CT-Connecticut gov. to ban gun sales to people on watch lists

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,698
Connecticut to ban gun sales to people on watch lists: governor

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-connecticut-guns-idUSKBN0TT2EM20151210#AyDr0zlOZiEjhaxK.97

Connecticut would become the first U.S. state to ban the sale of guns to people on government watch lists under an executive order that Governor Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, said on Thursday he will sign.

The measure, which Malloy said needs federal approval, would require state police to review whether a potential gun buyer was on the federal no-fly list or on a watchlist for people suspected of ties to terrorism.

It would also revoke existing gun permits issued to people whose names were found on such a list.

The move follows a call by President Barack Obama for Congress to prohibit people on the no-fly list from purchasing firearms in the wake of the last week's massacre in San Bernardino, California, of 14 people by a married couple inspired by Islamic State militants.

"I am taking this commonsense step with this executive order simply because it's the right thing to do," Malloy told reporters in Hartford. "If you can't fly without clearing government watchlists, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun."

State gun-rights groups were quick to criticize the move, which they said they believe runs afoul of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects the right to bear arms.

"I think it is downright dangerous and above and beyond what is constitutionally acceptable," said Scott Wilson, president of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League.

Almost three years ago a gunman killed 26 people, including 20 young children, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history.

Following that attack, Malloy pushed through one of the strictest gun laws in the United States, banning more than 100 types of military-style rifles and limiting ammunition magazines to 10 bullets.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest welcomed Connecticut's move but said that the Obama administration was determined to press ahead with federal action on guns, noting that people can travel across jurisdictions to circumvent local laws limiting firearm purchases.

"There are necessarily some shortcoming to that approach," Earnest told reporters at press briefing on Thursday. "That is why ... the president's commitment to keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them continues to be a priority of his federal legislative strategy."

The ban would not have stopped the California attack as the shooters were not on any government terrorism watch list.
 
Even if you don't want a gun, you should try to get one now to see if you're on "the list" ...
 
Secret government lists that strip essential rights from people.

What could go wrong?

Even if you don't want a gun, you should try to get one now to see if you're on "the list" ...

Yeah, I thought that politicians would laugh this ridiculous idea from Obama off. Apparently not.

It's really, absolutely stupid that the no-fly list is being used in this way. Shouldn't even have to explain it.

If the people on the no-fly list are truly a danger to the public to the extent that we should take away their rights (which we don't even do for murder suspects), then we should make the list public.

This idea that "Oh, we must respect their right to privacy since we don't know for sure they are bad people, but we should definitely take their guns." is simply ridiculous on its face.
 
Yeah, I thought that politicians would laugh this ridiculous idea from Obama off. Apparently not.

It's really, absolutely stupid that the no-fly list is being used in this way. Shouldn't even have to explain it.

If the people on the no-fly list are truly a danger to the public to the extent that we should take away their rights (which we don't even do for murder suspects), then we should make the list public.

This idea that "Oh, we must respect their right to privacy since we don't know for sure they are bad people, but we should definitely take their guns." is simply ridiculous on its face.

+1.

And to add, as you mentioned, "If the people on the no-fly list are truly a danger to the public" then why are they not incarcerated? Surely that would be the logical thing?
 
+1.

And to add, as you mentioned, "If the people on the no-fly list are truly a danger to the public" then why are they not incarcerated? Surely that would be the logical thing?

Because that would require at least a show "trial" of some sort.

But you knew that. :D
 
Secret government lists that strip essential rights from people.

What could go wrong?

Everybody has their guns and subsequently the rest of their freedom taken away.

You don't need a science major for that. Even if for some reason you might agree with all sorts of gun control rules. Anyone that looks objectively at the no-fly list has to conclude it's a major failure with civil rights and that at the very least there are ways to make it a whole lot better.
 
+1.

And to add, as you mentioned, "If the people on the no-fly list are truly a danger to the public" then why are they not incarcerated? Surely that would be the logical thing?

mind-blown-300x238.jpg
 
From the Connecticut Post.

Malloy made the announcement outside his Capitol office. The executive order would also prohibit those suspected of gang affiliations. Malloy said that he’s been working closely with officials in the White House on the issue and hopes to soon have a list of names of those who could be excluded in Connecticut.

So he is also creating a "suspected gang member" list and is working with unidentified Administration officials.

He said those on watch lists who already have weapons in Connecticut may be subject to their seizure.

What could possibly go wrong here? Need more MRAP's for the paramilitary state force, er, police.

XNN
 
Linky please.

From the Connecticut Post.



So he is also creating a "suspected gang member" list and is working with unidentified Administration officials.



What could possibly go wrong here? Need more MRAP's for the paramilitary state force, er, police.

XNN
 
He said those on watch lists who already have weapons in Connecticut may be subject to their seizure.

What could possibly go wrong here? Need more MRAP's for the paramilitary state force, er, police.

XNN

Absolutely nothing could go wrong. Obviously there are "terrorists", "militia", Constitutionalists and "Ron Paul" supporters that require a better armed and able paramilitary domestic peace force.
 
So, a Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh violation.

Land of the free!

Hush you! Were it not for the CONstitution things would be a lot worse off. Rights are limited. Don'tcha know?

The fed is quick to enforce things like the ability to by insurance across state lines. State rights win. Yeh, ha. Even the the Fed is tasked with allowing trade across state lines. Somehow the ability to buy insurance from a another state insurer eludes me.

When it comes to actual amendments...welll.
 
Last edited:
You can tell a lot about a woman's mood by just looking at her hands... for instance, if she's holding a gun, she's probably angry.
 
Back
Top