Newtown families: We'll keep fighting for gun law

Apr 21, 2013 Full story: WBRZ 10

Some families who lost loved ones in December's massacre at a Connecticut elementary school say they are very disappointed by the Senate's defeat of expanded background checks for gun sales and vow to continue their fight.

Full Story
wtf

Terre Haute, IN

#2 Apr 21, 2013
murder is already illegal. taking away law abiding citizens rights WILL NOT PREVENT IT.
Molon Labe

Hayes, VA

#3 Apr 21, 2013
Why don't the Newtown families tell the Obama Administration to ENFORCE the current NIC check law. All those felons who tried to buy a gun AREN'T be prosecuted at present. Let's use the current laws FIRST before adding more problems for the law abiding public.
wtf

Terre Haute, IN

#4 Apr 21, 2013
Molon Labe wrote:
Why don't the Newtown families tell the Obama Administration to ENFORCE the current NIC check law. All those felons who tried to buy a gun AREN'T be prosecuted at present. Let's use the current laws FIRST before adding more problems for the law abiding public.
THANK YOU!!! Exactly my point!

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#7 Apr 21, 2013
Molon Labe wrote:
Why don't the Newtown families tell the Obama Administration to ENFORCE the current NIC check law. All those felons who tried to buy a gun AREN'T be prosecuted at present. Let's use the current laws FIRST before adding more problems for the law abiding public.
How does one "enforce" an unconstitutional 'law'? The amendment plainly states "shall NOT be infringed". If someone is still a "felon", then they should still be locked up, right? If they have already paid their debt to society, then they are no longer a "felon". Self-defense is not only the right, but the duty of all free people. And ur government were expressly forbidden from contravening that specific right.

The true solution. Is for We The People to be ARMED as is Constitutionally INTENDED. And if a criminal attempts to commit an act of violence - they get stopped cold.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#8 Apr 22, 2013
We are unarmed BOSTON, we are strong (LOL).

Bostonians can spin anything. LOL. They go their ass beat, but they tell us they won. Fking hommunists.

What does this mean to a hommunist:

"...shall not be infringed."

Answer: it means the govt can infringe our rights.

Since: Feb 13

Amarillo, TX

#9 Apr 22, 2013
Obama, Pelosi & Reid told us health insurance premiums would go down with obamacare, yet that lie is OK.

I am sure if a gun control law were to come about that ONLY hindered criminals and not the law abiding citizens it would pass quickly. But by definition criminals don't care about laws. How many laws were broken before the first school victim was shot?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#10 Apr 22, 2013
Shelly Bl wrote:
Obama, Pelosi & Reid told us health insurance premiums would go down with obamacare, yet that lie is OK.
I am sure if a gun control law were to come about that ONLY hindered criminals and not the law abiding citizens it would pass quickly. But by definition criminals don't care about laws. How many laws were broken before the first school victim was shot?
All of which was intended to be prevented by:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

But since We The People have allowed the infringements. Our hired servants feel themselves justified to do whatever they want. For we permitted them to steal away the means of KEEPING THEM IN CHECK.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#11 Apr 22, 2013
"...What is a Constitution? It is the form of government, delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established. The Constitution is certain and fixed; it contains the permanent will of the people, and is the supreme law of the land; it is paramount to the power of the Legisature, and can be revoked or altered only by the authority that made it. The life-giving principle and the death-doing stroke must proceed from the same hand. What are Legislatures? Creatures of the Constitution; they owe their existence to the Constitution: they derive their powers from the Constitution: It is their commission; and, therefore, all their acts must be conformable to it, or else they will be void. The Constitution is the work or will of the People themselves, in their original, sovereign, and unlimited capacity. Law is the work or will of the Legislature in their derivative and subordinate capacity. The one is the work of the Creator, and the other of the Creature. The Constitution fixes LIMITS to the exercise of legislative authority, and prescribes the orbit within which it MUST move. In short, gentlemen, the Constitution is the sun of the political system, around which all Legislative, Executive and Judicial bodies MUST revolve. Whatever may be the case in other countries, yet in this there can be no doubt, that every act of the Legislature, repugnant to the Constitution, as absolutely VOID."--Justice Patterson, U.S. Supreme Court, VANHORNE'S LESSEE v. DORRANCE, 2 U.S. 304 (1795), 2 U.S. 304 (F.Cas.) 2 Dall. 304.
Molon Labe

Hayes, VA

#12 Apr 22, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
How does one "enforce" an unconstitutional 'law'? The amendment plainly states "shall NOT be infringed". If someone is still a "felon", then they should still be locked up, right? If they have already paid their debt to society, then they are no longer a "felon". Self-defense is not only the right, but the duty of all free people. And ur government were expressly forbidden from contravening that specific right.
The true solution. Is for We The People to be ARMED as is Constitutionally INTENDED. And if a criminal attempts to commit an act of violence - they get stopped cold.
Excuse me but I'm not arguing that all folks that served their time for a felony should NEVER be allowed to own a gun again. It's a case by case situation. My point is we DON'T NEED more laws just enforce those on the books. If, some of those laws need to be removed or adjusted to be more in line with the 2nd amendment, I all for it. I believe in Constitutional Carry, both open and concealed, by the way.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#13 Apr 22, 2013
Molon Labe wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuse me but I'm not arguing that all folks that served their time for a felony should NEVER be allowed to own a gun again. It's a case by case situation. My point is we DON'T NEED more laws just enforce those on the books. If, some of those laws need to be removed or adjusted to be more in line with the 2nd amendment, I all for it. I believe in Constitutional Carry, both open and concealed, by the way.
Not trying to be disagreeable. However allow me to repeat myself:

"How does one "enforce" an unconstitutional 'law'? The amendment plainly states "shall NOT be infringed".

My point being, that ALL 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. As our governments were EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN from enacting ANY 'law' which contravenes that specific right.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Opinion Line 28 min kuda 102
Joe Miller: 'If 20 million illegals vote, you c... 5 hr Here Is One 87
Moms Demand Action Calls On Kroger Family Of St... 5 hr Kentucky-Mitch 11
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 6 hr Here Is One 10,886
Ferguson, Clive Bundy, and the Second Amendment 7 hr Here Is One 235
In 'other Washington,' CCW will be regulated li... 8 hr Tory II 1
A 9-year-old girl, a fatal Uzi accident and a r... 13 hr Here Is One 35
•••

Guns People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••