Crack reporting from the rest of CNN

Jim Spellman, who has no doubt done exhaustive research into his piece on brisk ammunition sales in the US, seems to have missed something. I know investigating is hard and all, be we have Google these days, so finding some answers shouldn't be hard.

Let's take a look:

While campaigning for the White House, Obama supported re-enacting the now-expired ban on assault weapons. But there is no indication that the administration will take up that measure -- or any other gun-control initiative --anytime soon.

Really? No indication?

Your shitting me?

It took me one try and a whopping three seconds to find that Obama has just recently supported ratifying the CIFTA treaty which would effectively destroy the entire shooting and hunting industry in one fell swoop. Is that not a "gun-control initiative?"

How about the 500% tax on ammunition that Obama proposed? Would that have anything to do with the ammo buying frenzy? Does that not constitute a "gun-control initiative?"

Or perhaps Eric Holder's announcement that Obama would like to reinstate the failed "assault thingy" ban? "Gun-control initiative," no?

What about DoD ending the sale of fired cartridge brass to the commercial market? I can see no clearer "gun-control initiative" than making ammunition too expensive and rare for civilians.

This list of attempts is not comprehensive, and I found all of this after a rigorous consult with Google-the-wise over breakfast. So my question is: what do they pay reporters to do these days? Lou Dobbs aside, they sure don't investigate anything.

Update: DoD ended the sale of fired brass to the commercial market, but it was reversed soon afterwords. I was merely pointing out the attempt.