By Kim J. Harmon
While the quest for a second straight South-West Conference championship remained alive and viable for the Newtown High School girlsâ€	...
Contemporary Fine Arts Gallery Has Spring Opening Planned
SOUTHBURY — Award-winning sculptor James Travers of Newtown announces the reception for th...
Scholarships Available For Working Journalists
COLUMBUS, OHIO — The Religion Newswriters Association invites applicants to its Lilly Scholarships i...
Help For Victims And Survivors
LITCHFIELD — A support group for adult victims and survivors of alcohol-related crashes is held monthly on the first ...
Post-Prom Party Was
A Great Success
To the Editor:
On behalf of the entire Post-Prom Committee and its many volunteers, thank you to the entire community â...
Garden Walk: Roses
BETHLEHEM — The Bellamy-Ferriday House & Garden will offer a lecture, “Garden Walk: Roses,” on Sunday, Ju...
Through Good Times
And Bad
To the Editor:
We moved here over 15 years ago and started our family. The mantra at the time was “It’s Nice...
Poll Seeks Public Views On Police Performance
By Andrew Gorosko
The police department is conducting an opinion poll to gauge public sentiment on the organizatio...
Celebrate Connecticut During A Statewide Open House
By Shannon Hicks
More than 175 cultural organizations and tourism attractions throughout the state will open...
Restoring Self-Image For Female
Cancer Patients
DANBURY — The Praxair Cancer Center at Danbury Hospital and the American Cancer Society (ACS) will ...
I fail to see the Newtown connection in this nonconstructive partisan letter which apparently seeks to scare local seniors. Mr. Epstein's letter does nothing to further the conversation around a legitimate policy issue in the future of Social Security which according to SSA.gov "if trust fund assets are exhausted without reform, benefits will necessarily be lowered," citing lower birth rates. This is an area where we need an open and objective, multi generational, national dialogue, not fear based political propaganda.
I agree, thank you Richard. The example given by Ms. Murray illustrates that this is a state issue, not a town issue. If the same case occurred in Connecticut the plaintiff would have sued the state of Connecticut, not the town of Newtown.
What fun to have stumbled across this write up. As a friend of one of the daughters I was fortunate to have visited with them many times in the early 80s in various locations. A wonderful, adventuresome family!
The state constitution permits the lawful carry of firearms after proof of training and background checks. Local ordinances do not preempt state statutes and passing an ordinance for a problem that is non-existent as per the Newtown Police Department will undoubtedly result in the town incurring legal fees unnecessarily. Please see attached link for numerous legal precedents where municipalities failed when their respective ordinances were passed. https://ballotpedia.org/Firearms_preemption_conflicts_between_state_and_local_governments
Law abiding citizens do not violate laws and infringement on the Second Amendment is not going to make any community safer. Enforcing existing laws is what should be the focus regarding gun violence along with addressing the mental health crisis.
Richard Fisher, DDS
Newtown, Connecticut
