The talk of this town is gun control, gun safety and gun rights.
Father of Newtown victim heckled at hearingDanbury News-Times:
The sometimes boisterous public hearing -- after nearly four hours of testimony from State Police, parents of slain Newtown first-graders and city mayors -- seemed dominated by gun owners, who railed at more than 90 proposed bills.
"The Second Amendment!" was shouted a couple of times by as many as a dozen gun enthusiasts in the meeting room as Neil Heslin, holding a photo of his slain 6-year-old son, Jesse Lewis, asked why Bushmaster assault-style weapons are allowed to be sold in the state.
"There are a lot of things that should be changed to prevent what happened," said Heslin, who said he grew up using guns and was undisturbed by the interruption of his testimony.
"That wasn't just a killing, it was a massacre," said Heslin, who recalled dropping off his son at Sandy Hook Elementary school shortly before Lanza opened fire. "I just hope some good can come out of this."
Seeking to disarm the next Adam Lanza before it's too late, a key Republican lawmaker and upholder of the Second Amendment wants the state of Connecticut to require gun owners to lock up their weapons if they live with someone who is mentally unstable.Complex issues, with advocates on every side weighing in. We need to act carefully, but we need to act.
State Sen. L. Scott Frantz, R-36, a gun owner himself who represents all of Greenwich and parts of Stamford and New Canaan, recently introduced a bill that would tighten the law applying to safekeeping of firearms...
Advocates for the mentally ill such as Mattias urged lawmakers to do their homework before racing to enact legislation.
"We certainly support efforts to reduce gun violence," Mattias said. "I would think a gun owner who has a license for a gun should lock it up no matter who they're living with, as there is no evidence that people with mental illnesses are more likely to be violent than someone else. The latest research suggests that they're 11 times more likely to be victims of crime."
A Hispanic Republican, Senator Marco Rubio, complained that Obama's speech neglected border security and left the impression that "he believes reforming immigration quickly is more important than reforming immigration right."Rubio is going to be tossed to the wolves by his nativist party. Just you wait and see.
"I am concerned by the president's unwillingness to accept significant enforcement triggers before current undocumented immigrants can apply for a green card," he said. "Without such triggers in place, enforcement systems will never be implemented and we will be back in just a few years dealing with millions of new undocumented people in our country."
Republicans will likely oppose any immigration plan that doesn't put border security first.
More Republican infighting stories, even more punditry below the fold...
The fight on the right over immigrationDavid Lightman:
Republicans are split into two camps. There are those such as Rubio who will consider a path to citizenship along with tighter border security. They’re willing to talk to Democrats over how to deal with illegal immigrants and have strong business community support as well as a willingness by key senators to listen.LA Times:
Then there’s the hard line, championed by Limbaugh and others, who insist on tougher border enforcement and suggest “paths to citizenship” are a euphemism for amnesty.
“The word compromise is thrown around, we have to compromise, seek common ground. Where is the common ground (with President Barack Obama)? I don’t see it,” Limbaugh told his large radio audience Tuesday.
Obama and immigration: 'right tone' or 'same old story'?The press is having a cow over the concept of Obama getting stuff done in his second term when everyone knows he wasn't nice enough to Republicans in his inaugural (he's doooomed, I tell ya).
So while some people are asking what Te’o knew and when he knew it, some of us simply marvel that we have come into a time when such a story is even possible. Apparently, however, what supposedly happened to Te’o is common enough that it even has a name: catfishing.
It is relatively immaterial whether he lied or not. What is of greater interest is that the story illustrates a sea change in what now constitutes interpersonal relationships. And the new norm cannot help but seem a little odd to those of us who remember when a relationship — or at least an intimate one — presupposed that you and the other person had actually met.
Of course, that was the olden days. Now so much of our world is digital — movies, music, shopping, books — it’s easy to believe everything just works better that way.
But guess what? Not everything does.