Tell Us: Your Thought's On Gun Control

Friday's shootings at a Connecticut elementary school have ignited the gun control debate.

Friday's shooting tragedy at a Connecticut school has ignited debate on the issue of gun control.

Twenty-seven people, including 20 children, were killed when a gunman opened fire inside a kindergarten class at Sandy Hook Elementary. 

The shooter has been identified as Adam Lanza, 20, the son of one of the victims, according to police.

Some, like White House press secretary Jay Carney, said Friday "was not the day" to discuss gun control. Others disagree.

Assemb. Michelle Schimel, D-Great Neck, a strong advocate for stricter gun control legislation said elected officials must put public safety before the interests of the strongest gun lobbyists.

“I am appalled once again. Little children gunned down in the safest of places, their elementary school classroom. In a world gone seemingly mad, I have always had to defend my stance in government for stricter gun laws and regulations," said Schimel in a press release. "I urge people to call the White House and their State Houses — and scream out — our children, our children." 

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said society must unify and once and for all crack down on the guns that have cost the lives of far too many innocent Americans, according to a press release Friday.

"While we don’t have all the facts and our focus must be on the victims, this is yet another senseless and horrific act of violence involving guns," Cuomo said. "Let this terrible tragedy finally be the wake-up call for aggressive action and I pledge my full support in that effort."

Tell Us: Where do you stand on the gun control issue? Let us know in the comments section.

BHirsh December 18, 2012 at 01:21 AM
The hue and cry for a so-called "assault weapons" (sic) ban is a holler in a hurricane. It can't happen. Here's why. In 1994, the D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago decisions didn't exist. There was no judicial barrier to passing one. Now, it is precedent that a) the people have an individual fundamental right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes not dependent upon militia service, b) that holding has been incorporated to the states, and c) Justice Scalia (in the Heller holding) clarified what the U.S. v. Miller (1939) decision actually said. Miller established a two-pronged test to define just what types of arms are subject to Second Amendment protection. It held that small arms "in common use" that "bear[s] some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia" enjoy constitutional protection. Semiautomatic rifles and pistols meet both prongs of this test, hence they are proscribed from any government ban. The Heller decision also addressed (and dismissed) the argument that the Framers couldn't have envisioned the capability of today's modern weapons. Just as the Internet has supplanted moveable type, so have semi-auto firearms supplanted muskets. The principle involved in both of these rights is not constitutionally affected by the evolution of the mechanisms to exercise them. Now, this may be bad news to some, but it is pure celestial harmony to others. And, it is the state of the law.
Donald Hecht December 21, 2012 at 01:01 AM
Chris, as the father of a mentally challenged son, it scares me that there are people like you around.
Donald Hecht December 21, 2012 at 01:04 AM
"Jap" is a racist term Doc.
N Keith Kappel December 21, 2012 at 04:53 PM
What exactly is the law that will prevent a criminal from perpetrating a crime? It cannot be done yet our politicians want to stand on the steps and rail about 9 point plans to address gun violence none of which come anywhere near affecting a criminal, a terrorist or a mentally disturbed person. What they will achieve is limiting the rights of the law abiding through further expansion of government and associated bureacracies which in and of themselves limit individual liberties. This is about politicians seizing upon an opportunity to expand their power. Gun control is not the issue but control certainly is. Apply some critical thinking and ask yourself exactly what will any of the gun control proposals accomplish? And stop with the ban guns nonsense - if your pursue that tact you should sue your school district for failing your education. In the tribal regions of Pakistan, primitive people are producing 1000 firearms a day with limited resources - these include fully automatic AK -47's. Any attempt at a ban will simply result in a unconscionable black market to feed the criminal element who will prey upon a disarmed populace. Beware the unintended consequences
DPM December 22, 2012 at 06:13 AM
So let me get this straight. If a person robs me on the street of my driver's license, the solution to combating this problem is to pass another law making it more difficult for me to get a driver's license? We already have plenty of gun control in NY - some of the strictest in the nation. It is both immoral and disingenuous to believe that our kids will be safe simply by posting a "Gun Free School Zone" sign on their doors. The appropriate response is having trained, armed personnel in every school.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »