As noted in a previous blog, I believe people kill people, not the firearm. However, I REALLY do not see any need for an assault weapon with multiple rounds sold to a civilian.

The ACLU jumps on ANY infringement of civil rights and so should the NRA jump on any on infringement of firearm ownership. But, the reality is, with today's super weapons, I honestly don't think King George (no - not "W") will lead the charge up the Palisades over the cliffs and attack New Milford.

Me personally, I have no problem with Ms Grant charging up the stairs of drumthwacket and demanding the governor (oops - sorry) - she only wants a local ordinance! Ok - no problem with her wasting time, passing an ordinance that would ban assault weapons....... however unnecessary.

Wouldn't you think the lady would have something a little closer to home to get her picture in the Patch concern herself with?

I am opposed to gun control. I firmly believe in the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms, and see its existence without restriction as the only way to insure against an eventual police state. Throughout history dictators, tyrants an illigitimate governments of all kinds have gain control of the masses oppressing its people by using gun control laws under the pretence that controlling gun proliferation to its citizens is for the citizens own safety. In fact gun control laws in America are based on controlling slaves and stopping the civil rights movement.

The Second Amendment gave us the right to bear arms, however, it also gave the government the right to control how the "militia" would be armed. Please be sure to check the First Amendment also.

I am in support of universal background checks, but do not believe you can constitutionally impose a background check that includes non applying household members. This would deny the applicant on criteria he cannot control and intrude on the rights to privacy of non applicants. The first denies the applicant due process and equal protection under the law and the latter is a privacy invasion in violation of the constitution as well as HIPPA laws.

Hedy, cmon. Assuming Im reading this right, this is to support a federal initiative. This is not a New Milford issue. You were elected to serve the people of New Milford. Not the County, State,Federal Govt or The Democratic Party. And for the record, I am pro gun control.

The Second Amendment is not about hunting and target shooting. It's about keeping YOUR government from turning into a tyrannical force. Look back at history. Lexington & Concord (The Shot Heard 'Round the World) was because the British wanted to confiscate ALL firearms from the colonists. Why is it, it was good for our forefathers to have unfettered access, but not us?

Thank you Hedy and Council for making your voice heard on this issue. While a resolution doesn't carry any force of law, it does help put pressure on the NRA-owned congressman Garrett to FINALLY DO SOMETHING. This is not about overturning the 2nd Amendment, but rather, together with mental health support, keeping our schools and communities safe.
And as for those seditious people who advocate "2nd Amendment solutions" to tyranny, do you really want to be in league with John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald? Please be assured that if you choose bullets over ballots I will call our law enforment officers to put you away quicker than you can say "ready, aim, ..."!!

What a fing waste of my tax dollars. Please get to the issues at hand. Not useless laws that infringe upon our rights. Deal with taxes and united water property.

If you want to repeal the 2nd amendment, do it the way the Founding Fathers intended. Amend the Constitution.

The first time I discharged a firearm was probably around small game season of 1958. I had just passed my NRA hunter safety course and went about practice shooting with my brother. It was pretty simple then - basically rim or center fire cartridges and bolt, pump, lever, semi auto or double barrel rifles and shotguns. I don't think there were that many school shootings back then and legal firearm purchase in NYC (except maybe pistols) was more of a financial challenge then legal. Between Hunter Mountain area and Shepherd's lake in W.M., I must have discharged 3 or 4 thousand rounds of ammo since then.

I endured an experience in Haines Falls NY during a deer season in the 80's, which I will never endure again. I don't want to gross anyone out so, why don't we just skim over by saying euthanasia was the kindest act that guy bestowed that day.

Macho types talk about blowing someone away who dares enter their home at night. Have you ever heard a .45 or .357 go off at an indoor shooting range with no ear protection? Imagine that explosion in your home. I always have and always will advocate for the 2nd, but as far as home protection, I recommend locks, camera's and a trained loud barking dog if possible.

Too many very bad things can happen all too very soon with firearms at night and you being half asleep.

and a weapon will not wag a tail if you pet it.

So, I as a private citizen should be comfortable with the government, police, and military carrying these weapons? Because they never engage in excessive violence and abuse of power. In the past century "governments" have been responsible for the death of 250 million people. I'd prefer not to give them absolute power.

I agree with Jose 100%

Dear Hedy Grant,

This is an empty attempt at politicizing this issue. New Milford, under the 10th Amendment, has every right to pass whatever restrictions we deem to be appropriate for public safety. However, New Milford has no actual means to enforce gun control laws on its own. Moreover, New Jersey already has meaningful restrictions on firearms and magazines. This is therefore empty politicizing for no effect. It's shallow.

I don't believe in gun control. The purpose of the entire Bill of Rights is so that, by guaranteeing the individual liberties of the people, we can create a legal presumption that our consent to be governed has been freely given. A government that can restrict our rights to free speech, assembly, our right to bear arms or detain us without due process can compel the consent of the people through force and intimidation.

I therefore propose the following ordinance: While a New Milford gun control law would be a shallow, empty, political jesture, it would be completely American and appropriate for New Milford's town council to pass a resolution or ordinance defending the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Part of the oath of any public servant, law enforcement officer or official is to uphold and defend our Constitution.

Our town ordinance would provide that we will uphold the Constitution and no law enforcement officer, court officer, administrative officer or the Town Council itself will enforce any federal law that violates the Constitution or that infringes, abridges or frustrates the purpose of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

Our federal government has by operation of federal law abridged all of the most sacred rights of the Bill of Rights:

Our right to free speech and assembly: numerous restrictions on free speech including time/place laws in Washington DC and political speech restrictions.

Our right to bear arms: The National Firearms Act of 1934 (which banned and continues to ban the sale of actual assault rifles), the Gun Control Act of 1968, and numerous rules and regulations promulgated by the ATF.

Our right to Privacy: the Patriot Act, the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and numerous executive orders.

Our right to Due Process: The Indefinite Detention Provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, and numerous executive orders.

All of these measures were passed into law under the guise of public safety. As Benjamin Franklin famously said: "He who would trade liberty for temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security."

"The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."

Tench Coxe, February 20, 1788

While gun control would be beyond the effective range of New Milford, the spirit of the 2nd Amendment would involve the establishment of a private New Milford militia that would include safety training with respect to firearms (both safety and safe keeping). Given our recent track record with natural disasters and the increasing frequency of those events, a private back up reserve force might not be a terrible idea even for practical considerations.

An inititative like that would be the spirit and intent of the 2nd Amendment.

Why do most Democrats lose focus of the important issues. The issues they were elected to handle. Locally, this means defeating Hekemian and then finding a way to purchase the United water property and develop a sports complex without overburdening tax payers. Federally, it means concentrating on bettering the economy, making sure the wealthy pay their fair share and reforming immigration. Getting side tracked with gun control proposals kills democrats chances of making any true strides on the agenda they were elected for and makes voters change sides, because the basirc right of self preservation and the defense of self, family and property are inate. Ant threat to those rights causes extreme reactions.

I think Joe is recruiting...lol

Amen to Joe and Jose. Enough of this Hedy's grandstanding ill-efforts. I am NOT impressed. Kicking myself that I voted Democratic this past election. Can this woman please get out of bed with the Editor already?

Currently New Jersey has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country. To purchase any firearm, including BBguns, you must first get a firearms ID card. To get the ID card you are finger printed and a background check is performed. Everytime you purchase a firearm you must present your FID and another background check is performed at the point of sale. If you want to purchase a handgun you also need a seperate pistol permit which requires, you guessed it, a background check and another check at the point of purchase. NJ also limits magazine capacity to 15 rounds and bans an extensive list of "assault" weapons. What would be the point of more restrictions on the municipal level? Since handguns were banned in Chicago crime has gone up. The United Kingdom has an all out ban on firearms and has the highest viloent crime rate in Europe. Per capita, the UK has more violent crime including gun crimes than the USA. The non gun homicide rate in the US is greater than the gun homicide rate ( most gun homicide statistics include police shootings and justified homicides and don't represent only the acts of criminals.)

To Liberals, the Constitution is just some "old document". This is taught in our schools. Nobody follows it (not even our President). They just make laws up as they go along with no regard to the Constitution. People are so willing to give up their rights under the guise of the government "protecting us". Keep the prisoners in jail and stop infringing on our Constitutional Rights.

Look at the facts. Sandy hook, amongst other incidents, was truly tragic. However, the woman in sandy hook supposedly was an advocate. Her son was, according to some reports, going to be committed by his mother. How did he have such access if he was considered unstable? Free access to these weapons was the problem. The moron in NY who was released from jail starts a fire and shoots at the firemen. His neighbor bought the weapons for him. Every incidents may very well have been prevented with proper precaution.
People must have the right to protect themselves from the idiots in the world. Gun control is the issue: control the weapons, secure the weapons from the ones who are not entitled to possess!

And the criminals still buy them illegally on the streets.

Thanks for the inspirational quotes... here's another one, can you tell me who said it?:
"The government is afraid of the guns people have because they have to have control of the people at all times. Once you take away the guns, you can do anything to the people. You give them an inch and they take a mile. I believe we are slowly turning into a socialist government. The government is continually growing bigger and more powerful and the people need to prepare to defend themselves against government control."

You're right. Because of Timothy McVeigh, all of the founders and all of the bill of rights are the empty ramblings of insane people. We should just trash the entire Constitution by your logic. Ideas are as dangerous as guns. Timothy mcVeigh proved that as well.

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

Samuel Adams

And by the way, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with violent revolution against our government, as the insane McVeigh suggested. All of the Bill of Rights serves the same purpose, to ensure the legitimacy of our government by guaranteeing our individual liberty. One of Washington's first acts was to squash the Whiskey Rebellion. By preserving legitimate self-government, we ensure that the people have recourse through legitimate peaceful political process. By extension, any revolution would be illegitimate and seditious.

But the founders did draw reference for the bill of rights from the inalienable natural law rights endowed to us by our creator. If we dilute our rights through excess regulation, at some point we will dilute away any sense of legitimate government. See my post above. Under King George, there was a bill of rights of sorts in England that included a right to bear arms, but it became increasingly restricted under the auspice of protecting wild animals and those regulations made it impossible to bear arms. Our Rule of Law needs both form and substance.

At the moment, our privacy can be violated, we can be arrested and indefinitely detained without due process and we can be assassinated... And now we should be disarmed? The founders thought a standing army was the greatest threat to liberty. We have the largest standing army the world has ever seen, larger than the rest of the world combined in terms of effectiveness.

James Madison: "No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."

@sandcastle. Can you please explain how we are safer by not having guns that are painted black and by not having hollow point bullets?

By the way, hollow point bullets along with high capacity magazines are already illegal in this state.

I'll help you with the answer. It hurts just as bad to get shot by bullet out of a lever action rifle which can be cycled almost as fast as a semi-auto. It doesn't matter what damn color the gun is painted. Just because a weapon is "military pattern" does not make it an assault rifle, the defining feature being selective firing which has been illegal nationwide since 1934.

For the record, I am all for reasonable background checking including mental health record checks. The good news is that we live in NJ where background and mental health record checks are already required.

Banning certain firearms because they look scary is just stupid though. And 95% of gun violence is committed with handguns. More people are killed with hammers each year than with rifles.

And by the way, Adam Lanza's mother was not a responsible gun owner.

P.S. we are also required to provide an ID and firearms purchaser card when purchasing handgun ammo. So there really isn't much more the state of NJ can do to please you.

@sandcastle. Making war on my government would be treason. I do what my god given rights and our Rule of Law permit me to do. I vote libertarian and try to convince people like you that you are selling us out on fear and knee jerk reactions.

The idea of legitimate self-government isn't about making this the country you want to live in. It's about ensuring that this is the country that your grandchildren and great grandchildren want to live in.

People like you and our politicians will sacrifice anything to preserve "today." Pass laws like the Patriot Act and the NDAA, ban firearms, run massive deficits, fight undeclared wars, drop bombs all over the world with predator drones with no congressional approval, buy votes with handouts, bail out corrupt multi-national corporations with tax payer money, destroy the value of the dollar... These are all symptoms of the same disease. Politicians who want to sell you quick fixes and security blankets.

Gun violence has fallen steadily since 1991. The sheep get fixated on some tragic but unusual event and politicians pander. I'm sorry, but that is not a basis upon which to legislate. And it's offensive to every minority child that is killed with an illegal handgun everyday in the ghetto for which our leaders don't seem to care at all for. And it's offensive for every child killed as collateral damage in a drone strike in a country that my representatives did not declare war on.

We are all safer any time we limit the general circulation of deadly weapons and ammunition. Look, I'm sure you're a law-abiding citizen, and hopefully a responsible gun owner, and it's a shame that criminals and crazies have ruined it for good folks like you by abusing this freedom. But they have, and in order to reduce their access to these extremely deadly devices, you are being asked to give up just the very most dangerous of your toys. OK? Won't it be worth it if just one innocent child doesn't have to die at the hands of a maniac with a machine-gun? You could feel good about that, couldn't you?

Nope.

Sad.

Sorry, your kind of rhetoric is what is dangerous in the hands of politicians. There are no quick fixes like you described. And gun control passed in the wake of one tragedy just creates future victims.

... And there are no machine guns, they are all illegal. An AR15 is no more or less dangerous than any other firearm. It's not special in any respect. Its just painted black. All of my guns are equally dangerous and thats the lesson i teach my children. And that's the lesson I learned.

In my mind, there is no firearm more deadly than a shotgun full of 00 buckshot.

http://youtu.be/Psgcbqb4vU8

This is wht your taxes are what they are. 2nd Amemdment is a federal issue for Federal Govt. States have their own restrictions. New Milford has no say. To waste taxpayer money on symbolism is egregious. An elected official must ask themself what is the benefit for the people in New Milford? This is radcal left get your name in the paper and gain favor with the other extremists. Please stop wasting my hard earned money for your own political gain.

watch out mayor there are alot of gun owners in new milford we will vote you and all others out. like all say it is not the gun it is the person and only a fool will think than banning one of thousands of types of gun will stop anything. try fixing our town and get back to new milfords problems.

I am still waiting for someone to tell me how writing this resolution is not just a waste of taxpayer money. This is nothing more than a ponzi scheme to reward democrat appointed professionals throughout bergen county, and New Jersey with work. In turn, they donate money to campaigns. Hedy gains favor with the county, the county gains favor with the state, and the state gains favor with Obama. New Milford taxpayers foot a bill that does absolutely zero for them. Someone please ask Councilwoman Grant what is in it for New Milford taxpayers.