Blumenthal On NRA Statement: \’Sadly And Shamefully Inadequate\’

by Categorized: Uncategorized Date:

U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, who called for action on gun control on the Senate floor earlier this week, called the National Rifle Association\’s Friday response to the Newtown school massacre “sadly and shamefully inadequate.”

In a phone interview from Washington, D.C., Blumenthal said, “Their only solution is more guns and they reject any real action against gun violence. At a defining historic moment demanding courageous leadership, the NRA has declined to step forward as a credible and constructive partner. The NRA’s proposal for more armed guards in schools may be helpful in some instances, but it falls far short the strong, serious, comprehensive action needed to stop the kind of horrific tragedy that occurred one week ago in Newtown.”

Blumenthal said that there was an armed guard at the school during the Columbine massacre in 1999.

“The American people are demanding real change, and the Newtown tragedy is a call to action, but the NRA has failed to answer that call. So I am going to continue working with all sides that are committed to sensible common sense measures,” Blumenthal said. He added: “The NRA  will have to alter its approach to be taken seriously in this national debate.”

 

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on courant.com articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

60 thoughts on “Blumenthal On NRA Statement: \’Sadly And Shamefully Inadequate\’

  1. Richard

    Dick buddy,

    You had a chance to do all this after the Omar Thornton Beer Distributor shooting in 2010. Then you were afraid to alienate your base and push for gun control out of session and then whimpered after the Gifford Shooting in your first month in Washington.

    Let’s not blame the NRA for looking out for their own interest when you clearly put your own interests above public safety in 2010 and 2011.

    1. TheJerk

      that my friend is a great statement. People dont realize Dick (like most politicians) are extremely self serving and generally cowards

      1. Glenn Hamilton

        Yes, I agree. “In the rear with the gear” Blumenthal never missed a camera opportunity.

        Mr B., this is from a real combat Marine, wounded in action with a purple heart.Instead of criticizing the NRA where is your fix? Easy to criticize when you were born with a spoon in your mouth and only had to count military gear with a occasional paper cut but you do not offer anything.

  2. Jamie M

    While I didn’t like the NRA’s refusal to concede that you can make a case for less guns, Blumenthal is wrong when se says “the NRA’s only solution is more guns”. The NRA also talked about the need to look at the glorification of violence in the entertainment industry. Are these liberal Democrats going to get tough with Hollywood, as well with the NRA?

    Good to see my senator, the hero of the Tet Offensive, looking out for me. We elected this liar, we deserve what we get.

    1. Mrf1212

      Based on this ratiionale: Ban Wagner he inspired Hitler; Ban Dancing with Stars since the Newtown Shooter liked Dance, Dance Revolution and Ban Heston since he inspired LaPierre. The NRA used to be a very responsible apolitical safety and marksman organization–but then again that was when its letters stood for National Rifle Association–Over the years the NRA did many good things, safety, competition shooting and even law enforcement training. It could be said the NRA helped here with law enforement and abroad with better soldiers and marines familiar with rifles at an early age–growing up my Dad liked to hunt but made sure I was at least involved with the NRA Now it seems the focus is gun manufacturers and political action to support certain candidates. The tragedy at Newtown wasn’t the NRA’s fault but most NRA members that target shoot or hunt wouldn’t use those rounds if they wanted meat or punch paper and may keep other types of ammo for security but a cache that large probably was more than Seal Team VI expended on the bin Laden raid. $12 of trigger locks and a combination safe would have prevented the shooter access–that was the prime failure–and LaPierre should have presented that rather than blame everything else. The NRA has a long, useful, patriotic heritage & its put at risk by LaPierre taking it further in this direction. Who can support or pay NRA dues if the money is spent lobbying the miliatrization of our schools–Who will even want to keep their sticker on their car or truck? How can anyone believe that in America-we’d be even talking about armed guards in our schools-shouldn’t our kids grow up knowing we are the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave? Not some coward talk like arming schools. (US veteran–VFW eligible)

      1. Kim

        you have to love posters like Mrf1212 who don’t have a clue about gun ownership but like to speak as if they have all the answers. Same goes for jimmyboggs who’s only argument has ever been ‘if you don’t like it, move’.

        1. Mrf1212

          Kim,

          You’re right, my first “official” training with firearms wasn’t until 1972–before that it was just at home with family hunting rifles & my last “official” fire was in 1986 so even if I did learn something those years I guess I would never know all you do.

          The NRA’s LaPierre went to the extreme–the issue was an unauthorized user accessed firearms for an inappropriate purpose–no access, no issue//appropriate use–no issue (this wasn’t an accident or firearm failure during approporiate use–ie defense, hunting, target shooting). Seems no one wants to keep the argument that way–its either “we want to take your guns” or “don’t take my guns” when the argument should be KEEP YOUR GUNS LOCKED AND AWAY FROM INAPPROPRIATE USE.

          I used the examples to show how ludicrous LaPiere’s argument distratcs from that issue–sad rather than read it as such you felt best to dismiss anyone not as smart as you must not know firearms–tell me Kim in your mitiary service what was your unit’s expected kill ratio? And yes, when not is use ALL our firearms were secured and only issued to appropriately trained personnel. (Kind of like what the NRA was founded to support if you ever read their history)

          1. Kim

            Mrf1212: I don’t disagree with you on the security of weapons by individuals and others. This is only ONE of the many laws that should be more vigorously enforced, instead of resorting to even MORE laws that only serve to punish the innocent, responsible gun owners in this country. LaPierre’s statements did NOTHING to distract from safe gun storage – that’s simply your reading of his position statement.

            I DO disagree with your implication that the second amendment is for hunting/sporting only. I also disagree with your premise that a large ‘cache’ of ammunition is somehow inappropriate. I’ve stated my position on this and other issues in this very blog. You’re free to read through them.

            I also disagree with your ‘surprise’ that the NRA is an advocate for gun owners and gun manufacturers. What’s the surprise for? The NRA fighting on behalf of citizens and gun companies is no more out of line with their mission statement than breast cancer foundations advocating for cancer patients and drug companies that provide drugs.

            I hope this clears things up for you

      2. Kim

        the land of the free? Are you kidding me? Have you tried to buy a large soft drink in NYC? The list of freedoms lost over the last 40 years is too large for this blog but that doesn’t mean we should pretend otherwise.

        Nor should we pretend that the second amendment is about hunting and target shooting.

        Please tell us your plan to protect our children while in school – without mentioning further erosion of the second amendment. If you do, we might listen.

        1. Mrf1212

          As for a plan, simple–parents need to be parents again, people shouldn’t believe hiring the most costly BOE/school staffs get the best people–it gets the greediest; have a entry point security preferabbly in the parking lot access (armed or unarmed but in a secure position); ensure access points are locked with minimal entry access–buzzer/monitor/intercom system probably best; first story glass–bank glass, barred or reduced to prevent use as an entrance point; review if huddling children into group to make the driill easier is really better than other more chaotic but harder to target (huddling people creates a single large target profile–ever hear “like shooting fish in a barrel” and ensure if evacuated to an open area like a parking lot or playground there is some obstruction like firetrucks to limit sniping by a 2nd shooter.

          That’s a quick generic list–I raised concerns over a decade ago–but most towns prefer schools staffs that appear smiley, happy and tell parents everything is wonderful than spend time daily worrying how to truly do their job. Even simple things like”Home Ec” gets dropped for more school psychologist and other things that defer responsibilty–rather than empower students to learn things that help their adult life.

          But the initial post was based on the article not on the what went wrong or right–it was on the LaPierre’s comments and Sen. Blumenthal’s response

      1. Kim

        follow your own advice. If you don’t like the freedoms as outlined in the bill of rights, move. There are plenty of places that would welcome you with open arms as long as you speak ‘lemming’. The rest of us will continue to appreciate and cherish our freedoms in your absence, I assure you.

        Those who fought and died to protect our freedoms deserve our respect and gratitude.

  3. JBlock

    We all feel better now that we have the NRA to blame. But one thing they did say is that the penalties for illegal posession of firearms should be increased. Democrats don’t want to do that because it would disproportionately affect urban communites where illegal possession is way higher than suburban and by doing so would be labeled racist.

    Show me statistics of NRA members who have committed any of these types of crimes.

  4. Sandra Hylen

    The NRA is correct when they stated that armed guards protects the President and our Banks but not our precious children. Wake up people, the world isn’t going to get better. The world has more violence now than when our parents were growing up. Perhaps we should ask our self why?

  5. MZ

    Very self serving statement for NRA. More guns – practically a sales pitch promoting their own agenda. Did they suggest a 1000% tax on their killing spree toys to benefit victims and their families?
    Did they suggest “taking responsibility” by having all their proud weapons owners be the first to volunteer to clean up the messes their weapons leave behind? No.

  6. jenmorezz

    “Sadly and Shamefully inadequate”….that is how I would classify Blumenthal, Courtney, Murphy, Himes and a slew of other politicians responses. No real security for our kids at school? Then get rid of all armed security at the DC and Hartford Capitol buildings.

  7. Wes

    The same loud mouths like Blumenthal don’t have any problem using our tax money to pay for their own security.
    You idiots think armed our schools is a bad idea ? IT WAS A TERRORIST ATTACK !! A DOmestic terror attack. Think this will be the last one ? It will happend again and again until we stop it. we did not ban box cutters or planes after 9/11, we increased secuirty. The only issue I have with the NRA is they failed to address that the mother should not have had guns in the house at all. It is illegal ALREADY to have ANY firearms in a house wih a mentally ill person.
    As far as these politcal dirtbags…Why don’t you look at the truth…Here’s one of the biggest hypocrites…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1EObqM9Z0s&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    These are the times we live in and we must protect our children NOW. All you idtios that think a gun ban is gonna make our kids safer live in a fanatasy world. You have any idea how many guns are out there ? How many sold just this week ???
    My child is the same age as the victims and damn well know it could have been him. I WANT ARMED police or guards protecting him.
    Wake Up.

  8. e pluribus unum

    The school nurse on “60 minutes” told her story of seeing the gunman through the wire hole in her desk and said, “There was nothing we could do”
    Consider that in most mass shootings the one thing that causes the shooter to turn his gun on himself is when he has a gun pointed towards him. When police arrived and this shooter knew he wasn’t the only armed person in the “gun free zone”, he shot himself.
    Imagine if an armed guard or a principal(or other responsible adult with the proper training and permits) with weapons training and access to a firearm could have confronted him BEFORE he continued on to the 1st grade classroom?
    This is not fantasy. In Pearl, Mississippi this is exactly what stopped a shooter from continuing his rampage.

  9. Palin Smith

    Blumenthal is a fool. If he cared anything at all for the safety of our children, there would have been an armed guard on duty last week at Sandy Hook. But that busway is much more important. Oh…..did I mix up Blumy with Malloy? So sorry…they all look alike to me! DISGUSTING CREATURES who pretend to represent us.

  10. IVote

    The violent video games, and the culture of violence in Hollywood movies is atrocious. The NRA rightfully talked about the lack of morals and disgusting culture of violence a kid experiences in his everyday life of TV and video. Shame on Hollywood execs and so-called movie stars. Bravo to the Newtown kids who are asking kids to voluntarily bring their violent video games into the trashbin. TRASH is what Hollywood brainwashes these kids with. I LOVE the idea of retired police/veterans/security folks at every school. They need the jobs and the kids need the safety and security of this protection. BRAVO to the NRA, and shame on Obama and the liberals for politicizing this. God help our republic.

  11. Scott

    Inadequate????? The NRA was the first plan that would make a difference and really protect children….a senseless ban would little

  12. Really?

    “The NRA’s proposal for more armed guards in schools may be helpful in some instances, but it falls far short the strong, serious, comprehensive action needed to stop the kind of horrific tragedy that occurred one week ago in Newtown.” – If an armed police officer where to have been on site in the Newtown school when this all unfolded they would have most likely applied a strong, serious and comprehensive end to Adam Lanzas life which would have minimized or completely prevented this tragedy.

  13. jschmidt

    A town in Texas 30 minutes from the police have an automated lockdown system and trained, volunteer armed, teachers who use bullets that will not ricochet but break into small plastic pieces. Add bullet resistant glass to all entries and you have the makings of a secure facility until help arrives. Alternatively retired police officers or ex military could be used to guard the school, and would be a pleasant difference from what they witnessed in law enforcement. It could happen a lot faster than banning guns.

  14. jschmidt

    Diane Fienstein at a news conference held up an AR15 with her finger on the trigger. SOmething that is taught not to do by the NRA.

    1. Kim

      Diane Feinstein also has a permit and a gun for personal carry. The laws she wants to pass are for the rest of us, not for her. She is a hypocrite

  15. ccbeachcomber

    Where were you guys the week before 12/14?

    The politicians look like a bunch of ambulance chasers, as bad as the nosy non-stop, bad breath in your face media and their vapid commentary. Nothing can change what happened. The discussion about safety in schools is ongoing, not just starting. In fact, the school had a new security system. And yet…tragedy.

    At this moment, how many guns still sit in the open, on gun racks or displays by the proud owner readily available to some coward or depraved mind who suddenly feels society owes him or her? How do you staunch the coward’s sulky, bitter determination?

    Certainly, the NRA represents many people and their suggestion, though costly, does make sense and should be considered. But then, similar to the time after the horror of 9/11, must we digress as a society? Now, as then, there is no country to invade, no justice to be served. The TSA may make us feel safer, but we are not.

    What purpose does this carrying on by politicians and the media serve other than self serving malarkey? Gun owning parents need to realize they have a greater responsibility when children are live in or visit their home. Not everyone thinks the same as a gun owner.

  16. Free American

    Guns don’t kill people, but mentally ill people do kill people. We are ignoring those who require so much help with our civil liberties!! I know of a young man that fills the description of the mental state of Adam Lanza. He too is guarded by his parents, too old for them to demand help, they continue to enable him. Are you ever too old to be given help so you do no harm to others. What are their rights….a heart breaking funeral? When will the liberals wake up to the fact that not everyone can have and use equal rights. Some people do not have the capacity to make decisions, good or bad. Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind!

    1. Christine Solazzo

      I dont think anyone should own assault weapons but helping the mentally ill is more important

  17. Brian Wolverton

    It would be nice if there were a big control room where you could turn some knobs and pull some levers, and somehow magically you “put an end to gun violence.” THere are certainly public policy decisions that need to be made, and we may never know if they were the best decisions or not… but as people what each of us can do is to make sure the people in OUR lives never fall through the cracks like this. If you have a troubled cousin or co-worker or friend, talk to them! Engage them, invite them to be active in society with you! I know everyone has their opinion on what to blame, but I think the mark of honor is to question what responsibility you bear first. Ours is to not allow our brothers and sisters to disappear into dark corners and fester. If we can keep each other in the light, we can all avoid being pulled into the darkness. :)

  18. Free American

    Guns do not kill people, but mentally ill people do! When will we wake up to the fact that there are many people out there who cannot care for themselves and have parents or others who are enabling them to do harm. Our current civil liberties laws have enabled these people to kill, not the guns. I know first had of a man who fits the profile of Lanza and he is not being helped. He refuses help. He claims he is not sick. ENABLED by laws and those who love him. WOW When will the liberals realize that people are not all created equal. Pipe dream. Those that need help need it from those who are able to identify them and INSIST that they get it.
    Would anyone let a toddler walk into the street in front of a car if they could stop it? Is there a difference from that and Newtown. Someone is to blame, not the gun, the system and his mother are. Focus on getting the mentally ill help. Weapons of some type will always be available to those who wish to do harm.

  19. Pat

    I thinks it’s both laughable and hypocritical for Dick Blumenthal to talk about other people’s/organization’s credibility. Dick Blumenthal “misremembered” when called out during the campaign about his public statements about serving in Vietnam? As a two-war combat veteran, I can tell you, when you serve in combat zone, you never forget it. Buying political support of some veterans in the form of tax dollar giveaways does make Dick Blumenthal credible.

  20. walls

    The NRA is 100% correct to call for armed presence in schools. Armed bodyguards protect the President, Congress, banks, airports, Hollywood liberals – so why not schools?

    I disagree 100% with Blumenthal’s characteriztion of the NRA response being ‘shamefully inadequate'; what was ‘shamefully inadequate’ was Blumenthal’s claim to be a VietNam vet.

  21. Sully101

    What is sad and shamefully inadequate is the representation that CT has in the US Senate. Mr Blumenthal creeps out of his hole when there is an opportunity to get his mug in the papers and on TV. He lives to issue press releases with his name on them. He is late to the table on the gun control issue. Perhaps he shouldn’t have spent so much time suing the Kardashians and engaging in malicious prosecution of small business owners.

  22. Art Mocabee

    These two guys need to understand the 2nd Amendment first before they open there collective mouths. Armed security in our schools is a must.

  23. Wilson

    COLUMBINE HAD AN ARMED GUARD, SORRY NEWTOWN CHILDREN AND ALL SCHOOL CHILDREN BUT WE HAVE ELECTED GUTLESS SELFISH PEOPLE, SO CONCERNED ABOUT REELECTION BUT WILL PUT OUR CHILDREN IN HARMS WAY.

    1. Kim

      and we’ll never know whether the presence of the armed guard made a difference in the number of casualties.

      Elected people are there to protect, defend and uphold the constitution and Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights – a very important part. It takes courage to keep fighting for our rights in the face of ‘selfish’ people who want to continue eroding and removing our rights until we are all sheep, answerable to the current government.

      We should protect our children AT LEAST as much as we do bankers, politicians and the wealthy. Armed security in schools makes sense as long as they are trained professionals. To do otherwise is to ignore history and the truth, and to leave our children vulnerable to further atrocities. To do any less is selfish and self-centered, and unrealistic

  24. The Conn-servative

    Amongst all of the anti-NRA rhetoric, the media conveniently forgets the program the NRA sponsors,”Eddie Eagle” gun safety for youth. “Stop,don’t touch,leave the area,tell an adult.” Many school districts refused to implement this program, of course because it came from the NRA. Instead, we need to teach why Johnny has two mommies, can’t have a morning prayer,and took Jesus out of the “holiday” party. I am not saying that this would have stopped this monster Lanza but rather am pointing the medias assault on the NRA.

  25. Pat

    So when william jefferson buttafucco signed legislation putting police officers in schools, the media is OK with that, never acknowledging that the money to pay for it ran out. But when the NRA suggests putting police officers or other trained security professionals in schools, they are somehow not credible? I think dick blumenthal is not credible. Ask a Vietnam Veteran how credible senator blumenthal is. While you’re at it, ask him how credible bill clinton is.

  26. One Very Bad Idea

    Personel should carry weapons in school, incase an insane shooter enters the building, and fires upon the innocent? This puts guns already into the school environment. What if the insane shooter is already inside, and trusted within the school community; having been placed there to protect? No one can predict who the next insane shooter will be. Placing guns into the school before hand moots the threat of a madman threat from outside. After a crazed teacher opens fire in an assembly room, how can one say “we never saw this coming” ?

    1. Logic Please

      You would have a “drug free school zone” in an effort to keep students safe; Yet deliberately place guns inside the school environment?

    2. Kim

      what if an insane shooter gets a job as a cop? shall we disarm all cops under your theory? Why are you opposed to protecting children with the same level of force they are likely to encounter? when everyone is at an equal level of helplessness except the criminals (which is what gun-free zones accomplish), what is your solution other thann gutting the bill of rights?

      Logic: what does a ‘drug free school zone’ have to do with trained, armed personnel protecting our children? Who said anything about drug free zones? That’s a different discussion altogether, about the role of government and it’s war on drugs. Let’s stick to the issue, shall we?

  27. John R. McCommas

    Does anyone but me feel constantly embarrassed that this man is our senator? Our Faux Vietnam Veteran Senator is himself a disgrace. Having to listen to him heap scorn on an entity that had nothing to do with the shooting is just too rich.

    As someone else pointed out, as Senator, this guy is protected by armed guards a lot of the time. Is protecting our school children any less important than Blumenthal’s miserable life? It certainly is a debatable point even if it’s not a panacea.

    1. DaTroof

      I’m with you John. This guy is a disgrace to all who have worn the uniform. I don’t trust him one bit with anything. Only in Connecticut can we elect lying liberals like Danang Dick Blumenthal.

  28. JBeam

    When the politicians rail against security in schools consider this. They insist on security in their buildings. You can’t get into a federal or state building without going through security. Our state legislators have their own personal police force for crying out loud. How outrageous is that in this time of budget crunches? They can’t get by with a Trooper, off duty cop or private security assigned to the door?

    They will cry it costs to much. How much do we spend on their security. They are adults, they should step up and transfer that money to protect our children. Will they? no.

    As far as guns are concerned, what I don’t get is why no gun manufacturer has not offered a gun that uses technology to ensure only authorized users can fire it. We have that technology built into cars, computers, motorcycles, cell phones etc.

    Is it a liability problem? Then congress ought to mandate that guns be equipped with chips, key fobs, whatever, that prevent the gun from firing unless some device is present on the person using the gun.

    1. Jimmy Boggs

      JBeam; good point on single-owner guns. It isn’t being utilized because the guns wouldn’t sell. And gun manufacturers only care about maximizing profits. An the NRA only cares about representing the profit interests of the gun companies.

      But I happen to believe in repeal of the 2nd amendment so I could care less about anything short of a gunless society.

      1. Kim

        more harm is done to innocent citizens by the 1st amendment freedom of speech. Let’s repeal it – then we wouldn’t have to read this kind of nonsense:

        “JBeam; good point on single-owner guns.”
        RESPONSE: What does this mean? what point are you referring to?

        “It isn’t being utilized because the guns wouldn’t sell.”
        RESPONSE: Whatever ‘it’ is, your statement is pure speculation unsupported by any facts. If you just happen to be referring to ‘smart gun’ technology, it hasn’t been perfected yet and is not widely available for purchase, so there is no reference material on whether or not it’s being utilized.

        Like I said, this is what passes for ‘honest discussion’.

        The first amendment is dangerous so should be repealed, especially because there are those who “could care less about anything short of a society” where free speech is banned.

      2. John R. McCommas

        Mr. Boggs

        The NRA represents the rights of their membership. The NRA is lot alike other groups you may like that serve to amplify the concerns of many individuals.

        The NRA does the same thing for gun owners that the ACLU does for Flag Burners.

  29. Kim

    All responsible, honest gun owners deplore what happened in Sandy Hook and most would have laid their lives on the line to protect these beautiful children. They are not, however, willing to politicize this tragedy to advance their rights to self defense, like the second amendment haters are doing.

    It’s disgusting – but completely in character and therefore expected – to hear many shouting for ‘an honest discussion on guns’ while leaving honesty completely out of their discussion. Here are some facts that you WON’T hear during this ‘honest discussion, from those jumping on the anti-second amendment bandwagon:

    1. The Second Amendment says NOTHING about hunting and target shooting. It was created to protect citizens against bad guys, both individuals and over-reaching governments: ESPECIALLY over-reaching governments. The colonists suffered many abuses from the King until the British soldiers took steps to take away their weapons and ammunition – this caused the famous ‘shot heard ‘round the world’. If the soldiers had succeeded and the citizens had simply rolled over, this country would not be the beacon of hope to the world that it has been for so long: a beacon because of the freedoms and opportunities afforded its’ citizens by the constitution and bill of rights. Ask the citizens in Egypt or Turkey how badly they wish they had the right to own weapons for ‘the security of a free state’ at this very moment. Even President Kennedy had concerns about a US Military coup in this country – for those of you who want to insist we have nothing to fear from our government (while complaining that they can’t buy a large soft-drink in NYC).

    2. Gun deaths have decreased by 50% over the last ten years, in spite of private gun ownership quadrupling in the same time period. This blows the argument that more guns create more violence, completely out of the water.

    3. Many of those screaming to ban ‘assault weapons’ and ‘military-style weapons’ have no clue what either of these is. They certainly weren’t among those used by the pathetic Adam Lanza or most mass-murderers. Yet in spite of this ignorance they want the rest of us to believe and accept what they have to say.

    4. Assault weapons are already banned for 99% of citizens – it takes a special permit to own one.

    5. The second amendment haters are always complaining that the average gun owner has no training and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to own guns. Yet when a gun owner purchases 5,000 rounds of ammunition to obtain training over a long weekend at the range, they scream that no one should have that much ammunition. As usual, they want it both ways. And yes, it’s easy to go through that much ammunition in 2-4 days at the range.

    6. The second amendment haters use the fact that black-powder weapons were used at the time of the constitution and bill of rights and therefore should be the only weapons that private citizens should be allowed to own. They conveniently ignore the fact that the government troops had the same weapons, yet they don’t want to limit the GOVERNMENT to those outdated weapons. They want us all to pretend that self-protection is possible with slingshots and sticks, against a heavily armed government. And they want us to defend ourselves with single-shot weapons instead of 30-round magazines.

    7. The second amendment haters want to pretend that gun owners only need 1-3 rounds in order to successfully defend themselves against the multiple intruders that currently engage in home invasions. This while knowing full well that the intruders will have high-capacity magazines.

    8. The second amendment haters – including the main stream media – refuse to acknowledge the THOUSANDS of lives that are saved every day by responsible gun owners. This would erode their position, so it must be ignored.

    9. Second amendment haters like to talk as if they know what the founding fathers were thinking when they created the second amendment. Yet few – if any of them – have read the only book that I have seen to date that deals with precisely that issue: Stephen Holbrook’s’ Second Amendment. If they have read it – they completely ignore the truths presented therein. If they haven’t read it – they are grossly misinformed. Both scenarios are acceptable when you are more interested in an agenda than the truth.

    By all means, let’s have an honest discussion. But no discussion can be considered honest without acknowledging the previous points.

  30. Kim

    I guess that I shouldn’t be surprised that Mr. Lender – one of the few honest reporters in the Courant – should have taken to censoring comments. How else to explain the absence of comments that I made that were visible for 2 days, unless someone else is monitoring and controlling his blogs?

    1. Kim

      My apologies to Mr. Lender. The comment in question is visible now. Must have been a fluke – I’m happy and embarrasased to say

Comments are closed.