Emotional Connecticut Gov. rejects more guns in schools
(CNN) - Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy choked up Wednesday when addressing the Newtown elementary school shooting that left 20 students dead, and bluntly rejected the notion of putting more guns in classrooms as protection.
"When it comes to preventing future acts of violence in our schools, let me say this: more guns are not the answer," he said in his state of the state address. "Freedom is not a handgun on the hip of every teacher and security should not mean a guard posted outside every classroom."
[twitter-follow screen_name='politicalticker']
He received a hearty ovation from state legislators and guests in the room after both sentences.
The National Rifle Association has argued otherwise, calling for the deployment of an armed guard into every school as a line of defense.
Malloy, a first-term Democrat, has been an outspoken proponent of tighter gun control laws since the December 14 shooting in his state, which left seven adults, including six at the school, dead, along with the students. Authorities have said the gunman, who took his own life after the massacre, was carrying several weapons, including a semiautomatic .223-caliber rifle.
Malloy said on CNN's "State of The Union" on December 16, "One can only hope that we'll find a way to limit these weapons that really only have one purpose."
He appointed educators, mental health professionals, and law enforcement to a special commission and gave them a March 15 deadline for submitting their proposals. President Barack Obama has also tasked with a similar assignment a group led by Vice President Joe Biden.
In his remarks on Wednesday, Malloy appeared moved by the gravity of the tragedy.
"While it's only been a few short weeks on the calendar, we have all walked a very long and very dark road together," he said Wednesday. "What befell Newtown is not something we thought possible in any Connecticut's beautiful small town or our cities."
He choked up while recalling "the best of our state," including the teachers who sought to protect their students, the first responders, and the families who suffered losses.
"Let us do everything in our power to ensure that Connecticut never again suffers such a loss such as this - that we take real steps to make our kids and our communities safer," he said. "The more resources we can bring to bear on this issue, the better. Working together we can and will affect real change."
From CNN Politics
- Prosecutors accept deal with George Santos in Brazilian fraud case
- 10 Cards Charging 0% Interest Until 2024
- FBI informant speaks with CNN about her role in Proud Boys trial
- Kentucky governor vetoes ban on gender-affirming care for youth
- FBI takes down cybercrime forum that touted data connected to breach affecting US lawmakers
- Biden, DOJ won't assert privilege in Trump deposition in lawsuit brought by fired FBI official
@plain&simple
@ Terry ...lunatics don't think! In an IDEAL world we wouldn't be talking about arming guards at schools, or lunatics doing crazy senseless things!
---------------------------------------------
All due respect, but where is this IDEAL world you are talking about?
And yes, I believe these lunatics do think and can grasp the concept of a deterrent.
So children are precious, but not precious enough to have increased security in schools? We have security guards at city council meetings.
@THE REAL TRUTH: Seriously? How will hunters be able to kill their prey? Bow and arrow? Trapping? Some, but not all.
Terry wrote:
All due respect, but where is this IDEAL world you are talking about? And yes, I believe these lunatics do think and can grasp the concept of a deterrent.
----------
Think about this. Your lunatics can graps the concept of counter agents and counter deterrents. The kid in CT walked into a place where he expected no one to be armed, yet he was wearing body armor and carrying multiple weapons. Your lunatics will always come prepared with overwhelming force no matter what you do.
"It is because they already know that they can get away with their murderous rampage because no one inside is likely to be armed"
Right, because showing up wearing combat fatigues, a flack jacket and combat helmet is evidence that he expected never to be shot at. Do you people even listen to yourselves speak?
The people who do these things are generally looking to die and go out in a blaze of glory or don't give two craps if they do one way or the other. They frequently intend to be shot to death or to shoot themselves. The only time you read about some p-ssy trying to survive this kind of thing is when it was some pseudo-militia weekend-daycamp warrior who hallucinates himself as a guerilla freedom fighter "making a point" via some massively violent act intended to "put the gubmint on warning that we're ready to rise up and take our kuntree back." Make no mistake: we all fully expect those very nutjobs to be gearing up and planning something right this minute in response to these "threats" of more responsible gun safety regulation. It's only a matter of time until another group of them gets arrested or pulls off some stunt.
BTW, CNN, "gun rights advocates"? no
GUN SALES ADVOCATES.
FIFY.
Dude wrote:
So children are precious, but not precious enough to have increased security in schools? We have security guards at city council meetings.
------------
Read my lips, "Home Schooling." Most school districts would bust their budgets trying to pay for the increased insurance costs associated with having armed guards whose actions the districts would be liable for.
Even better, let's have teachers and janitors bring their pieces to work so that they can get into circular firing squad "standing their ground" while the kids are hit by strays and ricochets. The good news is that no one could be held responsible for the injuries or deaths they caused. Think about that.
"So children are precious"
You have to undersstand. These gun fanatic whackadoos frequently consider their guns to be akin to their children....they anthropomorphize them, give them names, call them their "babies"...the whole crazy 9 yards.
Dont hv weapons accessable. Tighter regulations can detour such assasians. Well REGULATED militia. Not well supplied or armed. There was another man with a gun n tuson shooting and 5 at virgina tech shooting. Having more guns doesnt solve problem!
Like mccrystal said these weapons r 4 war. The ammo explodes and if u havent seen the damage that kind of weapon does u hv no idea. God bless all first responders!
Banning and restricting lawful gun owners is not the answer, every law abiding citizen goes through a state and FBI background check before being able to acquire such weapons. The real criminals don't, they don't care for laws or human life. Gov Malloy look at Hartford, you banning or even taxing higher for such weapons won't make the gang bangers follow. Then I ask are you turning to banning as an easy way out, or just to say you did something to protect you political status.. Lets all get together on this one and really come up with an answer that helps all citizens with this problem. If you need more research look at the states of NY and CA, they have the most restricting laws when it comes to gun law yet their gun crime rates are among the highest in the Nation!!! Banning is not the answer!!!
Rudy NYC
"Think about this. Your lunatics can graps the concept of counter agents and counter deterrents. The kid in CT walked into a place where he expected no one to be armed, yet he was wearing body armor and carrying multiple weapons. Your lunatics will always come prepared with overwhelming force no matter what you do."
-----------------------------------------------
You are saying that I (we) should abdicate our right of self defense? That is the most basic human right of all.
I'm sorry, if it is within my power I will not let some miscreant dictate whether me or my family members live or die. Not without a fight.
"Freedom is not a handgun on the hip of every teacher and security should not mean a guard posted outside every classroom
-------------------------------------------------
That is correct. Well stated.
"You are saying that I (we) should abdicate our right of self defense? "
Nobody has said anything of the sort. Responding to suggestions of stricter, saner, more rigorous registration, licensing and monitoring requiements as though the only thing anyone is saying is "take ALL guns away" just makes you look like a tinfoil hatted moron.
@Sniffit
"So children are precious"
You have to undersstand. These gun fanatic whackadoos frequently consider their guns to be akin to their children....they anthropomorphize them, give them names, call them their "babies"...the whole crazy 9 yards.
-------------------------------------------
.the whole crazy 9 yards. ???????????
Whoa Buckwheat, you don't know it but you just used a "gun" relaetd term. The "whole nine yards" refers to a full load of .50 caliber machine-gun ammunition that was typically loaded onto to a World War II era fighter plane.
Given your threatening and hostile tone as well as subliminal references to firearm terms, perhaps you need a background check prior to any further postings.
If we need teachers to carry guns to keep our children safe, we as a country are neither free nor secure.
No position on guns or guards, just a statement. Teachers are already educators, administrators, disciplinarians, counselors, advocates, and more. They cannot now become armed guards as well. The teachers I know regularly reach in to their own pockets to supplement class materials, resources, etc.
Just think, a few short months ago teachers were socialist leeches on society according to the Right.
Bullet proof glass and metal detectors. That's all you need. Now let's see if the taxpayers love the childrrn enough to pay for it.
@dude
Yes, children are precious. But they're not just precious at school. They're also precious at the movie theater, and the mall,and the playground, and church, and walking on the street, and everywhere else. So yes, you could place an armed guard (by which I hope to God you mean a police officer) at each school, and perhaps that would provide some level of deterrence - and perhaps not. But at best it just moves the crime to another location. So what's your solution for everyplace else ? The problem is not that the mass killings occurred in school, the problem is that mass killings are occuring in lots of different places.
"Whoa Buckwheat, you don't know it but you just used a "gun" relaetd term. The "whole nine yards" refers to a full load of .50 caliber machine-gun ammunition that was typically loaded onto to a World War II era fighter plane.
Given your threatening and hostile tone as well as subliminal references to firearm terms, perhaps you need a background check prior to any further postings.
"
References to Buckwheat indicating overt racism: check.
Broken, illogical attempt at one-upping someone clearly smarter than you: check.
Silly semantic games as last refuge of someone without an argument: check.
Yep, you're a Teatroll gun nut alright.