February 8, 2015
The Journal Inquirer
In light of the recent push for further firearm legislation by the Governor’s Sandy Hook Commission in Connecticut and our Governor, I would like to add a few points to the conversation.
It is very unfortunate that it is often people who have little or no knowledge of firearms beyond what they see on television or in movies are the ones who write and enact many, if not all, ‘gun control’ laws. Because of this, their understanding is not one of proper respect and practical solutions, but rather fear and ignorance. While some Police Chiefs may support such legislation, we may want to remember that many are political appointees filled by politicians with their own agendas. I prefer to look to the rank and file officers in this nation. Time and time again studies show that these brave men and women overwhelmingly have little confidence in measures like the Governor’s.
It doesn’t surprise me, though, that while various politically created ‘truth seeking commissions’ can conclude we need more firearm laws, their recommendations are not supported by our nation’s most respected law enforcement agency; the Federal Bureau of Investigation or FBI. Far too many of these ‘commissions’ are not created to seek truth, but instead find ‘evidence’ to justify their misguided opinions.
One aspect of Governor Malloy’s push for anti-gun legislation uses phrases like ‘assault weapon’ or ‘military type’ firearm designed to fool an unknowing public making them believe that their state government is only protecting their safety, when they are actually stealing their freedoms and individual rights. These are rights so fundamental to our society that our Founding Fathers clearly and separately wrote them into both our Federal and State Constitutions.
Despite Governor Malloy’s disingenuous English, true ‘assault rifles’ are actually machine guns, but the Governor and his supporters don’t tell us this. The firearms that he attacks here are not. They fire one round per pull of the trigger just like many hunting rifles. These ‘terrible’ firearms are also preferred as weapons of self-defense by many homeowners and personally owned by police officers as private citizens. As Billy Joel once said, ‘Honesty seems to be lonely word’ in our Capitol.
Our all-knowing Governor has also focused on large capacity magazines deciding arbitrarily to limit the number of rounds that a firearm ought to have for safety’s sake. But by what logic was this number determined? Does a single mother of two violently confronted by an intruder need 5, 10 or 15 rounds to protect herself? Just how many rounds does it take to kill a deranged or vicious criminal and do we want to limit anyone’s ability to defend him or herself? I don’t believe any ‘politically appointed and agenda driven commission’ can answer this. In essence, what we see is a political and emotional reaction to a tragedy, not a rational one.
A word to the Governor and his supporters: Repeal this law and deal with the Elephant in the room, improving the Mental Heath system. That is the answer.
Serge G. Mihaly, Jr