On Thursday, Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy said he
would sign an executive order banning people on federal watch lists from buying
firearms. If this follows through, Connecticut would be the first state to
enact such a change. Malloy and the legislature have been expanding the ban on
assault weapons and barring the possession of large-capacity ammunition magazines ever
since the tragic Newton
shooting in 2012. However, last week, the
U.S. Senate turned down a bill to give the attorney general the power to block
gun sales to people on federal watch lists. Malloy, a Democrat that supported the bill, decided to
take a stance on the issue especially after the Paris bombing and the San
Bernardino shooting. “If
Congress will not act, we in the states will,” Mr. Malloy said.
Under the executive order, state police will have to
cross-reference the names of gun buyers with watch lists that Malloy was
allowed access to after asking Obama’s administration. If there’s a match, he
or she wouldn’t be allowed to buy the gun or ammunition. In addition, the
police would be allowed to revoke existing permits from gun owners on watch
lists. Those whose permits were revoked or denied would be able to appeal the
decision with the Connecticut Board of Firearms Examiners.
In opposition, Scott Wilson, president of the gun-rights
group Connecticut Citizens Defense League, said the order could unlawfully deny
firearms to law-abiding citizens. “While we are all concerned about terrorism,
this approach is very un-American and shameful,” he said. The same league has
also been critical of the federal government’s no-fly list, saying that some
people are placed on the list for invalid reasons. Mr. Malloy agreed that there can be
errors on the lists and said the appeal process would be a rigorous one.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/connecticut-moves-to-deny-gun-sales-to-people-on-no-fly-lists-1449772894
What do you think about the situation?
Do you agree with Malloy or think that the order would violate
citizens’ constitutional rights?
If you disagree, what do you propose is another solution?
6 comments:
I completely agree with Malloy and commend him for taking action himself when the Senate failed to do so. As Malloy said, "I am taking this common sense step with this executive order simply because it's the right thing to do. It's the smart thing to do."
The issue of gun control is a very divisive issue in America and has only continued to grow as a point of contention as more and more shootings have taken place. In order to protect Americans it is vital that more regulations be placed on the purchasing of guns, and one such measure is to block those on the "No Fly" list from doing so. It is amazing to me that even now there are people on this list that are able to legally buy guns. They were put on that list for a reason, they were seen as a major threat, so much so that they aren't able to board a plane. Therefore it makes absolutely no sense that these same people have access to buy guns. Furthermore I am confused by the argument from the opposition who claims that this decision could 'unlawfully deny firearms to law-abiding citizens'. As I have previously stated the people on these federal watch lists have obviously done something of suspect nature to warrant the appearance of their name. Even if they were placed there for an invalid reason there are ways to get off of the lists through an appeal process. Therefore while it might cause those few exceptions a slight delay in their purchase it in no way is looking to deny people's Second Amendment rights. It merely is a logical precaution to protect American lives from a very real threat (both guns and the people on the lists).
I hope that in taking this action other states will follow Malloy's example and help to lead the country in a better, safer direction.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/10/459250274/connecticut-governor-wants-to-bar-people-on-watch-lists-from-buying-guns
I agree Amanda; Malloy is taking necessary steps in order to ensure the public's safety. The guns that were used in the San Bernardino shooting were all purchased legally and yet CT is the only state taking action. The people on the federal watch list and the “No Fly List” are there for a reason; they shouldn’t have the opportunity to buy technology that can kill people. I cannot fathom the reason why Republicans are stopping this bill from being pushed through. I understand that American citizens have a right to own guns and I agree that it is a constitutional right. However those people who are deemed dangerous enough to be put on watch lists should not have the capability of committing mass murder. The shooting in the historically black Church in Charleston wouldn’t have even happened if these laws had been in place. The man who did the shooting had already been convicted of a felony and shouldn’t have been allowed to purchase a gun, yet he got his firearms legally through a loophole in the system. What I also think is important about Malloy’s actions is that their is the ability to appeal the decision to deal with errors. Overall I think a few name errors is a smaller price to pay than the loss of human life.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/politics/connecticut-bans-guns-watch-list/index.html
I disagree in part with Amanda and Claire due to the fact that not everyone on the No Fly List are necessarily terrorists. The government can technically place anyone it wants on the No Fly list, and therefore denying possibly innocent people the right to own a gun. The no fly list often includes people with the same name as someone else that in reality have nothing to do with terrorism. The people that are included in the list are not given the right to be given notice or evidence and are not allowed a hearing. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in the past due to this "no fly list" and the problem still is not resolved. It violates the 5th amendment which is the right to due process. Furthermore, during the American Civil Liberties Union's lawsuit, the government admitted to adding people to the list speculatively, not based on true events. I think that terrorists should be prevented from getting weapons, but the no fly list is not a proper tool for doing so. I think that Malloy has good intentions in protecting Connecticut, but I also think that this act would violate the constitutional rights of citizens.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/08/us/politics/push-for-gun-curbs-tied-to-no-fly-list-puts-republicans-on-the-spot.html?_r=0https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/07/the-no-fly-list-is-a-terrible-tool-for-gun-control-in-part-because-it-is-a-terrible-tool/
I agree with Athena and the above commenters, in that everyone is entitled to their 2nd Amendment rights, and should be equally protected so long as they are not terrorists or those who wish to cause harm. However, I think that the rights of non-terrorists on the No-Fly list should probably take a back seat to what is currently an epidemic ravaging our nation -- the lack of real gun control. The 2nd Amendment was intended to provide the 18th-century American people a safety net for the real possibility of their government taking up arms against them. However, we no longer need firearms to maintain a standing militia, and guns are bought and sold for recreational and personal defense purposes. I say, if you want recreation, buy a football, and if you want personal defense, buy a dog. I believe that guns are obviously not the ones who are inherently evil, but rather, inherently evil people are. Until we can figure out how to put a cap on this disease, 2nd Amendment rights need to take a back seat in my opinion. Malloy is making some good moves, and I think he is on the right track for not only Connecticut, but other states in our union. For me, human life should absolutely take precedent over gun rights.
I agree with Amanda and her comment about commending Malloy to take action when the Senate failed to do so. The 2012 Sandy Hook shooting was a horrific event that was known throughout the United States and all over the world. It is definitely an event that will go down in history and never be forgotten. Because of that, Connecticut is placed under the spotlight in regard to gun laws. Directly following the shooting, Malloy and the legislature have been expanding the ban on assault weapons and barring the possession of large capacity ammunition magazines. I strongly believe that this executive order towards banning people on federal watch lists from buying firearms is a good move. Moreover, one of the main concerns about gun laws is safety. Although every American has the right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment, there has been numerous shootings throughout the country in the past few years. This executive order increases the safety. However, gun laws is currently a very controversial topic and therefore I believe it will take years to settle this issue. In addition, if this executive order follows through, Connecticut will be the first state to enact this change. Because they will be the first, there is a lot of risk involved as they cannot turn towards other states and see how they handled it.
Post a Comment