BOSTON — An array of gun bills drew a crowd of citizen activists to the State House on Tuesday, with a pair of bills aimed at ending the citizen ban on firearm suppressors and temporarily taking guns out of the possession of at-risk persons drawing the most passionate testimony.
The day started with state Representative David Linsky (D-Natick) making remarks at the building's Nurses Hall to kick off what was described as a gun violence protection lobby day. Linsky's legislation, an "act establishing extreme risk protective orders," would allow a family member, living partner, police officer, district attorney, or health professional to petition judges to temporarily take away legally-owned guns and ammo from another individual.
There has been a lot of talk in the media lately about little Charlie Gard, and how the courts and bureaucracy of the United Kingdom have prevented his parents from spending their own money to try to treat him in another hospital.
Many are asking, how did we get here? How did many of our brightest minds in law and government arrive at a conclusion that so callously disregards parental rights, parental love, and his parents' right to fight for his life? How did we get to a place where the state has a higher authority than the boy's parents? How are the rights of parents to choose a course of treatment completely disregarded? Why does the government think this is O.K.? Where does that authority come from?
