71°
FAIRFIELD COUNTY, Conn. – Members of One Million Moms For Gun Control from across Fairfield County plan to rally at the State Capitol in Hartford on Thursday to demand stricter gun control laws after the Newtown school shooting. The Fairfield County chapter will be joined by other chapters from Connecticut, Rhode Island and western Massachusetts.
The gathering, dubbed the March For Change, will be held at 11 a.m. on the north steps of the Capitol. The rally falls on the two-month anniversary of the shooting that took the lives of 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
The group is focused on pressuring lawmakers to enact “common sense gun laws,” according to its website, including bans on high-capacity ammunition magazines, stronger assault weapons bans and universal background checks for gun sales.
For more information about One Million Moms For Gun Control visit the group’s website or Facebook page. For more information about the March For Change in Hartford, click here.
Are you participating in the March For Change? Send us your photos and reactions to danbury@dailyvoice.com
Comments (29)
The one with the green hat in the picture: is that hat form-fitting?
Hyphenate your last name and get on the bus! The eyes of the world are on Connecticut!
Why is it the Republicans support everything that destroys
Timmy, like always you are so deep and thoughtful with your comments. NOT. By the way, why do you use multiple different ids and sometimes express agreements with yourself.
Oh Niikk, that's a good one. Do you mean things like Obama's drone strike program with its 80% "collateral damage" kill rate?
Or do you mean the President's non-policy on Syria where 30,000 have died? The Arab Sring where thousands of innocents have died?
Or do you mean the Fast and Furious fiasco which has claimed the lives of 300+ Mexicans and at least two Americans?
Or do you mean the number of jobs killed by the Left's support of "green job" vapor ware that has absorbed billions in tax payer funds?
Or do you mean abortion which has stopped the hearts of 55MILLION fetuses since the Roe case?
Come on Niikk, which of the above supported by Republicans do you mean? Sorry, what's that voice-in-my-head, Republicans don't support any of these things that destroy?
Oh, never mind.....
Thank you Jim very well said and so very true.
Timmy, why are you thanking and complementing yourself? You always do that. Why?
I'm having trouble figuring whether it was more "well said", or more "so very true".
We need to have a test for mental stability before anyone can obtain one of these weapons of mass destruction. This will be sure to disqualified at least 90 percent of the pro gun wackos.
Timmy, if I were you I would not waste money on such a test. You should know that you'll fail the test.
Easy on the psychological projection, Jim.
It seems that most anti-gun rights people are aware of their mental limitations & believe they would just start shooting people if they had access to a gun. They then believe that the same thing must be true about everyone else.
I'm sure there are some fine psychiatrists in the area who can help you over your irrational fears. Please avail yourself of their services.
THANK YOU!
So well said, and so very true
The right to march and protest is guaranteed to us by the right to assemble. These mothers have that right just like you have the right to own firearms.
Profound paranoia, abject fear, inability to see what the world is just as it is imagined to be, on the brink of Armageddon: good luck to all of you living your lives this way. It is your right but I can't make that choice. At the same time, please catch the subtlety here, I am not the government ready to raid your home of lawfully obtained and used arms. It must be tiring to be you to believe that all of the time.
So much anger: to bring up the Cheshire killings, a very rare occurrance in this State if ever (I am sure someone has the chilling statistics on that provided by the NRA or our friend, Tom Paine) is to emphasize what it is that you see through your paranoid and angry filter. Perhaps it would be better for all of you to get some therapy and figure out what's bugging you that you feel so threatened. With your guns in hand, of course.
Hey KY (jelly?) No one says the sucker moms can't take bus rides, or assemble, or have Tupperware parties, or play mah jong--however they usually fill their idle hours. That right is guaranteed in the Constitution--just like my right to keep and bear arms. As for the Cheshire horror (" a very rare occurrence in this State, if ever.") IF EVER ?? Are you implying that Cheshire might never have occurred? That a mother was not raped and strangled after reporting, to the police, the presence of these two dirtbags in her house, after her husband was bludgeoned with a ball bat? That her ELEVEN YEAR OLD daughter was not raped , and that she and her sister were then not murdered by fire, while the father cowered, defenseless, in another room? Yeah, there's anger here, and a grim resolve to never allow that to happen in my home. And the confiscators need to know that a noisy reception awaits them in the homes of millions of American gun owners.
You have SO proved my point exactly by your response. So, I guess that means my points are correct.
K, congrats on sucking me back in here. So tell me, what is a "rare occurrence"? Home invasions followed up by rape, murder and arson? The same followed up by law enforcement waiting WAAAY to long before acting? Home invasions generally? I was in
Redding last Monday when Chief Fuchs said home invasion were rare - where, in Redding?
Over the course of an at-desk lunch I was able to compile the following list of media reported home invasions in CT since just August. And the list is not exhaustive but I am sure you won't peruse it since you are convinced I and others are paranoids. I am sure various police agencies, NBC and other Mdia outlets colluded with us in the preparation of this list.
http://greenwich.patch.com/blog_posts/home-invasions-rarely-happen-in-connecticut-not-686b780e
As for paranoia about gun taking - have you read the CAGV/March for Change demands that include banned possession of black rifles and 7+ round mags with NO GRANDFATHERING. For the uninitiated, no grandfathering means current lawful owners will be forced to surrender, sell out of state or destroy items that are currently very common place and legal. That will include 3.5-5mm 7+ round pistol magazines with no replacements available. Not even the NYS law went this far. And for the intrepid, this means confiscation as the ultimate out come. So tell me K, is it paranoid to think the professional gun takers like CAGV are looking to be "sensible".
By the way K, do you believe in women's reproductive rights?
Really, your initial question is more dense than I could ever believe you truly are. Of course you compiled that list: you must reinforce your fear and sense of righteousness. Tell me, other than for target practice (that would be nonliving targets) or hunting (?) why is it so important that you have a 7+ round mag? Are the bad guys with guns out to get you? By women's reproductive rights, I am assuming you mean the right to say what happens to their own bodies? Tell me, do you have yours?
What is sad, is that the states and cities with the strictest gun laws have the most crime!
VT is 3rd lowest in the nation, anyone can carry a gun at any time with no permit.
Chicago? Land of murder, has a ban on guns.
Banning guns does nothing but give them to criminals. PERIOD.
For anyone interested in further education on a range of firearm and gun control issues, please see this list of posts:
http://wilton.patch.com/blog_posts/compendium-of-thomas-paines-firearms-related-patch-posts
Correct Jimmy I agree
Jim -Really?! Weapons of mass destruction? Have you ever fired a gun?
Do you realize that fully automatic weapons have been heavily regulated since the National Firearms Act of 1934?
Do you understand that the types of firearms involved are cosmetically similar to military weapons, not functionally equivalent?
Do you realize that a black AR (Armalite Rifle) is no different in lethality than every semi-automatic hunting rifle?
Beyond that, are you aware that in the 49 rampage killings since Columbine, a AR/AK style rifle was used in only 8% of the 49 incidents? And half of those used AKfirles which are already banned in CT?
Jim, puhlease?
reberc is right. ENFORCE what's already on the books. And stiffen laws within the existing framework...for example: You use a gun committing a misdemeanor...mandatory 1 year. Use a gun committing a felony-mandatory 10 years. Whatever it is now for a convicted felon caught in posession of a firearm---triple it.
You all are saying to repeal the second amendment, that is stupid. Go to the CT Judicial site and look at the punishment for those who ILLEGALLY use guns. The MOST I've seen is 5 years prison time. How about changing THOSE laws? Make the punishment stiffer. 20 years MINIMUM, no matter what. But, no. It's all about "Lets REPEAL the Second Amendment!" Really people. THINK before you act! Push for stiffer punishment and the crimes will slowly stop (mainly because the criminals will all be in prison).
I just love when those with little understanding of things have such strong opinions. JLevin, regarding the 2A and your views, did it ever dawn on you why the crafters of the Bill of Rghts used "arms" rather than muzzleloader or flintlock? If they wanted to be specific (and limiting), they could have. Might it have been that the Founders included leading inventors, tinkerers, big thinkers and more than a couple of merchants who dealt with firearms. Thus, if they meant to limit citizens as a big thinker like you suggests, they would have.
Instead, they understood that technology advances and that citizens should be able to avail themselves of the same arms as would any potential future adversary, whether criminal, foreign or domestic threat. But you knew that, right?
Further, the Connecticut state Constitution also used "arms" in 1818 which was sufficiently after the Bill of Rights for weapons to have advanced. BTW Levin, you DO know that the State Constitution provides for an unambiguous right to bear arms for self-defense, don't you? Check Article 1, Section 15 if you are really ignorant.
So your plan would require repeal of two Constitutional rights to have your asinine way.
But more importantly, what is your solution for the 85% of gun crime/injury/death that is due to illegal firearms wielded by those possessing thos arms illegally? They ignore laws by definition so bans would mean nothing to them. Would love to hear your brilliance on that.
And then there is suicide, the cause of over 60% of all gun deaths each year. How are you going to deal with that?
Finally, let me guess, you are the type that suggests your righteous indignation can deprive me of my double Constitutional right "to bear arms but you are also of the belief that NO ONE can tell a woman what she can do with her body". Please explain to me how you circle that rhetorical square in your mind. There is not even an articulated "right" regarding women's reproduction to which you can point. Neither for gay marriage. Neither for legal drug use. Etc etc etc yet you likely see those as moral imperatives while you are simultaneously able to argue for disarming every law-abiding citizen in the US.
Please show me what a great thinker you are. PLEASE!
The Second Amendment should only apply to "arms" which existed in 1791, when it was ratified: swords, knives, and muzzle loading black powder pistols and muskets. There is no way it should apply to semi-automatic high caliber military rifles with 100 round magazines, just as the Supreme Court already has determined that it does not apply to fully automatic weapons. Or explosives. Or bombs. The gun nuts can keep their muskets and have the exact same rights as people did when the 2nd Amendment was first ratified.
jlevin:
OK, then. No free speech via TV, radio, telephone, internet. And, no books, magazines or newspapers printed on anything more advanced than a mid-late 18th century hand operated, one page a time printing press. Free Speech = parchment paper and quill pen!!
Ken: I agree with you; but I also agree with Jim J.. Repealing the Second Amendment is the only legal way to take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Let them go ahead and try it. What the soccer saps,cookie-eaters and their henpecked husbands are trying now is to violate the letter and spirit of the Second, with silly bus rides, marches, ribbons and hysteria, supported by small-town political hacks with dreams of higher office. In any event, we are never giving up the weapons we are guaranteed by the Constitution; and that we keep to protect ourselves, our families, and our property. There are 300 million of these guns in our hands, and we will employ them, if necessary, to prevent their confiscation, and the violation of our rights. The "moms" should stay home and clean their McMansions, for a change, and leave us alone. Mourn Sandy Hook; act to protect yourself with the Cheshire family rape and murders in mind.
We need to repeal the first to prevent people from sounding like idiots.
Theres nothing common sense about violating peoples civil rights. This is no different, from a constitutional standpoint, than marching in support of racial, religious or sexual discrimination.
We need to repeal the second Amendment and get these weapons of mass destruction of the streets.