For nearly an entire term in the White House, Obama’s record on guns was a picture of caution. Perhaps moved by false fears that the gun lobby could scuttle his presidency, or perhaps simply boxed into inaction by the fact that there were simply too many other battles to fight these past four years, President Obama did nothing to hold back the rising tide of gun violence in the nation he leads. After nearly four years as president, Obama’s most significant guns legislation is a law he signed allowing loaded guns in national parks.

Perhaps for this reason, the president appeared genuinely remorseful in his remarks to the community that lost so many of its children on Friday. “Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children, all of them, safe from harm? Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know they are loved and teaching them to love in return? Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose? I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer’s no.”

In his immediate reaction to the tragedy two days ago, Obama told the nation that “each time I learn the news, I react not as a president, but as anybody else would as a parent.” Tonight, the most powerful man in the world appeared like he was finally ready to react as a president:

We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change. We will be told that the causes of such violence are complex, and that is true. No single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society, but that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely we can do better than this.

If there’s even one step we can take to save another child or another parent or another town from the grief that’s visited Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Newtown and communities from Columbine to Blacksburg before that, then surely we have an obligation to try.

In the coming weeks, I’ll use whatever power this office holds to engage my fellow citizens, from law enforcement, to mental health professionals, to parents and educators, in an effort aimed at preventing more tragedies like this, because what choice do we have? We can’t accept events like this as routine.

Are we really prepared to say that we’re powerless in the face of such carnage, that the politics are too hard? Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?

It remains to be seen exactly what steps the president will take to stop future tragedies from occurring, as it remains to be seen just how hard conservatives in Congress will fight to preserve the conditions that led to Friday’s awful events. But a president typically does not start speaking about invoking his powers of office, or hint that political struggle is coming, or suggest that his own history of inaction was tragically mistaken, if he intends to do nothing in the face of an epidemic of murder. This is the kind of speech that suggests a major change in administration policy is on the horizon.

A man equipped with a 47 gun arsenal was arrested on Sunday after threatening to kill children at a local elementary school. The Cedar Lake, Indiana man had also threatened his wife:

Cedar Lake police were called to the home of 60-year-old Von I. Meyer early Friday after he allegedly threatened to set his wife on fire. A police statement says Meyer also said he would enter Jane Ball Elementary School and “kill as many people as he could.” Authorities found 47 guns and ammunition worth over $100,000.

This incident comes right on the heels of the arrest of an Oklahoma man planning a school shooting and the horrific murders in Newtown, Connecticut. Though America has suffered a spate of mass shootings and common sense gun regulations effectively reduce murder rates, several Republicans and gun advocates have responded to Friday’s tragedy by calling for relaxing restrictions on guns in schools.

In the aftermath of the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, some Americans are turning in their guns as part of local government buy-backed programs.

Residents in New York City, New York, Camden, New Jersey, Baltimore, Maryland, and San Francisco, California, sold hundreds of weapons back to the government no-questions asked, with some attributing their decisions to the Connecticut tragedy.

“After the incident yesterday, it was time to get it out of the house,” Sonia White, a 65-year-old Baltimore County grandmother said. A man in San Francisco explained, “I’ve got kids, man.” “Kids are curious. Kids don’t know any better. I had it locked in a toolbox, so I don’t know. … I just know it had to go.”

Following this month’s killings by Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher, who shot his girlfriend dead and then turned the gun on himself, at least seven NFL players have gotten rid of their personal firearms. One player reportedly turned in multiple weapons to his franchise’s security detail, “telling his team’s personnel that he didn’t trust himself with the guns.”

Lawmakers across the country pleased for tougher gun safety legislation on Sunday morning, in the aftermath of the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut. Many called for the extension of the Assault Weapons Ban, a piece of legislation that expired in 2004 under then President George W. Bush, as a way to limit certain types of weapons that and demanded that President Obama “stand up and lead and tell the country what we should do.”

On Friday, Adam Lanza, a 20-year old resident of Newtown, used a “semi-automatic assault rifle” to kill 27 people, including 20 children, at an elementary school in the town. Responding to the massacre, lawmakers urged Obama to lead on gun safety:

– GOV. DAN MALLOY (D-CT): “When we talk about the assault weapons ban that was in place in the United States, to have allowed that to go away or dissipate, it’s the state’s ability to enforce that because guns move across state lines.”

– GOV. JOHN HICKENLOOPER (D-CO): “You know, the discussions around assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and who — you know, what type of — should there be a wait? One of the things we’re doing in Colorado is expanding the time if someone has had a mental illness hold, expand the time they have to wait before they can get access to a firearm.

– SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): “Are there high ammunition clips, high capacity ammunition clips that have no value, whatsoever when it comes to sporting and hunting and even self-defense, the person could buy body armor and use to it protect themselves as they kill innocent people? Can we have a thoughtful, calm, reflection on these things? And do it in the context of our 2nd amendment? I think we need to.

– SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (I-CT): “If you buy a gun from somebody who is not licensed, or at a gun show, you don’t have to be checked at all. That is a loophole we ought to close. Assault weapons, these were developed by the U.S. military, originally as weapons of war. And, I think we ought to restore that assault weapons ban, because, not to take anybody’s guns away from them, they have now. But, to stop the manufacture and sale of those weapons. Now. Because, look what Lanza did to these poor kids.

– SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “Well the kinds of things like the Brady Law, Assault Weapons Ban, limitations to clips, making sure mentally unstable people don’t get guns, do not interfere with the fundamental right, but at the same time make us safer. Every amendment should have some balance and some limitation.”

– SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN: “I can tell you that [Obama] is going to have a bill to lead on because it’s a first-day bill I’m going to introduce in the Senate and the same bill is going to be introduced in the House. A bill to ban assault weapons. It will ban the sale, the importation, and the possession — not retroactively but perspectively.”

– MAYOR MIKE BLOOMBERG (I-NY): “It’s time for the President I think to stand up and lead and tell the country what we should do. Not go to Congress and ask what do you guys want to do. This should be his number one agenda….The President can introduce legislation even when it doesn’t get passed. … We got to really question weather military style weapons belongs on the streets in this day and age… And I think a President through his leadership can get a bill like that through Congress, but at least he’s got to try, that’s his job.

The Assault Weapons Ban, enacted in 1994 but not renewed in 2004, made an impact, according to the Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence. They found that:

“In the five-year period (1990-1994) before enactment of the ban, assault weapons named in the Act constituted 4.82% of the crime gun traces ATF conducted nationwide. In the post-ban period after 1995, these assault weapons made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime – a drop of 66% from the pre-ban rate.

Moreover, ATF trace data showed a steady year-by-year decline in the percentage of assault weapons traced, suggesting that the longer the statute was in effect, the less available these guns became for criminal misuse. Indeed, the absolute number of banned assault weapons traced also declined. An initial report issued by the Department of Justice supported these findings. These findings were further supported in a later report by one of the same researchers.”

Obama supports an effort to pass an Assault Weapons Ban and has called for Congress to act in the aftermath of past gun tragedies, but has yet to lead on the issue. But now, it’s not just politicians who are calling for stricter gun legislation: a petition on the White House website, with more than 115,000 signatures, says the President should “produce legislation that limits access to guns.”

On MSNBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ Sunday morning, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) promised to introduce a new assault weapons ban on the first day of the new Congress, challenging President Obama to back the bill. Feinstein sponsored the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004, and has been working on a new ban since the Aurora movie theater shooting in July. Four shooting sprees later, Feinstein has vowed to introduce the legislation on the first day of the 113th Congress.

Feinstein’s assault weapons ban will force Obama to take a stance on gun control after many promises to address the issue. The senator told ‘Meet the Press’ host David Gregory that her ban would cover the sale and importation of assault weapons, certain kinds of bullets, big drums and extended magazines:

I can tell you that [Obama] is going to have a bill to lead on because it’s a first-day bill I’m going to introduce in the Senate and the same bill is going to be introduced in the House. A bill to ban assault weapons. It will ban the sale, the importation, and the possession — not retroactively but perspectively. And it will ban the same of big clips, drums, or strips of big bullets. So there will be a bill. We’ve been working on it now a year.

In the wake of the elementary school shooting in Newtown, CT on Friday that left 28 people dead, the majority of whom were children, Obama gave an emotional speech calling for lawmakers to put politics aside and “take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like these.” Gun control measures have wide support among Americans, including members of the National Rifle Association, the most powerful gun lobby in the world. The Newtown elementary school gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, primarily used a Bushmaster .223 semi-automatic rifle.