Second - give an inch, take a mile. Incrementalism is how they will ultimately cut our balls off like they've done to all of Europe. There are enough laws on the books. No more.
It's a shame how quickly the conversation turned from dead babes to "the government wants your guns!". Both sides of the aisle aught to be ashamed for their rhetoric.
At least the President is taking action, like a president should. He's not stupid, and knows full well the resistance he'll meet. Obama welcomes resistance. The GOP stance is, as usual inaction, and moderates will note it for 2016.
In my ideal world, both the Democrats and GOP come together to really tackle the issues that led to Sandy Hook...whatever they are.
Is the grief of giving up a gun is the same as the grief of giving up a child? Not even comparable.
So don't cry to me about losing your guns, if that happens.
That's all I have to say about it.
The flip side of incrementalism is exaggerated rigidity. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds (Thanks, Emerson!)
You need to not be a criminal to own a gun. I like that rule. Having the rule is only step one. Enforcing the rule is step two. Making the seller of a firearm responsible for confirming that the buyer is legal is easy, logical, and does not infringe upon a single right (CT has a free call-in system where you call an 800 number, run the check, get a "yea" or "nay" and a confirmation number). The seller can still choose to sell the weapon, even if the buyer fails the check, the seller just has to acknowledge that he has committed a crime.
It gives the power and the responsibility back to the people. I can accept that.