Gun Violence Prevention- Connecticut Legislature proposals

On the night of April 2, 2013, the Connecticut Legislature’s Bi-Partisan task force on Gun Violence Prevention released its proposal for gun-control legislation. It sheds light on a few of the proposals that are being talked about in Washington and other parts of the country.

I will highly some key points, that I feel could be shot down by a Supreme Court challenge.
Here’s a snapshot of some of what their proposal seeks to accomplish.

1. Requires a “universal background check” for all firearm sales or transfers
   1. All gun sales or transfers must be preceded by the buyer passing a national criminal background check.
2. Bans the sale or purchase of large-capacity magazines (LCMs) that have a capacity of more than 10 rounds and requires all currently owned LCM’s to be registered with law enforcement
   1. In addition to banning the sale, import, or purchase of LCM’s, this law states that you must register all LCMs that were legally purchased prior to the law going into effect. Additionally, the law states that owners of LCMs are only allowed to load more than 10 rounds in their LCMs if they are in their home or at a shooting range.
   2. Concealed carry permit holders with firearms purchased with LCMs prior to the ban are not allowed to carry more than 10 rounds in the magazine.
3. Expands the Connecticut Assault Weapons Ban
   1. The current assault weapons ban is being expanded to include a ban of any weapon that has one or more of the characteristics often found on military weapons. Residents who already legally possess weapons that fit the expanded definition with have their weapons grandfathered but will have to register their firearms with law enforcement and the transportation and use of these weapons will be very limited.
4. Requires a state-issued eligibility certificate to purchase long-guns, ammunition or magazines.
   1. To purchase a long-gun, the purchaser must complete a firearms safety training course, be fingerprinted, and undergo a national criminal background.
   2. To purchase ammunition or magazines, the buyer must possess an eligibility certificate that shows that they have passed a national background check.
5. Denies eligibility certificates to those who have been involuntarily confined or voluntarily admitted to a hospital for persons with psychiatric disabilities.
   1. Those involuntarily confined will not be allowed to possess or purchase firearms or ammunition for 5 years after their release.
   2.  Those voluntarily admitted will not be allowed to possess or purchase firearms or ammunition for 6 month after their release.
6. Establish a dangerous weapon offender registry
   1. Offenders who have been convicted of weapons offenses or some offenses where they have threatened to use a weapon would have to register with law enforcement for five years.

This would NOT have prevented Newtown, Aurora or AZ/Giffords shooting.
That is pretty broad, intrusive, but most importantly, a clear violation of the right to Keep and Bear!

Second Amendment Required

Now here is a breath of fresh air and positive news about the right to keep and bear arms, in a time when government, at least at the Federal and state levels, are trying to limit our second amendment right.

Nelson GA, a little town of 1300 and 50 miles north of Atlanta, voted unanimously to require, if you don't object, to owning a fire arm.

The measure requires every head of household to own a gun and ammunition to "provide for the emergency management of the city" and to "provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants."

AP Reports:
The ordinance exempts convicted felons and those who suffer from certain physical or mental disabilities, as well as anyone who objects to gun ownership. The ordinance also doesn't include any penalty for those who don't comply.
But backers said they wanted to make a statement about gun rights at a time when President Barack Obama and some states are pushing for more restrictions in the wake of the Connecticut elementary school massacre in December that left 20 children and six educators dead.
Councilman Duane Cronic, who sponsored the measure, said he knows the ordinance won't be enforced but he still believes it will make the town safer.
"I likened it to a security sign that people put up in their front yards. Some people have security systems, some people don't, but they put those signs up," he said. "I really felt like this ordinance was a security sign for our city. Basically it was a deterrent ordinance to tell potential criminals they might want to go on down the road a little bit."

The city council's agenda says another purpose of the measure is "opposition of any future attempt by the federal government to confiscate personal firearms."

(But there is always one in the bunch)
Nelson resident Lamar Kellett was one of five people who spoke during a public comment period and one of two who opposed the ordinance. Among his many objections, he said it dilutes the city's laws to pass measures that aren't intended to be enforced.
"Does this mean now 55 miles an hour speed limit means 65, 80, whatever you choose? There's not a whole lot of difference. A law's a law," he said.
Kellett also said the ordinance will have no effect, that it won't encourage people like him who don't want a gun to go out and buy one.

The proposal illustrates how the response to the Newtown, Conn., massacre varies widely in different parts of the country.

While lawmakers in generally more liberal states with large urban centers like New York and California have moved to tighten gun control laws, more conservative, rural areas in the American heartland have been going in the opposite direction, seeking to loosen restrictions, arm educators or even require gun ownership.
Among the other efforts to broaden gun rights that have surfaced since the Newtown killings:
-- Earlier Monday, lawmakers in Oklahoma scuttled a bill that would have allowed public school districts to decide whether to let teachers be armed.
-- Spring City, Utah, passed an ordinance this year recommending that residents keep firearms, softening an initial proposal that aimed to require it.
-- Residents of tiny Byron, Maine, rejected a proposal last month that would have required a gun in every home. Even some who initially supported the measure said it should have recommended gun ownership instead of requiring it, and worried that the proposal had made the community a laughingstock. Selectmen of another Maine town, Sabbatus, threw out a similar measure. The state's attorney general said state law prevents municipalities from passing their own firearms laws anyway.
-- Lawmakers in about two dozen states have considered making it easier for school employees or volunteers to carry guns on campus. South Dakota passed such a measure last month. Individual communities from New Jersey to Colorado have voted to allow administrators or teachers to carry guns in school.

Located in the Appalachian foothills, Nelson is a tiny, hilly town with narrow, twisting roads. It's a place where most people know one another and leave their doors unlocked.
It used to be a major source of marble, with the local marble company employing many in town. But that industry is mostly gone now, Mayor Mike Haviland said. There are no retail stores in town anymore, and people do their shopping elsewhere. While the town used to have an internally driven economy, just about everyone leaves town for work now, making it a bedroom community for Atlanta, Haviland said.
The mayor said he never dreamed his small city would be the focus of national and international media attention, but he understands it.
"It bumps up against the national issues on guns," he said.
Nelson resident Lawrence Cooper and his wife, Nanette, sat on their front porch Monday morning, enjoying a pleasant breeze and listening to the radio show of conservative Herman Cain, who unsuccessfully sought the 2012 Republican nomination for president. The Coopers support the ordinance.
"It's supporting gun rights flat out, and there is so much -- not antipathy -- but antagonism against gun ownership these days," Lawrence Cooper said. "And this is a very conservative small town, and they are fully in support of this."
The couple doesn't own any guns, but 52-year-old Lawrence Cooper said he grew up with them, and this ordinance might inspire him to go out and buy one. He chuckled as he pulled out a small black-and-white photo from his wallet. It shows him at 3 years of age, in front of a rack of hunting rifles and shotguns.
Police Chief Heath Mitchell noted that the city doesn't have police officers who work 24 hours a day and is far from the two sheriff's offices that might send deputies in case of trouble, so response times to emergency calls can be long. So having a gun would help residents take their protection into their own hands, he said.

Cruz (R-TX) Gives Constitutional Lesson to Feinstein

Now that the Senate Judiciary Committee feels that Senator Feinstein attack on our second amendment is justifiable and voted 10-8 to send it to the Senate floor, we have a showdown on our god given, constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Her comments made to Senator Cruz from Taxas, here, is startling line of thought and it is clearly misguided understanding of OUR right to keep and bear.

Now I took a few notes and feel compelled to respond:

-“Sandy Hook victims were dismembered.” 

How would she know this? Information on that has never been released.

-“Weapons of war” 

These are not weapons of war. No solder would be very confident to take semi-automatics in to the theater of war.

-“It’s fine that you want to lecture me on the constitution” 

No, the constitution is lecturing you.

-“I have been here a long time” 

The constitution has been here, as has our country, for far longer than her service.

-“It doesn't Prohibited, it exempts” Prohibits= Forbid (something) by law, rule, or other authority. 

Exempts= Others that are excused from. Meaning us and that you don’t have the right, but others do. That’s NOT how it works under the 2^nd amendment.

And I guess these Senators feel that Child pornography shouldn’t be banned in Texas public schools?

-“Congress is in the business of making law”

-Congress is in the business to be protecting our liberties, representing We the People and providing the common defense. WELL, they are suppose to, anyways....

-“The Supreme Court interprets the law. If they strike down the law, they strike down the law”

They’ve struck down similar laws in the recent past. What these gun grabbing liberals know is, it will take 2-3 years to get the law (if it becomes law) struck down. By that time, people have been without their rights to “Keep and Bear” for the time period.

 Dick Durbin says “None of our rights are absolute. None of them.” 

WHOA!! Carefull DICK! Your Marxism is showing, Fucker!!!

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”  Sure sounds like they ARE 'absolutely' free from limitations, restrictions, or exceptions!

THIS is the socialist left in America. You can easily see how they stick right with their dogma of their ideology.

Obama: "I don't believe people should be able to own guns"

Thanks to CNS News, we now know the truth of Obama's opinion on our 2nd amendment rights.

In his new book, At the Brink, economist and author John R. Lott Jr., assesses the presidency of Barack Obama and recalls conversations regarding gun laws they had while working at the University of Chicago.
In Chapter Three, Mr. Lott discusses gun-control and takes the reader back to his time at the University of Chicago, where he and then-professor Barack Obama spoke on numerous occasions about guns in America.

"I don't believe people should be able to own guns," Obama told Lott one day at the University of Chicago Law School.

The chapter documents the actions that Obama has taken on guns, citing the following:

• In 1996, Obama supported a ban on handguns
• In 1998, he supported a ban on the sale of all semi-automatic guns
• In 2004, he advocated banning gun sales within five miles of a school or park, which would have shut down nearly all gun stores

President Barack Obama describes his views on guns much differently now that he is on the national stage, Lott believes, pointing to an interview on Fox News in which Obama states, "I have said consistently that I believe that the Second Amendment is an individual right."
h/t weasel zipper:

Yes, now that he is in the national spot light, of course he is going to change his tune.
But with today's MSM, he could still speak those words, and it wouldn't get any coverage.

America- Losing Your 2nd Amendment Rights

Ever thought what it would look like if we Americans lose our second Amendment rights?

Australians know exactly what it means and they are warning Americans, "Don't trust the Politicians to be honest", or know what it will mean.

The video here shows how the Politicians in Australia convinced their people to give up, even certain guns and how rules for guns that are not banned, are to be kept!

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
~Thomas Jefferson~