PDA

View Full Version : State Senate Approves Machine Gun Bill In Response To Boy's Death



patriot45
05-01-2009, 11:35 AM
Don't get me wrong, this was a tragedy, but basically they are legislating stupidity. (http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-senate-machine-gun-ban-0430,0,3606972.story)

Common sense is all thats needed, not common sense legislation!



Prompted by the death of an 8-year-old Connecticut boy at a Massachusetts gun club, the state Senate voted 31-2 Thursday on a measure designed to keep machine guns out of the hands of anyone under 16.

The bill, which prohibits the transfer of such weapons to children, is in response to the death of Christopher K. Bizilj, an Ashford boy who lost control of a Micro Uzi submachine gun and accidentally shot himself in the head in Massachusetts in late October.

The third-grader, who was 4 feet 3 and weighed 66 pounds, couldn't control the high-powered weapon's recoil. A Massachusetts grand jury has indicted a police chief, the gun club and two Connecticut men in connection with the accident at the machine gun event in Westfield.

Both Republicans and Democrats described the measure as "common sense" legislation, saying they believe that most citizens would be surprised to learn that it is currently legal for minors to fire such a powerful weapon.



"Perhaps this legislation might prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future," said Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, co-chairman of the legislature's judiciary committee. "It seems extraordinary that we would have to legislate" regarding machine guns.

The bill requires approval by the House and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell to become law.

Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney of New Haven, who pushed for the measure, said, "The tragedy that occurred in Massachusetts in October should be a wake-up for Connecticut. It is of vital importance that we keep children safe from assault weapons and machine guns."

megimoo
05-01-2009, 11:42 AM
Don't get me wrong, this was a tragedy, but basically they are legislating stupidity. (http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-senate-machine-gun-ban-0430,0,3606972.story)

Common sense is all thats needed, not common sense legislation!
The magic phrase 'assault weapons'.Now it's just a small step to add everything from a blow pipe to a sling shot to the definition of a 'machine gun 'and ban those also!The liberal political mind is a thing to behold !

noonwitch
05-01-2009, 11:42 AM
You have to wonder whose bright idea it was to let a 3rd grader play with an Uzi.


As I am not a gun owner and know little about guns (which is why I don't comment too much on gun control issues, other than to say that), I'm not sure what use Uzis and AK-47s have for the average citizen. They are the chosen weapons of drug dealers in Detroit, but I doubt the dealers legally own their weapons. Other than the sheer joy of shooting them at targets at a firing range (not that there's anything wrong with that), are they useful weapons for the average person who isn't in an armed standoff with the cops? I can't imagine they are useful for deer hunting.

Jfor
05-01-2009, 12:01 PM
You have to wonder whose bright idea it was to let a 3rd grader play with an Uzi.


As I am not a gun owner and know little about guns (which is why I don't comment too much on gun control issues, other than to say that), I'm not sure what use Uzis and AK-47s have for the average citizen. They are the chosen weapons of drug dealers in Detroit, but I doubt the dealers legally own their weapons. Other than the sheer joy of shooting them at targets at a firing range (not that there's anything wrong with that), are they useful weapons for the average person who isn't in an armed standoff with the cops? I can't imagine they are useful for deer hunting.


That's the beauty of the 2nd amendment. The weapons do not have to be useful for hunting for somebody to own one. Besides, the issue of if they are useful for the average citizen is moot in regards to this story. The story is about the fact that a 3rd grader was being allowed to fire an automatic weapon without the support of an adult there. Granted the adults were supervising(making assumptions because the story was vague), but they should have been a hands-on supervising.

On a personal note, I have allowed my neice and nephew to first fire my .45, my 9mm, my ak-47 and my ar-15. Not once did they fire the weapons without my hands supervision. They were both 4 and 5 at the time I first allowed to them to fire the weapons.

Gun ownership requires a certain level of responsibility that some folks do not posses. Teaching firearms safety is paramount when getting kids involved in the support. Just because they can handle that .22 rifle doesn't mean they can handle a full auto 9mm UZI.

Gingersnap
05-01-2009, 02:48 PM
That's the beauty of the 2nd amendment. The weapons do not have to be useful for hunting for somebody to own one.

Absolutely! The problem here was a lack of common sense on the part of the adults. Also, there's nothing particularly magical about turning 16. If you are weak, small, frightened, or jittery, you'll have control problems with unfamiliar firearms anyway.

expat-pattaya
05-02-2009, 10:27 AM
The weapon they allowed that child to shoot is one of the hardest to handle. No barrel to speak of and little to grab at the front end. Difficult for experienced subgun shooters to handle. They were idiots to allow it.

I have allowed my 8 and 10 year old nephews to shoot my MP5. The setting was strict. They were seated, the suppressor was attached (which extends the barrel making it harder to lose control) and I was right there ready to grab the weapon if anything went awry. First they shot in single shot mode to get used to that, then a burst in full auto. Plus, and MP5 is a lot easier to handle as there is little barrel rise. Not a problem. Fun time and always safe.

Common sense is lacking. But passing laws for common sense is in itself lacking common sense. A circular logic failure.