"Disabled" "Group" suing Connecticut over new gun law defends AR-15's more than the disabled
It's a brand new "group" apparently of one.
It doesn't appear to be connected to any major or historic group that has advocated for the rights of the disabled.
What is the term when you use someone else to advocate for your own interests?
By Mary E. O'Leary, The New Haven Register
Updated: 04/11/2013 04:29:57 PM PDT
NEW LONDON Lawsuits have been threatened against the state's new sweeping gun legislation, and the first to be filed is by the Disabled Americans for Firearms Rights, a relatively new organization.
The suit represents Scott Ennis of New London, the group's founder, who suffers from Hemophilia A, which has caused him severe joint damage. The legal move was first reported by the Hartford Courant.
...
Ennis, in his suit, says he wants to continue to have access to an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle that is on the list of banned assault weapons adopted by lawmakers in a bipartisan deal last week.
"The AR-15, due to its ease of handling, low recoil, adjustable features and customizability, is particularly suited for disabled persons in order to engage in lawful use of firearms, including hunting, recreational and competitive shooting and personal self-defense,' the suit says.
...
The suit further challenges the law for limiting magazines to 10 rounds, which it says "unfairly and arbitrarily deprives law-abiding disabled citizens, including the plaintiffs and members of DSFR, of their fundamental right to bear arms.'
Under the new rules, Ennis, as owner of one of the banned weapons, would have to register it, as well as any high-capacity magazines, but he can keep the gun and the magazines he now has and continue to use them for home defense and target-shooting. He cannot buy any replacements of the banned weapon or magazines, however.
...
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_23007085/first-lawsuit-filed-against-new-connecticut-gun-laws
rdharma
(6,057 posts)jimmy the one
(2,717 posts)Ennis, in his suit, says he wants to continue to have access to an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle that is on the list of banned assault weapons...
He wants to retain access to his ar15, which if he accidentally nicks himself with a shot bullet, or changing a clip, or otherwise cuts himself with it, being a hemophiliac he might bleed to death within minutes? Wheeeeeeeeeee.
Better watch out Scott, ar15s have also been known to cause 'severe joint damage', far worse than you'll ever experience without one.
(unless hemophilia A is different than blood clotting, dunno).
This makes an entry into my 'Gunnuts Say the Craziest Things'.
"The AR-15, due to its ease of handling, low recoil, adjustable features and customizability, is particularly suited for disabled persons in order to engage in lawful use of firearms, including hunting, recreational and competitive shooting and personal self-defense,'
If you can go hunting scott, with hemophilia, you either like to live dangerously or you must not be that disabled.
You should impose your likes & dislikes on society in general? as if there's no other less lethal gun in the world which would support your point of view?
SunSeeker
(53,607 posts)It does not take away the AR-15 he already owns. Therefore, he lacks legal standing to bring that lawsuit. The lawsuit should be dismissed.
Robb
(39,665 posts)It's pretty funny, actually.
SunSeeker
(53,607 posts)Makes me think of that idiot Chris Kyle who got himself and his neighbor killed taking a vet with PTSD to a shooting range. http://abcnews.go.com/US/navy-seal-chris-kyle-killed-shooting-range-suspect/story?id=18389238
Robb
(39,665 posts)Disabled Americans for Firearms Rights was incorporated April 10th. Today's Friday, they started Wednesday.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)if it weren't for this, some DUers would never have uttered the word "disabled" despite years of membership here.