Update on Proposed Ban In Southbury

For prior posts about this proposed gun ban in Southbury, click here.

There was a great showing of CCDL members for the November 2nd board of selectmen’s meeting. Over 700 people were in attendance, and the vast majority were Second Amendment supporters. 48 people stood up and spoke against a firearm ban and only 13 people spoke in favor of such an ordinance.

After a presentation by Southbury’s Resident State Trooper at the meeting, the trooper requested that the Board of Selectmen revisit and clarify two existing town firearm ordinances (one for town parks and one for town open spaces) to determine if these also ban permit holders or does a permit meet the “except by special permit” clause in the ordinances. Southbury Selectman George Bertram has said in an email, that he will also work to rescind both local ordinances that currently restrict legal firearms in Southbury. He doesn’t believe that Southbury should be in the business of adding restrictions to the legal carry of firearms. He said, “CT has enough (restrictions) already, in my humble opinion.”

The board of selectmen ran out of meeting time because they only had the use of the high school until 11PM. They had to table their discussion about the firearms ordinance until the November 16th meeting. Their next meeting will most likely again be at Pomperaug High School, 234 Judd Rd, Southbury, CT at 7PM in the auditorium. They will most likely not take any more public comments at the next meeting, but will vote on whether or not to continue to explore a firearms ban on town property, town building and at town events. With this proposal coming from the Southbury Democratic Town Committee and with the Republicans still holding the majority of the seats on the board after the elections, it is unlikely that this will move forward.

CCDL will of course continue to monitor the situation, and alert our members and supporters if further action is required.

An Open Letter To Senator Murphy

Greetings Senator Murphy,

Your recent call for increased infringements on the rights of Americans (more gun control) coupled with decreased vetting of foreign entities has now reached ‘the Lunatic Fringe’.

Our organization (Connecticut Citizens Defense League) has no opinion on immigration as a sole subject, but when you conjoin calls for gun control along with mass immigration of foreigners, it is obvious what you are attempting to do.

You are now prioritizing non-citizens over legitimate citizens of the United States by calling for gun control to accommodate those non-citizens. The purpose of your idea is simply to push fanatical gun restrictions any way that you can. This reasoning is simply unacceptable to most Americans.

Let’s face it Senator Murphy, the bottom line is that you very simply do not trust your fellow Americans with firearms. The fact that you cling to this position is clearly evidenced by your ceaseless calls for gun control. What is particularly troubling is the fact that you are doing so while admitting that some immigrants from certain regions of the world may be so dangerous that we need to ban legal firearms to reduce the ‘risks’ of these people being here. It is sheer lunacy that you would risk the lives of your fellow citizens in such a manner if given the opportunity.

Your way would make all of us less safe if you eliminate the means for us to protect our lives and our families. Therefore, you and your beliefs are more dangerous to this nation than any immigrant from anywhere in the world ever could be.

Scott Wilson
President
CCDL, Inc.

State Reps Dubitsky & France Discuss Future Gun Control Bills

Appearing September 6, 2016 on The Lee Elci Show, State Reps Doug Dubitsky and Mike France were asked a key question by the host regarding the likelihood of future gun control bills in the legislature.

The discussion that followed was very foretelling of what is, and is not likely to happen in the next legislative session. The entire segment is 15 minutes long and well worth listening to, but if you’re pressed for time and just want to hear the part about guns you can fast-forward to the 5:45 mark.

As we have been saying since the last legislative session, 2016 may be the most important election for gun owners in the history of Connecticut.

As a reminder of what our members can do to make a difference in the upcoming election, CCDL has a published list of endorsed candidates who need our help and support. Please contact Pro 2nd Amendment candidates in or near your House and Senate legislative districts, and ask how you can help them before November elections.

Just a small amount of time spent helping can make a difference in whether or not a candidate wins or loses. Rest assured if our side loses, there will be more gun control bills that pass and become law.

Newtown Action Alliance Urges All Newtown Business Owners to Ban Guns in their Establishments

Following closely on the heels of our federal legislators, The extremist antirights group Newtown Action Alliance is also trying to circumvent state and federal laws by bullying establishments into banning their law-abiding customers right to self-defense. This is the press release they sent out today, followed by comments from CCDL’s president Scott Wilson.

Open Letter to All Business Owners in Newtown

Newtown, CT- On January 6th, a customer shopping at Caraluzzi’s in Bethel was concerned upon seeing another customer openly carrying a handgun. After this incident, some Newtown residents called for a boycott until Caraluzzi’s bans firearms in its stores. Last week, Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy and Representative Elizabeth Esty called on the Connecticut Food Association to ban open carry of guns in retail stores.

There are no federal laws restricting open carry of firearms and, with the gun lobby’s influence, more than 40 states now allow open carry. In Connecticut, there are no state statutes that prohibit open carry of handguns for someone with a valid pistol permit, and no permit is required to openly carry a long gun. The law, with few exceptions (such as police officers on duty), prohibits carrying firearms on school or General Assembly property, loaded handguns in vehicles, and handguns where barred by law or a property owner. Supermarkets, food retailers, restaurants and other private establishments in Connecticut have the legal authority to ban firearms from their premises.

Last year, when Texas approved its controversial open carry law to allow handgun license holders to carry their handguns openly, numerous private business owners including H.E.B. (the largest private company in the state of Texas) and Trader Joe’s stood up and banned open carry in their stores.

Many U.S. companies have created policies to ban all guns in their establishments nationwide. These include Safeway, Chuck-E-Cheese, Ikea, Sonic, Whole Foods, Costco, Buffalo Wildwings, Peet’s Coffee and Tea, California Pizza Kitchen, AMC Theaters, Disney World, and Toys-R-Us.

Contrary to the rhetoric from the gun lobby, more guns do not create a safer society. A 2014 Stanford research study reaffirmed that right-to-carry laws are linked to an increase in violent crimes. Research demonstrates that states with higher gun ownership have higher rates of gun deaths. Americans are 20 times more likely to be shot and killed by a gun than those from other developed nations. Nearly 100,000 Americans have died from guns and guns have injured nearly 250,000 more since Newtown. Gun violence is a public health and safety issue.

After the Sandy Hook tragedy, the gun violence prevention movement is stronger than ever. According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 125 gun safety laws have been passed in 41 states since that time. We now have comprehensive background check laws in 18 states. While we fight for more legislative changes, a broad coalition of advocates, responsible gun owners, civic organizations, faith groups, celebrities and corporations must work together to change the gun culture to end gun violence.

The Newtown community in particular requires increased sensitivity, love, and compassion from local business owners, as there are many in our community who continue to suffer from PTSD. We strongly recommend that all business owners in Newtown join our movement to create a safer and less intimidating environment for our children and families by banning all guns in their establishments.

CCDL president Scott Wilson responds:
“The press release from the Newtown Action Alliance (Feb 3rd) in which they request ‘all business owners’ in Newtown ban the lawful carry of firearms into their establishments is a flat-out wrong course of action. This is an insane request for a couple of reasons. The first of which is that anyone who is carrying a firearm legally has been background checked on multiple levels and should be entitled to be able to protect themselves. The second reason should be a reminder to the people in Newtown that if there were armed people in Sandy Hook at the time of the massacre, it may have been stopped in its tracks, or might have never happened at all. To have the mindset that people should not ever be armed is utter madness and insanity. It’s an open invitation for slaughter”.

“I really hope that business owners and the like understand that police cannot be everywhere, and that most mass murders happen in places where guns are banned outright. The Newtown Action Alliance is deliberately trying to put innocent people in real danger. They need to understand that applications for pistol permits in Newtown increased after what happened in Sandy Hook. People want to have the ability to protect themselves and not have to cower in fear and left pleading for their lives to a madman”.

In addition to Scott’s comments, let me add this. One of President Obama’s Executive Orders following Sandy Hook was to give the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) $10 million to study gun violence. When the study came out, it received little media attention, and was virtually ignored by groups like Newtown Action Alliance. Perhaps because the study President Obama commissioned found that:

  • Armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker
  • Defensive uses of guns are common
  • Mass shootings and accidental firearm deaths account for a small fraction of gun-related deaths, and both are declining
  • “Interventions” (i.e, gun control) such as background checks, so-called assault rifle bans and gun-free zones produce “mixed” results
  • Gun buyback/turn-in programs are “ineffective” in reducing crime
  • Stolen guns and retail/gun show purchases account for very little crime
  • The vast majority of gun-related deaths are not homicides, but suicides

Not exactly the findings NAA and other anti-constitutional groups wanted to hear, which is why they ignored it and kept shopping around until they finally found a so-called “study” that matched their agenda.

I will also point out that a recent Pew Research study shows that homicide rates have decreased 50% in the last 20 years, while firearm ownership is at historic highs. The study also found New Hampshire one of the “safest places on the planet”. NH has minimal gun-control laws. No permit is needed to purchase a gun. As a matter of fact, no permit is required to openly carry a firearm in public. A (easily obtained for $10) permit is only needed to conceal a firearm. Many other states with what NAA considers lax and inadequate gun control laws like Vermont and Maine are almost equally safe. But people like NAA will continue to peddle fear and emotions; because when the facts are not on your side, what else is there to do?

One last thing for the business owners of Newtown and elsewhere.
While nobody intent on committing a crime or causing harm is going to see a “No Guns Allowed” sign on the door and go elsewhere, your law-abiding customers will.
We’ve made the decision to protect ourselves and our loved ones. We won’t NOT carry a gun the day we shop in your store; we will simply not shop in your store. We have expended considerable time, effort and money to be able to legally carry a firearm; we won’t give that up because your store is a mile closer or a few cents cheaper.

The Irony Of Gun Grabbers

Today is the day we celebrate the birth and life of civil rights leader Dr Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today is also the day that various anti-gun groups will gather in Newtown to protest your right to self-defense.

NAA-MLK

Oh, the irony of people rallying to limit the constitutional rights of those they dislike on the very day that we celebrate a man who gave his life fighting for all Americans to be guaranteed those same constitutional rights.

A man who was denied the right to lawfully keep and bear arms based on the color of his skin, but defied the law to exercise that basic human right.

A man who these same anti-gun groups would today condemn and demand be jailed because he illegally owned guns without any background checks.

And while it is true that later in life King himself decided to go unarmed, much has been written about how his supporters continued to possess firearms in defense of both themselves and Dr. King.

“The right to defend one’s home and one’s person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law.” – Martin Luther King, Jr. 1967

CCDL is asking people to come out and show your opposition to this intrusion upon your rights. See this previous post for more details.

Counter-Protest The Antigun Rally in Newtown!

According to a letter recently published in The Newtown Bee, the antigun crowd is planning another protest for Monday, January 18th, in front of the headquarters for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. In part it appears they are protesting the NSSF’s Project ChildSafe. For the life of me I can’t figure out why people who claim they aren’t actually anti-gun but just pro gun safety would oppose an actual, effective gun safety program is beyond me.
I would think if they really wanted to stop the violence and promote gun safety they should protest in front of a drug gang’s headquarters or in a high crime neighborhood. I can only guess it’s because we’re safe and law-abiding gun owners and the NSSF is located in a nice suburban neighborhood, and drug dealers are scary  criminals and hang out in the bad part of the big city?

Whatever their reasons, they say they are speaking for all of us. We need you to show up and show them that’s not the case. Connecticut has a large number of legal gun owners. We’ll be meeting in front of the NSSF headquarters at 3:30pm, located right off rt 25 at 11 Mile Hill Rd, Newtown. Parking is tough, but you can park behind the Reed School, by the soccer and baseball fields on Old Farm Rd (see map below). DO NOT PARK on Tinkerfield Rd. Any crossing of Mile Hill Rd. is prohibited, except up by Reed School where you park.
Remember you are technically parking on school grounds.

  • Bring Pro2A signs.
  • Bring American flags.
  • Bring a sign thanking the NSSF for what they do.
  • BE RESPECTFUL AND POLITE! Don’t let someone goad you into an argument or fight. Remember the media will be there.

What: Counter-protest in support of the NSSF
When: Monday, January 18, 2016 at 3:30pm
Where: NSSF Headquarters, 11 Mile Hill Rd, Newtown, CT 06470

nssf-parking


View Larger Map

Are You An Extremist?

So apparently now “Due Process” is an extremist view according to the Connecticut Democratic Party.

The Connecticut Citizens Defense League, just like their allies in the national and state Republican Parties, is fighting to make sure terrorists have access to deadly weapons. This is beyond extreme. To try to use the Second Amendment to claim that Congress cannot regulate terrorists’ ability to do harm to our citizens with firearms is just plain wrong.

And yet Republicans in the Senate last night – spurred on by the extremest views of the NRA and CCDL – blocked a bill that would have blocked people suspected of terrorism from obtaining weapons.

So “innocent until proven guilty,” which has been the law of the land since the beginnings of this country, is now an extremist view.

CCDL is a nonpartisan organization. Many of our members are registered Democrats. As an organization we have endorsed many progun Democrats, and have even honored a Democrat as our “Legislator Of The Year“. We know this political rhetoric is coming from the leadership, not well-informed rank-and-file members.

Does anyone else actually believe in revoking rights guaranteed by the state and federal constitutions and written into law, without any hearing? Without any chance to defend yourself? Without any due process?
Because that’s exactly what this is about.

The surprising thing is many of these same people were opposing this very same watch list not long ago. Saying it unfairly targets Muslims, pointing out there is no oversight, mentioning how petty people have used it to punish people they don’t like (like the MD police office dept that submitted 50+ people from a democrat protest). They’ve pointed out ridiculous mistakes that went unnoticed, such as babies, senators, and the entire Ford Motor Company.

They’ve pointed out how easy it is for innocent people to mistakenly be added to these watch lists, and they’ve rightly pointed out that it’s hard to find out why you’ve been placed on these secret lists, and even harder to get off them, even if you were placed there in error. They admit the list is ineffective, and riddled with errors.
They’ve even gone to court, calling the list illegal and unconstitutional!

So for years, the terror watch list has been flawed, riddled with errors, and even called illegal and unconstitutional by the ACLU. This is not a list of known terrorists at all, and real terrorists certainly should not be allowed to freely walk the streets.

And now our President, our Governor, our Legislators, and the CT Democrat Party are calling for the rights of law-abiding citizens to be trampled upon without any due process at all based upon these same lists? The spokesperson for the CTDems goes so far as to call CCDL and it’s members extremists who are trying to aid terrorists? Because we expect our elected officials to follow the laws we elected them to protect?

If due process is an extremist point of view, I’m happily an extremist. What about you?

Now what?

“Gun Safety” Groups Oppose Free Trigger Lock Program

According to an article in the Newtown Patch:

The Department of Justice awarded Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation a grant for its free gun lock program, but the move has upset at least two other groups.

The DOJ awarded a two-year $2.4 million grant for NSSF’s Project ChildSafe program to encourage responsible firearm storage. The Newtown Action Alliance and Coalition to Stop Gun Violence launched a petition to cancel the grant.

Yes, you read that right. Two supposed “gun safety” groups (Including one based here in CT) are opposing the use of taxpayer money to fund an actual and effective gun safety program. Why the heck would they do such a thing? Because despite the claims by these groups that they support safe, lawful gun ownership, the truth is the only form of “gun safety” they approve of are gun bans. I guess their mantra of “if it saves just one life it’s worth it!” only applies to gun bans as well. According to the NSSF, Project ChildSafe has already distributed more than 37 million free firearm safety kits through its law enforcement partners across the country, including almost 50 locations here in Connecticut. That’s potentially at least 37 million lives saved. How can they oppose such a program and still claim they support gun safety?

Remember this next time they try to tell you they aren’t anti-gun, they just support gun safety and responsible gun ownership.

Common Sense Gun Lies

The following is a guest post by CCDL member John Sturmer. It is in response to an op-ed published recently in the Greenwich Time and other Hearst Media newspapers. That op-ed was written by Jonathan Perloe, who runs the Greenwich Council Against Gun Violence and also serves on the board of Ron Pinciero’s Connecticut Against Gun Violence (CAGV).
If you haven’t already, first read “Perloe op-ed: Standing ground on tough gun laws”, and come back here to read Mr. Sturmer’s excellent response.

UPDATE 4/1/2015: The Greenwich Time has published this. Feel free to comment there.

Common Sense Gun Lies – A response to Jonathan Perloe- “Standing Ground on Tough New Gun Laws”

I am writing this because I am tired of lies and misinformation being spread by our bevy of anti-”gun violence” groups in Connecticut.  At one time I believed them to be ignorant, but I now know better.  So, I would like to dissect and discredit these statements point by point.

Mr. Perloe points out that “90 Percent of legislators who voted in favor [of SB1160, the 2013 gun law]” were re-elected.  Most of those legislators ran unopposed.  Another way to look at it was of the large 12 seat gain by the GOP, 11 of those seats were replacements of legislators who voted for SB 1160.  Only 1 legislator who voted against the law lost his re-election bid.

Mr. Perloe also contends that the now banned “Large Capacity Magazine” enabled Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza to fire “…154 rounds in under 5 minutes”.  5 minutes is 300 seconds.  154 rounds is 1 round roughly every 2 seconds.  Try that.  Clap your hands, count to 2.  The rate of fire had zero to do with magazine capacity.  That rate of fire could be maintained with a 5 shot revolver by one of my basic pistol students including reloading.

Mr. Perloe goes on to mischaracterize “Stand your ground” as “letting gun owners shoot to kill whenever and wherever they feel threatened”.  This is a LIE.  Stand Your Ground means nothing of the sort.  In every jurisdiction in this country, you must “Reasonably believe that deadly physical force or great physical harm is being used or about to be used against you or another person”.  Stand your ground does not change that requirement, either legally or MORALLY.  Additionally, any trained person will tell you that we shoot to stop… not to kill.  This isn’t the movies where you “decide” whether or not to kill someone.  Someone is about to kill you.  Your only focus is to STOP that.  Tell a judge in any jurisdiction in this country that you were “Shooting to kill” you go to prison.

Mr. Perloe also contends that “… right now Congress is considering legislation that would force every state to allow virtually anyone to carry a loaded, concealed gun in public. That would mean convicted felons, domestic abusers and other dangerous people from Florida and other states with lax gun laws could legally and secretly carry their guns anywhere in the country, including in Connecticut.”  This is the biggest lie.  Felons and the mentally ill are prohibited from possessing firearms by federal law under 18 USC 922(g).  In other words, felons, mentally ill people and domestic abusers are PROHIBITED IN EVERY STATE AND JURISDICTION IN THE COUNTRY from possessing a firearm.  Additionally, Florida has a permitting process for carrying a firearm, which includes training, fingerprinting and background checks.  Those requirements are remarkably similar to Connecticut’s own requirements.  Florida does not have “lax” gun laws.  The measure being considered by Congress does not absolve anyone of following CT law, which also prohibits possession of a firearm by felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill.

Reasonable people can disagree on the Second Amendment just like any other issue.  However, Mr. Perloe’s article goes beyond disagreement, and bridges the gap into willful misinformation.  Don’t believe the lies.

 

John Sturmer is the Principal Owner of JJ Firearms Training, LLC. He is also a Certified Firearms Instructor, Range Safety Officer, Glock Armorer, and a CCDL Member.

Press Release – Gabby Giffords

03/17/2015
For Immediate Release:

 Response to Gabby Giffords Press Conference

The Connecticut Citizens Defense League (The state’s largest grass-roots gun rights group) has issued the following response to a press conference being held today by Governor Malloy, former Arizona U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords and others.

 

Opening Statement from CCDL President Scott Wilson:
“As a group of law-abiding gun owners, CCDL respects life, and we abhor violence of any kind. This includes domestic violence or any other type of violence that may be perpetrated against innocent persons”.

Wilson on Gabby Giffords Visit:
“With all due respect to Gabby Giffords and the horrific tragedy that she has survived, she is now just a tool in the hands of those who seek to eradicate our constitutionally protected rights. She is essentially a professionally paid victim that advocates for any and every possible angle to dismantle our 2nd Amendment rights”.

 

“The most troubling aspect of the legislative proposal by the Governor is the complete elimination of ‘due process’ for individuals that have a temporary restraining order filed against them. Legally owned firearms would be confiscated with no hearing until a date after the guns are seized”.

 

“If a person with one of these temporary orders is cleared of any wrong-doing by a judge, confiscated firearms will probably not be returned for over two years. Some of these firearms in fact may never be returned to an individual”.

 

“It is also important to note that nearly half of all temporary “ex parte” restraining orders never become permanent ones after a court hearing. That is an awful lot of people whose rights will be stripped from them, and many more will be at risk if this proposal becomes law”.

 

Wilson also stated:
“Like them or not, guns are private property, and we are a state and a country that has constitutional protections for good reason. Connecticut also has a long history that includes the manufacturing and lawful use of firearms that goes back to the founding of this country. Connecticut residents know what’s best for ourselves, not some paid spokesperson from out-of-state that is exploiting her personal tragedy for whatever the reason may be”.


former Arizona U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords