Jump to content
308AR.com Community
  • Visit Aero Precision
  • Visit Brownells
  • Visit EuroOptic
  • Visit Site
  • Visit Beachin Tactical
  • Visit Rainier Arms
  • Visit Ballistic Advantage
  • Visit Palmetto State Armory
  • Visit Cabelas
  • Visit Sportsmans Guide
Sign in to follow this  
98Z5V

Fight back, and get serious...

Recommended Posts

Looks like the BS rammed through from Sandy Hook is getting challenged - as it should.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/connecticut-gun-control-law-prompts-second-amendment-lawsuit

Connecticut gun-control law prompts Second Amendment lawsuit

By Dave Collins | Associated Press

HARTFORD, Conn. — Gun rights supporters are suing Connecticut officials over part of a 2013 state gun control law passed after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, saying it unconstitutionally bans people from loading more than 10 rounds of ammunition into their firearms.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court cites the Second Amendment right to bear arms and the ability of people to better defend themselves with more bullets in their guns.

“Law abiding gun owners in Connecticut are left more susceptible to harm or death by being limited in their means of self-defense,” Holly Sullivan, president of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, said in a written statement. “Criminals who are intent on doing harm will not follow this same law.”

 

The defense league, the Second Amendment Foundation and two Connecticut gun owners filed the lawsuit against Public Safety Commissioner James Rovella, state police Col. Stavros Mellekas and Chief State's Attorney Richard Colangelo Jr., none of whom were in their current jobs when the gun control law was passed.

“This is a legal process, in which they were named as a result of their current position,” said Brian Foley, a top aide to Rovella, who oversees state police. “We will work through this important process, unfortunately we cannot comment further.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that states can regulate firearms to protect public safety, said state Attorney General William Tong, whose office will defend state officials and the gun law.

“Commonsense gun violence prevention measures are clearly constitutional,” Tong said in a written statement. “Reasonable limits on high capacity magazines save lives. The vast majority of the American people support — and demand — these basic public safety measures.”

State officials passed some of the strictest gun control laws in the country after a gunman used an AR-15-style rifle to kill 20 young children and six educators at Sandy Hook in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012.

The laws included a ban on ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 bullets. People who owned “large capacity” magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition before the law took effect were required to notify the state Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection and were allowed to keep them, but are prohibited from putting more than 10 rounds in them.

Gun control supporters say the law can save lives by limiting how many bullets a shooter can fire before having to reload. It was approved by former Gov. Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, and the Democratic-controlled legislature.

But gun rights supporters say that magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are considered standard and that many firearms are not available with magazines that hold fewer than 10 rounds.

“This law does nothing more than penalize law-abiding citizens while criminalizing components of handguns they own that were previously legal,” said Allan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, based in Bellevue, Washington.

The two gun owners suing the state are Susan Ross, of East Haddam, and Domenic Basile, of Watertown, who both own handguns with magazines designed to hold more than 10 rounds.

“A person with 15 rounds of ammunition available will be better able to defend himself or herself from a criminal gang, or from a drug-crazed criminal who continues attacking even after being shot, than a person who has only 10 rounds of ammunition available before they must reload their gun,” the lawsuit says.

Po Murray, chairwoman of the Newtown Action Alliance, said the lawsuit should be dismissed in the interest of public safety and public health. The alliance was formed to prevent gun violence after the Sandy Hook shooting.

“Assault weapons and high capacity magazines are the weapons of choice for mass shooters,” she said. “The U.S. Constitution must protect the lives of innocent children and adults in schools not the gun lobby's pursuit of profits selling weapons of war designed to efficiently kill maximum number of people.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 98Z5V said:

Po Murray, chairwoman of the Newtown Action Alliance, said the lawsuit should be dismissed in the interest of public safety and public health. The alliance was formed to prevent gun violence after the Sandy Hook shooting.

“Assault weapons and high capacity magazines are the weapons of choice for mass shooters,” she said. “The U.S. Constitution must protect the lives of innocent children and adults in schools not the gun lobby's pursuit of profits selling weapons of war designed to efficiently kill maximum number of people.”

My own take on the defense's defense.  RED above.  The US Constitution doesn't say a damn thing about protecting the lives of innocent children and adults in schools. Nothing like that in the US Constitution.  This is one misguided fucker, trying to extrapolate their own "feelings and emotions" into a document that states nothing of the sort. "Feelings and emotions" needs to stop in this country.  It doesn't pertain to laws, or developing laws.  It doesn't pertain to interpreting laws.  "Feelings and emotions" are things that have no place on governing the society of the United States of America.  We were not founded on "feelings and emotions," not should we let something so petty direct the course of this nation. Once we allow that in, everything goes out the window. 

Edited by 98Z5V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the red part as I would unwind is this is what the 2nd amd. does.. if used as written.. not abused. It has nothing to do with other interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully this works but I think conn and mass are about as fooked up as cali when it comes to stupid stuff. If it does get removed then other states can/will jump on the band wagon. If Someone was going to commit mas murder they wouldn’t give a rats ass about some stupid law preventing 10 rounds or a special mag drop button requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 98Z5V said:

My own take on the defense's defense.  RED above.  The US Constitution doesn't say a damn thing about protecting the lives of innocent children and adults in schools. Nothing like that in the US Constitution.  This is one misguided fucker, trying to extrapolate their own "feelings and emotions" into a document that states nothing of the sort. "Feelings and emotions" needs to stop in this country.  It doesn't pertain to laws, or developing laws.  It doesn't pertain to interpreting laws.  "Feelings and emotions" are things that have no place on governing the society of the United States of America.  We were not founded on "feelings and emotions," not should we let something so petty direct the course of this nation. Once we allow that in, everything goes out the window. 

Right now in Champaign Ill the woman mayor has outlawed ammunition and alcohol sales. Threatening to cut utilities for compliance.

Creating a problem where there was none.

because of emotion

 

Edited by unforgiven
Sprung wrist doing curls

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All they ever use is emotion when making laws.

 

This "panic" is starting to show people's true colors, politicians and every day people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Radioactive said:

Hopefully this works but I think conn and mass are about as fooked up as cali when it comes to stupid stuff.

It is my understanding that this argument worked in California. It's certainly ripe to be tested in MA, and NY as well. The California case was in the 9th circuit court last I heard; and was the cause of "freedom week" for California residents last year (when they could again buy high capacity magazines for a single week in 2019).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the selective invoking of "we need to do it for the kids/if it saves one life then it's worth it" 

Why are they not banning private pools ? after all public pools are available with lifeguards... no one need their own pool!

Centers for Disease Control report that here in the United States, on average, 3,536 people died from drowning annually from 2005 to 2014, which equates to 10 deaths each day. Then there are the thousands of others who suffer swimming pool-related injuries each year. Drowning is the number one cause of unintentional death for children between the ages of 1 and 4.

74 percent of fatal pool accidents occurred at residential locations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cunuckgaucho said:

I love the selective invoking of "we need to do it for the kids/if it saves one life then it's worth it" 

Why are they not banning private pools ? after all public pools are available with lifeguards... no one need their own pool!

Centers for Disease Control report that here in the United States, on average, 3,536 people died from drowning annually from 2005 to 2014, which equates to 10 deaths each day. Then there are the thousands of others who suffer swimming pool-related injuries each year. Drowning is the number one cause of unintentional death for children between the ages of 1 and 4.

74 percent of fatal pool accidents occurred at residential locations

We need a new law!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t feed the idiots. They will never understand the point you’re making. In their world, padded corners and banned everything would be a utopia. Now I can sit here safely in the middle of the room and stare at the wall while I take my antidepressant psychotropic drugs and “relax”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DNP said:

 Now I can sit here safely in the middle of the room and stare at the wall while I take my antidepressant psychotropic drugs and “relax”. 

Don't get me started on my Johnny Noveske Rant.  He was either a visionary or clairvoyant.  It cost him.  Fuk that, he was a visionary, and made it happen.  His clairvoyance was what they went after. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...