When Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy told the 16-member Sandy Hook Commission, “I believe that responsible, law-abiding citizens of our state have a right to bear arms — but that right cannot come at the expense of public safety,” the U.S. Constitution took another hit.
Has the governor heard of the Second Amendment? Has he decided to become the arbiter of what’s constitutional and what is not? And what does it mean to essentially say I believe in the right to own a gun, “but that right cannot come at the expense of public safety?”
What if the government, or in this case Malloy, decided that eliminating all gun ownership was the only way to ensure public safety? Would that mean he no longer believes in the right to own a gun?
The liberals are proclaiming their goal is not to overturn the Second Amendment. In reality, their gun control measures will not prevent another Sandy Hook, but that hasn’t stopped the anti-gun crowd from using the saddest of tragedies to further their gun control agenda. And Malloy’s latest comments on the issue, when Democrats are not thinking he’s “walking on water”, are just the latest evidence.