I truly believe we are in serious trouble here, if we don’t start speaking up this will continue. Here are some of my beliefs:
Removing firearms will not remove them from criminals.
There are only so many police. I also have to mention this, I have seen a few videos of people confronting Police while carrying concealed. First off they are the Protectors and are only doing their jobs. If I was a Police Officer and was called to a scene where someone was carrying, I would be concerned about my safety and that of the general public. Yes I know it is our right, but Police don’t know the wackos from the normal. In my day when someone talked to themselves you knew they had some issues, now everybody has a cell phone connected by earpiece and you don’t have a clue.
I like the odds – we already know there are not enough Police, so if 99% of us are carrying concealed that means the criminals have no idea who we are.
So I’m going to ask you a favor, don’t give the Police a hard time for doing their jobs. Lets just make sure the laws they are going to enforce are the right ones, like the 2nd Amendment.
Interesting debate with law enforcement , many localities have already given their two cents not to enforce. I agree they are caught in the middle of this debacle. It will be very interesting how this plays out in a court of law, as to my opinion I believe it is unconstitutional.
Likewise, only 50,000 semiautomatic rifles were also registered, further proof that Connecticut’s gun owners are revolting through civil disobedience.
One guy stated: “I believe I would remove the gun from the state…..it would be in the same Uhaul as the rest of my belongings.” I think I would have to agree – I would move, your welcome to come to Arizona.
I knew the moment I heard about this law that Connecticut passed, it was never going to work. I had no idea how many weapons there were but the possible number 300,000, and only 50000 registered as required by law. Haha – 250,000 felons.
This article is an excellent point of view as to why these laws won’t work:
Those wishing to possess a pistol already had to pay fees, take tests and fill out paperwork to obtain a firearms-purchase permit.
Separate permission from the state was required just to buy ammunition in a process that must be repeated every five years. Bearing arms outside the home requires another permit that the state may, or may not, issue at its discretion.
and he says it plain and simple
None of these hurdles prevent crime. The alleged perpetrator of the Newtown massacre obtained his weapons by murdering his own mother, in violation of the law. That’s what criminals do.
What is wrong with legislators, they react rather than think proactively. I guess it doesn’t surprise me, soon forks will be on the endangered list or what about spoons and I’ll have to eat with my hands I guess… What say you?
As a matter of law, the meaning of the Second Amendment has been settled since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). In that case, the Court ruled that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness” of the state militia.