.

From A Law-Abiding Citizen and Responsible Gun Owner, An Open Letter To My Legislators

Open Letter to Ct Legislators

 

An open letter to the Senators and Representatives of CT

The “Constitution State’s” state constitution says: “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.” (Article I, SEC. 15)

The Hartford Courant front page on Thursday Jan 17th indicated that Connecticut is behind the proposals adding additional restrictions to arms ownership by the President.

I am not in favor of the proposals and neither are most people I know. The
author provides no facts backing up his opinion that "Connecticut"
supports them.

Our state representatives (Senators and House members) have a duty and take an oath attesting to their responsibility.

You swore: "You do solemnly swear (or affirm) that you will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the
State of Connecticut, so long as you continue a citizen thereof; and that you
will faithfully discharge, according to law, the duties of the Office of State
Senator/Representative to the best of your abilities; so help you God."

I believe each of you has taken this oath. As a result I would ask that:


  • You protect my status as an individual who owns
         firearms.  

  • You critique each proposed law under consideration by
         asking is it effective? Will it do harm? Would it have had an impact on
         the tragedies in Connecticut in the last 10 years? Does the restriction of
         freedom inherent in all laws outweigh the benefits in a time tested
         environment?

  • Are you voting for or against the proposals because
         they reflect your educated, informed opinion?

  • Are the specific protected rights of the individual
         infringed? Is your position in conflict with the State and Federal
         Constitution?

  • I have not read any proposal before you that, if enacted, would have changed the outcome of the recent spate of senseless killings.

    I am a law-abiding citizen and responsible gun owner.

    I am saddened by the tragic events in Newtown, Connecticut, but I believe that efforts to impose new restrictions on me and other lawful and responsible owners like me are a misguided result and does not reduce the potential of a similar tragedy happening again. It is playing to fear.

    Are you aware that violent crime with firearms has declined since the Federal "assault weapons ban" expired in 2004? If you have a question regarding the
    efficacy of any aspect of a proposal did you seek an informed opinion?

    Your focus should be on strengthening mental health care, improved reporting of a person’s threat potential and improving the quality of data supporting NICs checks (National Instant Criminal Background Check System). Do NOT pass more gun laws; instead, work to enforce the more than 20,000 gun laws already on the books.

    I am your constituent and I vote. Please represent me.

    I ask what is the legislature doing other than promoting a platform of more restrictions on legal firearm ownership?

    If it is the standard to pass something "that may save
    even one life" you are fooling the public and yourself and that is
    shameful. With similar logic can we expect that more restrictions should be put
    forward raising the driving age to 21, Connecticut recently experienced a 42%
    increase in driving fatalities (319 people in 2010 were killed in CT) or
    licensing owners of backyard swimming pools (600 children drowned in 2009 in
    the US) or licensing trampolines or imprisoning adults who have carelessly left
    poisons under the kitchen sink that are ingested by children or prosecute
    people who have allowed unsecured proscription medications to be stolen from
    homes by thieves and teenagers. We cannot continue to pile on ineffective law
    and generally restrict our freedoms when any activity or incident causes harm. Yet
    this is the natural progression of law and legislation. This is not the legislative
    philosophy I wish to govern my life or guard my liberty. Note that the state
    and federal constitutions offer no protection for these subjects and pursuits
    but we expect that common sense should prevail.

    Please use your good sense to not be bullied by those souls who would chose "pseudo" security at the expense of freedoms especially those that are constitutionally protected. Think it through and always walk away when the promoter of a solution requires “immediate” action. They are usually selling emotionally charged bunk. Represent me well.

    David Stahelski


    Madison CT

    This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

    Jay D January 19, 2013 at 03:27 AM
    From Pem, 10:04 am friday, For those who might have trouble with that concept ... just review your comments before posting and considering removing any sentences that include the word "you." Thanks.
    Fred January 19, 2013 at 03:58 PM
    On March 2, 2010, Barbara Humburg, 41, a divorced Caucasian female, was found dead of multiple blunt and sharp force injuries in the yard of her rented Middle Beach West Rd. home in Madison, where she lived alone (her two children were in college). She was scheduled to testify in court that day in a case against her ex-husband to recover delinquent child support. The Police have characterized her death as a "homicide," but her death reportedly remains a mystery, and no one has been charged.
    Fred January 19, 2013 at 04:05 PM
    Irrespective of whatever the circumstances surrounding her death were (they are unclear at the moment), there would appear to be at least a reasonable possibility that if Ms. Hamburg had a firearm during the period immediately before her death, she might be alive today. I did not know Ms. Hamburg, and don't know anybody who did. Will the proposed new "sensible" gun laws, state and federal, make the next Barbara Hamburg more or less safe?
    Fred January 19, 2013 at 07:34 PM
    http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2013/1/biden-says-administration-doesn't-have-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks.aspx
    Die Harder January 20, 2013 at 03:34 PM
    This story was reported on the durham patch http://durham.patch.com/articles/gun-owners-rally-in-hartford-in-support-of-second-amendment Why wont the Madison Patch post it?

    Boards

    More »
    Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
    Note Article
    Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
    Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
    See more »