearm. They also have free medical care and extensively screen ADULTS to keep the mentally infirm from owning a firearm. We do not. The Navy Yard murderer was mentally ill and bought his shotgun in Va, which has no effective screening.
            Yes, the Swiss have mandatory training in the use of the firearms that the populace must own. We do not. We allow any knuckle-dragging drooler with $50 to buy anything he wants (except for those weapons controlled by the 1934 Congressional act.) In that sense they are much closer to the “well regulated militia” called out in A2 of our Constitution than we are. They also have no standing army, which all of our forefathers strenuously argued against (witness the Constitutional requirement that no army appropriation may last more than two years.)
            The Va Tech campus had SWAT ON CAMPUS (no driving time required), the Washington state mass murder occured IN THE COURTHOUSE AMONGST ARMED GUARDS, so guns on campus don’t mitigate the threat.
            Guns in the hands of mentally disturbed folks create havoc. The NRA has repeatedly held that there is no reason to “hold hostage” the rights of the many because the few are crazy. Perhaps a background check to see if they’re crazy? No, that would be invasion of privacy. So the NRA position has devolved into “let them shoot it out”, and that process is now occuring.
            Like so many GOP, you have clearly spelled out what you are against. Try giving a positive response: how do you propose we keep guns out of the hands of the disturbed? How do we ensure that those who buy guns know how to use them? Is it the government’s place to ensure that, or should the court system just process the murderers until they’re all dead or in prison? Does the government have any responsibility to regulate the environment in which its citizens live, i.e. to make things as safe as possible? Or do we return to the 1890s when any hack with a fountain could mix any brand of poison and sell it (back then it was a civil tort action if you sold a mix that killed people)?

      • jackoooo says:

        Let’s pass another law!

        • johninPCFL says:

          Good idea. Maybe one that allows the states to share their violent felony roles so that sellers in other states can know not to sell them guns. How about one that says criminals can’t buy guns at gun shows? How about one that says if you buy a gun for a criminal you go to jail?

          • jackoooo says:

            I was only kidding. I know their is no law that will work.
            The left are dreamers.

          • johninPCFL says:

            Sure. Laws against murder don’t work. Except mostly they do. Laws against tax fraud don’t work. Except mostly they do. Laws against driving without insurance don’t work. Except mostly they do. Laws against armed robbery don’t work. Except mostly they do. Laws against home invasion don’t work. Except mostly they do. Laws against running red lights don’t work. Except mostly they do.
            The laws that have the highest proportion of failure are the “morality” laws. Drug useage laws, anti-abortion laws, drunk-driving laws, etc. Restricting gun purchases to sane, non-criminal citizens does not fall into this category.
            Add the double-f to your handle. It fits.

          • jackoooo says:

            When it comes to gun control, Mr. Obama and his extremists just won’t
            quit. He’s not interested in what Congress thinks, in what state
            legislators think… he’s certainly not interested in what you and I
            think. He wants his way with your rights. And he’s getting it bit-by-bit
            through executive order.

          • johninPCFL says:

            Sure. By advocating for the same law passed in the 1990s and advocated by Reagan and GWB, he’s stripping away your rights.
            Time for your meds.

  3. stcroixcarp says:

    Another episode of death and violence brought to you by the terrorists of NRA.

  4. YES we have to go in the the disputed lands like it or not we are still we USA “The world may yet feel “shame” at not taking further action in Syria, David Cameron warned as he launched a bid to ensure a “permanent and fitting” British memorial to the Nazi Holocaust.The Prime Minister defended his support for military action against Bashar Assad’s regime in a speech at a dinner to mark the 25th anniversary of the Holocaust Educational Trust.

    His comments came as he described a report by UN weapons inspectors into the atrocity in Damascus as “chilling”, adding on Twitter: “No-one can ignore facts. 100s gassed in worst attack since Halabja. UNSG right: we must destroy chemical weapons.”

    William Hague said the UN report was “damning” and “fully consistent” with Britain’s assessment that Bashar Assad’s regime was behind the attack. The Foreign Secretary spoke out after UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon presented what he said was “overwhelming and indisputable” proof that chemical weapons were used on a large scale. I thank you FirozaliA.Mulla DBA

  5. Yvonne R. Mcginnis says:

    Our legislators need not be fearful of the NRA, the American people also hold the purse strings through the power of the vote. Our legislators have to find the will and the courage to save America. The NRA will be fine as long as they continue to convince the American people that they are fighting for their Second Amendment rights. Unfortunately, they have a psychological edge on the American people and our legislators. Americans are without hope as they turn to Congress to lead on this issue and take action. Americans are afraid that we as a society have accepted the gun violence, and therefore will not see any comprehensive gun laws that protect Americans. Our gun crime rates are still too high, despite what the NRA says. We have tried it their way and it isn’t working. We must keep in mind, the NRA’s responsibility is not to protect America, their responsibility is to market firearms and make huge profits for gun manufactures. It is our government’s responsibility to protect Americans, and so far that hasn’t happened except in limited circumstances. We must see that unlimited gun rights is destroying America. We are self-destructing when we don’t take swift action; especially after cases such as Newtown, McCready, and Martin. America is a great nation when she finds her strength in the numbers, democratic principles, and the values that bind us together as a nation. For the sake of the American people, we have to know when it’s time to step away from special interest groups, and do what is necessary to keep America safe. Our national security, schools, neighborhoods, and communities rest upon the shoulders of our great leaders. We can’t let America fall to incivility, terrorism, and/or succumb to political gridlock or death.

  6. jackoooo says:

    Take the guns away from the Navy. Let them use sling shots……
    This soldier was in the Navy, right??
    The Fort Hood shooting was in the Army! Take the guns away from the Army also!!
    Dumb Democrats.

    • johninPCFL says:

      Maybe the takeaway point you are missing is that those slaughters took place on campuses guarded by trained, armed guards. The best place to begin defending is as far away from the point of conflict as possible. The typical knee-jerk reaction from the NRA and their lap-puppets is: murders happen with knives too. If the assassins had to use knives they would have been stopped at the gates. Keeping guns from mentally ill people seems like a reasonable first step. Why does the NRA (and their puppets the right) want mentally ill people to have free access to guns?

      • jackoooo says:

        No one wants mentally ill people to have guns. That’s why we are getting Obama care.
        The problem is not exclusively the weapons, it is mostly the breech of security. Like Benghazi. But what difference does it make?
        The breech of security at the airports on 9/11. Razor knives?
        The breech of security at Oklahoma. Explosives.
        The breech of security Fort Hood. Rifle.

        • johninPCFL says:

          “breech” = rear of gun. “breach” = access using force.
          The NRA is against (no one’s sure what they’re FOR) any restriction on the acquisition of guns. Mentally ill, criminals, Nazis, etc. – doesn’t matter. Let them all have guns and let natural selection deal with it.

          • jackoooo says:

            johnin

            WAKE UP!!! CUT THE BULL.

            This is the NRA position. All you had to do was look it up for God sakes. Don’t act Obama dumb.

            There’s no defense quite like a good offense. But this one relies on a falsehood.

            The National Rifle Association, under fire in many quarters for scuttling popular legislation
            to require near-universal background checks for gun purchases, is
            embarking on a new campaign to prove that it cares about preventing
            future shootings. The group is talking up the need to keep firearms away
            from mentally ill people — a cause that it frequently invokes.

            The gun lobby organization is putting out a print ad lamenting
            that mental health reform is “being held hostage” — the three words are
            creatively splayed out to look like a hostage note — by President Obama
            and Democrats. Reported this week by the Washington Examiner, the group intends to spend $55,000 on the ad campaign.

          • jackoooo says:

            Mental Health and FirearmsSince
            1966, the National Rifle Association has urged the federal government
            to address the problem of mental illness and violence. As we noted then,
            “the time is at hand to seek means by which society can identify, treat
            and temporarily isolate such individuals,” because “elimination of the
            instrument by which these crimes are committed cannot arrest the ravages
            of a psychotic murderer.”

          • jackoooo says:

            Scott signs NRA-backed bill limiting gun sales to mentally ill

            June 29, 2013 by Joe Saunders

            Florida Gov. Rick Scott on Friday signed a bill backed by the
            National Rifle Association to make it more difficult for the mentally
            ill to buy guns.

            The
            bill, sponsored by Rep. Barbara Watson, D-Miami Gardens, and Sen.
            Audrey Gibson, D-Jacksonville, passed the Legislature with minimal
            opposition – unanimously in the Senate and with only one vote against it
            in the House, cast by Rep. John Tobia, R-Melbourne.

          • jackoooo says:

            One last one fool!!!

            The National Rifle Association,
            which has opposed virtually all of President Obama’s proposed gun
            control package, swiftly endorsed a bill rolled out Wednesday intended
            to strengthen the federal background check system and keep guns out of
            the hands of those deemed mentally ill.

            Four senators — two
            Republicans and two Democrats — unveiled the legislation that would
            clarify the circumstances under which someone loses the right to have a
            gun when they’re judged mentally ill.

            The bill introduced by Republicans Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Jeff Flake of Arizona, along with Democrats Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Mark Begich
            of Alaska, would expand the definition of those adjudicated “mentally
            incompetent” to include those judged to be a danger to themselves or
            others, found not guilty in a criminal case by reason of insanity, and
            requires involuntary outpatient treatment by a psychiatric hospital,
            among other provisions.

            Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/6/nra-embraces-senate-mental-health-bill/#ixzz2fB67g81P

            Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

          • johninPCFL says:

            Yes, they have for the last several years used their proxies to scuttle legislation aimed at keeping criminals and the mentally ill from obtaining guns. That means, specifically, that their ACTIONS are designed to make sure that anyone desiring a gun can get one. Mentally ill? No problem. Violent felon? No problem. Sex offender? No problem.
            Their internal position is that once everybody is properly armed, the civil war may begin and only the “righteous” will remain.

  7. silence dogood says:

    Who/what bears responsibility — HIPPA laws(government)-Affirmative action(gov.)-Honorable discharge(gov.)-Failure to enforce 3 prior violations(gov.). Security clearance(gov.) And you sheep want the government to do more ?

  8. glorybe2 says:

    The only real problem is that sometimes the wrong people get shot. Society needs a lot more criminals to be gunned down, daily. One day society will be smart enough to feed gunned down criminals to the hogs so that their existence will have some use to society. As it is we have to have ceremonies and all kinds of rituals just to fry one in the chair. Society is silly putty on steroids.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.