Letter: Changes to security must be made

0
8

letters_flatTo the editor,

People of Connecticut get shortchanged twice first with a President who is not a leader, then secondly we have a Governor who leads us in the wrong direction.

Our President has yet to have an approved budget, which is required by law. Do you think that may be one of the reasons we have such a financial mess? Our President doesn’t feel he has to ring in this uncontrolled spending by negotiating with Congress, he obviously feels above that. It would be nice if someone in his cabinet would inform him that he should listen to someone. He’s not a dictator but a president that was elected by the people and can be impeached for not carrying out the duties of the office of the President of the United States.

Our Governor is obviously working on his reelection with his very obvious movements. First he signed a bill to eliminate the death penalty, then allowed in-state tuition costs for illegals. Now his latest scam for support is to allow illegals to get their driver’s licenses. Is there something about illegal I don’t understand?

The state is in a financial mess but yet the Governor still pays a business to move from one Connecticut municipality to another. I fail to see how this helps Connecticut. We have a busway being built which is too expensive and needed for few. So few, it would be cheaper to transport these people by taxi.

Now we have the gun laws to jump on while it’s a hot item due to the disaster in Sandy Hook. To make certain guns, clips or ammunition illegal or banned will not prevent these tragedies. It will however give the underworld yet another way to make illegal guns a hot commodity.

In my opinion the best way to curb these disasters from happening again is to screen buyers of guns. If my memory is correct none of the shooters of the largest disasters were legal gun owners so what law would have prevented them?

The Columbine disaster occurred in the middle of the Clinton’s 10-year ban on assault weapons so that gives you an idea what the bans are worth.

If you look at the big picture very seldom are crimes with guns carried out by responsible gun owners. To outlaw guns completely in this country would lead to civil disobedience like never seen before in this country since the Civil War. I can’t picture authorities going door to door to confiscate guns.

If all guns were collected all law abiding citizens could become victims such as the Petit family was. The rules of engagement of law enforcement are not adequate to protect citizens. In Cheshire you might recall at the Petit home there were many law enforcement outside but none attempting to go inside to attempt to save Mrs. Petit and her two daughters.

The law abiding citizen should not be punished for the actions of a few deranged people that got their hands on guns.

The Second Amendment is not to blame for these disasters and its removal should not be on the table. My protection for my wife and I is owning a gun, secondary would be the police with their less than adequate rules of engagement.

The NRA suggesting armed security in schools makes sense. We have a security in courts, airports, rail stations, docks, so why not schools? The Governor has his state police driver and bodyguard, the President and his family has protection. The Senate building and Congress chambers have security, so why not the schools, it just makes sense to expand security to schools.

It’s a dangerous society we all live in, and we must face facts changes to security must take place to offset the danger.

David Scott

Beacon Falls