The majority of Mothers of America made a promise after Newtown that we would not move on again from another mass shooting without action. We must join together to say that this is not acceptable: not in this community, and not now.
— Shannon Watts, founder of One Million Moms for Gun Control
The non-profit organization One Million Moms for Gun Control is urging organizers of the East Coast Fine Arms Show to cancel its event this weekend out of respect for the still grieving community of Newtown, Connecticut. The show is slated for Stamford, just 40 miles from the Newtown shooting site. Westchester Collectors, Inc. is putting on the show.
Shannon Watts, founder of One Million Moms for Gun Control, agrees with Stamford Mayor Michael Pavia that the timing of the show is too soon.
“The idea that life has already returned to normal for the community of Newtown less than one month after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School is shocking. Newtown residents have not even had a full month to heal,” said Watts. “Allowing this show to go on without protest would be tantamount to saying, ‘It’s time to move on.’ The mothers of America made a promise after Newtown that we would not move on again from another mass shooting without action. We must join together to say that this is not acceptable: not in this community, and not now.”
Kara Baekey, of the Fairfield County, Connecticut, Chapter of One Million Moms for Gun Control said, “As a lifetime resident of Fairfield County, the same county as Newtown, I believe it is too soon for a gun show to be held so close to Sandy Hook. We are still under the microscope of the media, our children are still asking questions, and we are asking for time to grieve. Instead of hosting a gun show, we should be working to strengthen our state and federal gun laws. This is not the time to be celebrating and marketing guns in Connecticut.”
The 8th Annual East Coast Fine Arms Show will take place in Stamford, CT, at the Plaza Hotel located at 2701 Summer Street, presented by Westchester Collectors.
About One Million Moms for Gun Control:
One Million Moms for Gun Control, a nonprofit that supports common sense gun measures, was formed in the immediate aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14, which claimed 26 lives—20 of them children. Our goals: 1) Reinstate the ban on assault weapons and related magazines. 2) Close gun-show loopholes that encourage private gun sales without background checks. 3) Set boundaries on how much ammunition a person can purchase. 4) Limit the scope of concealed weapons laws at the state level. For more information, visit onemillionmomsforguncontrol.org
I think what the author is missing, is these people are EVIL before, during, and after medication,you just don't create a correlation to pysch meds and killing. They probably felt those evil thoughts for a very long time.Millions of people are on SSRI in this country,a very small percentage have gone on to kill. How many mass murderers were not medicated, was Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris's Dylan Kiebold medicated?
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/americas-biggest-killers-the-chart-anti-gunners-dont-want-you-to-see_01052013 why look at rifles vs. hammers? let's look at the more general "firearm" vs. "non-firearm" as well as many other causes of death. firearm deaths rank pretty low. I guess we should start banning cars, alcohol, doctors, and bats before we ban guns.
O.K. fair enough Brutus- I see your point Than why medicate them AND send them back out into society, IF there are clear signs they are dangerous to themselves and others? Often times the parents say in reflection i knew he/she was troubled but didn't know what to do
Finkelman cites many different pieces of evidence for his argument the Second Amendment is a collective right of the States to keep militia. Most salient of these was citing the Constitution in the several parts where it gave Congress and the president shared responsibility for the ultimate control of the militia. He also describes how many proposals of the Pennsylvania Antifederalists were incorporated into the Bill of Rights almost word-for-word, in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth and Tenth Amendments. So the Founders certainly were aware of and influenced by the Penn Antifederalists, but nonetheless rejected to include their insistence that "the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals." Instead the Second explicitly begins with "A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free state..." The Constitution puts that Militia under state-appointed officers and subject to Congressional regulation and, in emergency, Presidential command.
Boston also referenced the former Soviet Union’s Joseph Stalin and how he implemented gun control in order to expand his power. “[I]t’s something we’ve seen happen time and time again in history,” he added. Perhaps the most memorable portion of Boston’s letter to Feinstein read: “I am not your subject. I’m the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I’m the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I’m the flesh and blood of America. I’m the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American.”
Finkelman also uses as evidence the records of state courts and legislatures, "as numerous courts accepted the notion that to 'bear arms' was a term solely connected to the militia and the military." He cites the Tennessee Supreme Court in 1840 understanding the term "bear arms" had a "reference to their military use," and quotes that court thus: "A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane." In other words, to "bear arms" was understood to have a martial sense, which indeed conforms to the exact wording of the Second Amendment that starts with "A well-regulated militia."
...Out of time, many points unanswered I admit, but I am swamped with work I hope will turn into paying work. You can have the last word here, my attention is stretched by many things. I am grateful for your thoughtful discussion, thanks again VOR.
I was asking, and the word- partner- was omitted, was Dylan Klebold medicated, seems to me he wasn't or it would have been referenced
The plain text says RKBA is a right of the people. By statute, the unorganized militia is all adult males between the ages of 18 and 45 (and women who volunteer) just like the electorate is all adult citizens. The militia isn't going to be particularly effective if the members don't assemble and act in some coordinated manner, nor if they don't practice shooting straight.
Limitations on who should own guns would be more accurate, All the causes of death on that chart are preventable to some degree,yes,as well are homicides when they committed by misuse, just as a car can be misused.
2:36 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013 cheryl - Do you stand by your earlier postas being the Truth? cheryl 1 hour ago stats 2011: 323 death by guns You failed to say how many were justified!!!
If Nancy Lanza didnt have 1 gun in her home, then lots of people would be alive today. Try to counter that truth. Gun advocates look at Chicago as their city to show how laws dont work. But why not examine, on this site, a closer city, like New York, with anti-gun Bloomberg as mayor? Are you unaware of the huge and continuing drop in gun deaths? Or is it more convenient to only state the facts that support your b.s. point of view? The bottom line needs to be looking at the country's laws vs other countries. As it stands now, I can buy 15 guns in colorado--drive a few hundred miles and sell them in chicago. Hardly a great argument. Compare England to the USA and then decide if gun laws have no impact. Hint-they do. And just explain why I cant look at England and USA when making conclusions. If you cant--then you have lost the argument. Sorry-but that is the facts. You tell me about chicago-but i have a retort-- the guns in chicago are bought elsewhere. Now its your turn to tell me why england has so few gun deaths.
FBI: Michigan's crime rate down 10.5% with CCW law in place. The bad guys hate armed citizens. Wonder why?
You would have to establish that adam lanza had an ability to kill 20 plus people in order to actually mention that that was a possibility. Can you? If you want to bring it to the absurd, like it seems you do (lets not deal with facts, but with suppositions) --may I ask does the 2nd amendment cover your right to own a nuclear weapon? A bazooka? A tank? Where, in your mind-that is capable of enormous elaboration, does it end? No, Id rather deal with reality, even though it does have the inconvenient nusiance of having a gun, that did kill lots of people....sorry to take you back to reality. Lots of 'crazy' people exist in this country....they all have 2nd amendment rights---so in your scenario, you accomplish nothing. I dont deal in absolutes, so once again, we have to deal with things more reasonably when debating me. I dont think that limiting or banning guns will solve all crime. I dont think that only bad guys will have access, and I do think that some bad guys will have a much harder time obtaining weapons, with intelligent application of laws. So, there are starting points to all problems. Im not suggesting to ban ALL guns-- brutus. Do you suggest there should be NO limits? Unlimitied weaponry and access for every man woman and child? Hopefully not-- so please dont characterize those of us who desire less guns in our society to be absolutists-with total bans, etc... A reasonable conversation about the problem is what is desired.