Connecticut passes strictest gun cont...

Connecticut passes strictest gun control laws in US as Obama's reforms stall

There are 1562 comments on the Guardian Unlimited story from Apr 4, 2013, titled Connecticut passes strictest gun control laws in US as Obama's reforms stall. In it, Guardian Unlimited reports that:

A makeshift memorial to the victims of the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, which has reignited the national debate on gun control.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Guardian Unlimited.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#348 Apr 7, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
"I say leave it to the states to decide....."
Nobody cares what you say...and the States are under the same restrictions as the Federal gov't under the 2nd and 14th Amendments.
I guess that explains why every state has some form of restriction on the ability to own a gun.....

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#349 Apr 7, 2013
Cat74 wrote:
So where are those new gun control laws? Reid can't get the votes to pass them, because even some Democrats understand the Constitution. We are waiting. Obama shot his big mouth off about all the gun control he was going to get from Congress, before the votes in favor of gun control was counted. Every once in awhile the Messiah has to come to earth, and face reality!!!
Only because the NRA has bought off enough politicians to keep anything from passing.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#350 Apr 7, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
"Full Faith & Credit has nothing to do with gun ownership; that's why a Conceal Carry Permit isn't valid in all states."
Not yet...but it's coming.
"No one trying to completely take the right away; we're just supporting reasonable restrictions..."
When will you show us these "reasonable restrictions"...? Barring your ability to do that...no!
No worry, once Kennedy and/or Scalia finally die we'll replace them with a solid liberal majority that will remove the activist rulings from the current SCOTUS.

Reasonable restrictions would be banning all semi-automatic weapons.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#354 Apr 7, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
"..........zzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........
And yet we keep passing more reasonable restictions on the gun-nutters.

SIR LANCELOT

“I just hate stupid people”

Since: Apr 07

DEEP SOUTHERN ILLINOIS

#355 Apr 7, 2013
Marine Corp Pat wrote:
<quoted text>
You’re such the paranoid drama-queen… if you really thought that while at the hardware store, you need to be medicated and isolated from society… that’s pathetic.
It was a joke PattyCake, much like you are.
Christine

Minneapolis, MN

#356 Apr 7, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
No one cares enough about you that you need a gun, lampchop.
People want to kill Obama because he is a person of importance.
When you get elected POTUS- you can decide whether or not you want someone to protect you.
Created Equal and treated equal under the law.

There is no one more important than anyone else in the USA.
Obskeptic

Ypsilanti, MI

#357 Apr 7, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Lucky for Lanza, he had the assault weapon the NRA made possible and legal for him to possess.
And the NRA insists background checks aren't needed.
And if you want to carry into a public school: have a blast, it's the NRA way!

So less then 3% of murders are committed by the long rifle and your response is to prevent law abiding citizens to own them.
Cat74

United States

#358 Apr 7, 2013
Yes, all Americans should be treated equal, but if you are here illegally you are not on American, you are a criminal, and that makes you not equal under the law.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#360 Apr 7, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not for long, traitor. The us supreme court has SHOT down numerous perverse attempts of tyranny and usurpation lately. The states that have passed those UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws will soon learn the error of their ways. There is a HUGE BACKLASH in motion. Just as there were when the court overturned Heller and McDonald cases.
You pathetic traitors are losing ground BIG TIME.
Losing ground?

Since those decisions we've actually passed MORE bans, including some of the most restrictive in New York & Connecticut as well as Colorado.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#362 Apr 7, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
MEANINGLESS. We The People WERE SOLD on accepting .
You can't even quote the Constitution of the USA.

And the second amendment is barely two dozen words (and you miss half of them).

You don't think I read your copy and pastes- we the people can only assume you are lying.

Again.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#363 Apr 7, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You aren't in a militia, GayDavy.
Marching around with your right arm extended doesn't count.
"You aren't in a militia,..."

And YOU are a liar.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#364 Apr 7, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
The us supreme court has SHOT down numerous
The US Supreme Court has overturned a handful of lower court decisions; it has upheld the overwhelming majority.

PS: this is what the MAJORITY said the last big case:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.[United States v.] Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."

Justice Scalia

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#365 Apr 7, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
The states that have passed those UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws
Not a single one passed in the last few weeks is unconstitutional, GayDavy.

Since you don't even know what the second amendment is, honey, you can't even possible have an *informed* opinion.
drinK the Hive

New York, NY

#366 Apr 7, 2013
Manipulation Equal' Survival...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_px6_EOTWkX8/TSlCUUM...
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#367 Apr 7, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.[United States v.] Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
Justice Scalia
PS: women and blacks are still going to be able to vote.
"PS: women and blacks are still going to be able to vote."

Well yes they are...and women is the fastest growing segment of society that are becoming gun owners...how about that...?
Christine

Minneapolis, MN

#368 Apr 7, 2013
Cat74 wrote:
Yes, all Americans should be treated equal, but if you are here illegally you are not on American, you are a criminal, and that makes you not equal under the law.
Agree Obama should return to Kenya!
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

#369 Apr 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet we keep passing more reasonable restictions on the gun-nutters.
Yet again you put forth NOT A THING in rebuttal to the other poster's remarks.

Rather, you engage in the entirely puerile, as usual.

So once again, just for you, these are the prior rulings on that matter of ant-gun laws in BOTH the states AND the fed gov:

"The claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime."
Miller v U.S. 230 F 486, at 489

"No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it."
Miller v U.S., U.S. Supreme Court,[319 U.S. 105 (1943).

"If a state converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity."
Shuttlesworth v Birmingham, U.S. Supreme Court.[394 U.S. 147 (1969).]

"Constitutional rights cannot be denied simply because of hostility to their assertions and exercise; vindication of conceded Constitutional Rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them."
Watson v. Memphis, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224 (1921),

"The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions."
Tiche v Osborne, 131 A. 60.

"The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff."
People v Zedillo,{219 Mich. 635, 189 N.W. 927, at 928 (1922).

"When any court violates the clean and unambiguous language of the Constitution, a fraud is perpetrated and NO ONE is bound to obey it."
State v Sutton,[Source: 63 Minn 167, 65 NW 262, 30 LRA 630]

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be NO rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."
Miranda v Arizona, U.S. Supreme Court, 384 US 436, 491 (1966).

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of Constitutional rights."
Snerer v Cullen 481 F. 946.

"We find it intolerable that one Constitutional rights should have to be surrendered in order to assert another."
Simmons v U.S.,[390 US 389 (1968)].

So, you were saying? You might allude to whatever the HELL is is that you'd like, but at the end of the day, there is such a large body of 'settled law,' as to make any of your squeaks become TOTALLY irrelevant.

Now, go back to bed and pull those covers up over your pitiful, miserable little head, because YOU are TOO AWFULLY AFRAID to face life HEAD ON.

"Time men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."
Thomas Jefferson 1796
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#370 Apr 7, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Lucky for Lanza, he had the assault weapon the NRA made possible and legal for him to possess.
And the NRA insists background checks aren't needed.
And if you want to carry into a public school: have a blast, it's the NRA way!
"Lucky for Lanza, he had the assault weapon the NRA made possible and legal for him to possess."

You can keep changing your words around but YOU are still lying. The NRA does not support, advocate or condone murder and theft. That's what Adam Lanza did even before he got to the school...no matter how many lies you tell about it.

"And the NRA insists background checks aren't needed."

The legally required background checks were conducted on the lawful purchaser and owner of the firearms. The police have even said that Adam Lanza did NOT try and make a gun purchase before the shooting.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#371 Apr 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess that explains why every state has some form of restriction on the ability to own a gun.....
Also explains why some States preemptively repealed some of their own laws after the Heller and McDonald decisions. More to follow.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#372 Apr 7, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
No worry, once Kennedy and/or Scalia finally die we'll replace them with a solid liberal majority that will remove the activist rulings from the current SCOTUS.
Reasonable restrictions would be banning all semi-automatic weapons.
"Reasonable restrictions would be banning all semi-automatic weapons."

Then what...?

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
News Reader Reaction Forum: Will concealed carry mak... (Jun '11) Wed Hendo 45
Safe carry Jan 16 javawhey 21
News Secret sting operation by the GAO blows away th... Jan 12 Say What 3
News Malloy: Bump stocks should be banned in Connect... Jan 12 Say What 3
News NJ's new governor could sue feds over concealed... Jan 5 jimwildrickjr 2
News ATF Seeking Public Comment on Proposed Bump Sto... Jan 5 Say What 4
News Military must meet FBI database requirements Jan 4 Watchdog 4
More from around the web