.
Feedback

CT's Approach to Gun Legislation

Exhibit A on what not to do? New York. Here's why Patch Back's Lisa Bigelow thinks Connecticut has a good shot at getting high quality legislation.

New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo inspired surprise, envy and more than a few feelings of dismay among activists nationwide when he promptly signed strict new gun control legislation into law in the immediate wake of the Newtown tragedy on Dec. 14.

And although many gun control advocates here in the Nutmeg State have expressed interest in certain aspects of its law, such as the seven-round limit, the legislation itself has inspired protests and lawsuits from rights groups furious at its dead-of-night passing.

One might have expected Connecticut to act just as swiftly. Thankfully, we did not. Instead, our state government appears to be taking a measured, rational approach -- the right move, I believe.

There are, of course, caveats.

The legislature’s Bipartisan Panel, founded at the beginning of the current term, plans to put forth its recommended legislation in February. But Governor Malloy’s own Sandy Hook Commission, comprised of independent non-elected experts, won’t make its own recommendations until March.

Will the panel’s draft legislation and the Commission’s recommendations be at cross purposes? One hopes not, but only time will tell. 

My biggest suspicion -- that the new legislation won’t do anything to address the bigger problem of handgun violence, which many experts (and readers of this column) acknowledge as a far bigger threat to public safety than scarier-looking semi-automatic long guns -- is the second caveat.

Generally speaking, I am not the governor’s biggest supporter. With the Sandy Hook Commission, however, I think he had the right idea. Independent, varied, non-elected, non-partisan experts? Check. Enough time for legislators to review testimony and still pass sensible legislation by summer? Check. Appropriate distance between early February’s budget announcement, previously slated as the year’s "big issue," and the Commission’s recommendations, due in mid-March? Check, check.

Nevertheless, the powers that be in Hartford decided to do a hurry-up offense in the wake of New York’s headline splash from the ambitious Governor Cuomo, who stated he is “proud” to have passed the first new gun laws following Newtown.

Never mind that New York’s legislation was passed without opportunity for public comment, an egregious wrong. As a 19-year resident of upstate New York -- and I mean real upstate New York, like Capital District, graduated-from-Plattsburgh, snows-in-May upstate New York -- believe me when I tell you there are tons and tons of gun-loving conservatives and common-sense moderates north and west of the Taconic Parkway who would have appreciated the opportunity to share their views.

Never mind that New York forgot to exempt police officers from the magazine limit (oops!). Never mind the bill revokes public access to gun permit records and forces mental health professionals to report individuals who, in their opinions, represent a threat to themselves or society, a serious breach of commonly accepted doctor-patient confidentiality practices. And never mind that the legislation was basically passed in the middle of the night (remember Connecticut’s budget bill from 18 months ago?), confirming gun owners’ worst paranoid fears of unlawful persecution.

But I digress.

Although I have concerns about the role of the Bipartisan Panel versus the Commission and whether or not the Panel will rush to write legislation before the Sandy Hook Commission makes its recommendations public, all in all I must confess to feeling satisfied that our legislators are taking a balanced, thoughtful approach to this front-page, bold-type issue.

My friend in Hartford, State Rep. Gail Lavielle (R-143), observed wisely that the Bipartisan Panel afforded Connecticut residents the opportunity to exercise their collective right to speak directly to legislators about Newtown in a highly personal way. (She also noted, as she always does when we speak, that government isn’t just government. It’s OUR government. And we should feel free to express ourselves personally on any issue, not just gun control!)

I asked Rep. Lavielle about the buzz in Hartford following the meetings. I assumed what happened in New York would be happening right here in Connecticut. I wondered, is certain legislation, such as a magazine limit, a foregone conclusion?

To my surprise and delight, she said no.

“People are really working hard to separate their own personal opinions from the process,” she said. In other words, our elected representatives are still fact-finding (yay!). They have not (yet, anyway) jumped to any rash conclusions (yes!). They are carefully balancing their constituents’ opinions with expert testimony (perfect!).

What a relief it is to know that with all the hype and hysteria surrounding the hearings that those who will ultimately vote on any new law are taking the time to learn the proper technology and terminology as well as the surrounding legal, health and economic issues.

Of course, the monkeys in the wrench are the timing of the draft legislation versus the Commission recommendations, as well as the budget announcement, due this week from Governor Malloy. Whether or not enforcing the as-yet-unnamed legislation will require ample funding or will ultimately become an unfunded mandate remains to be seen. It’s going to be messy, to be sure.

On the plus side, at least we’re not New York.

Robert Chambers February 6, 2013 at 12:11 pm
It remains to be seen. Depends on what your idea of "High Quality" is. The legislators should ask themselves "Will this law prevent another Sandy Hook?" and if the answer to that question is NO then what have they done?
I hate to agree with Mayor DeStefano but he did bring up a valid point in the hearings that the majority of crimes committed with firearms in his city are done by non-permit holders in the low income areas. Infested with gang and drug activity young men, thugs, are going around shooting each other and others in the crossfire. If the committee could do something about the CRIMINALS doing the majority of the crimes they would have a REAL opportunity to effect positive change in the neighborhoods most plagued by shootings. Probably too much to hope for, they seem hell bent (Looney anyway) on going after all the things he's been going after for years but never had the right crisis as a catalyst.
CuriousOrange February 6, 2013 at 01:00 pm
Denying gun-access to criminals and crazies should solve this crisis. Why is there so much resistance to regulating the ownership and sale of guns? The NRA seems to prefer shootouts to reason.
Lisa Bigelow February 6, 2013 at 01:55 pm
Thanks for reading and writing in.
I do agree that a vocal population of gun owners are making themselves seem hysterical. They're so loud, in fact, that it's difficult to know whether or not they represent all gun owners or just some. My colleague Heather Borden Herve wrote about that topic this week and the results so far have been predictable. On this issue I really consider myself a neutral bystander. To me, the control advocates appear frustrated and sad over the continued waste of life and they are willing to do whatever it takes to eliminate this form of violence. The vocal rights advocates appear paranoid at best and hysterical at worst, but I do think, in the end, they want to see the violence stopped as much as the control advocates do. And I share their concerns that new technology-based laws won't prevent further loss of life... but they do need to put forward an actionable plan to show they're taking concerns seriously. Though they complain that control advocates are hysterical, it's they themselves who appear that way. It's a mess, to be sure. Lisa B.
CuriousOrange February 6, 2013 at 03:47 pm
"I do agree that a vocal population of gun owners are making themselves seem hysterical"
Maybe the solution is 'hysterectomies' (Kidding -- 'manhood' seems more the issue.)
Ron Moreau February 6, 2013 at 06:23 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NZtdFtsXBCY

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Stratford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Ashley Riera June 17, 2013 at 03:02 pm
To clarify, for those who are wondering why we can't just take the two cats up with us, we alreadyRead More have four cats, and a dog. We could only take two of the four cats with us, plus the dog (who is 14yrs. old.) The limit for the rental is three pets... this was a hard decision for us all. We would have taken them all if we could.
Bunny The Dog
Alyson Cahill June 13, 2013 at 07:01 am
Edit: Bunny was stolen WITH the truck. Suspect is Caucasian male in his 50s. Truck is red Dodge RamRead More with dent in rear passenger side cab. Please help! Call 203-257-3001 or 203-645-1282 with any information. No questions asked.
bpiretti June 13, 2013 at 12:15 pm
Found!! https://www.facebook.com/BringBunnyHome
Shirley B. Backus June 13, 2013 at 11:05 pm
Another example of why to never leave your pet unattended in your vehicle!
A photo of Sam (Credit: Contributed Photo)
Amy Taylor June 13, 2013 at 12:25 am
Thank you so much! You have no idea how grateful we are! You are very special people!!
Kathie June 13, 2013 at 03:58 am
Now that Sam has been found, the reason he ran off was due to the sound of gunfire at RooseveltRead More Forest in the early afternoon as his master was getting ready to take him out of his car. All had been quiet, the park was open, so the loud bangs were a surprise - both to Sam and his "Dad". To the best of my knowledge, when the shooting range is used by the Stratford PD, the park is closed to the public. It was that way always and I believe still is. But now, with non-Stratford police personnel using the range, obviously the Park is NOT closed as was observed/heard yesterday at 2 separate time periods of the day. The range is used by at least one other police department. Of course, there could be unauthorized people using the range too. I just don't know. But what I do know that yesterday (Wed), there was shooting early afternoon, and then again around 6PM. I observed at around 5:00PM, a little boy running up the dirt road that leads to the shooting range. The park remained opened all day! The shooting was NOT being done by the Stratford Police. People do not always stick to the trails, and as we all know, children can be quite curious. Who is to say a child and/or adult gets near the berm or behind it and someone shoots over the berm? What goes up, has to come down. I also was told that neighbors say there is shooting going on quite frequently, even on Sundays. I doubt that this is from Stratford PD, because outdoor shooting usually occurs for a week or so, twice a year. Tighter controls must be done! Surely, the parking area can be checked for vehicles... but I observed yesterday people entering the parking area (adjacent to the driveway leading up to the range) on foot, on bicycles, and motorcycles. So people could be in the park even when no vehicles are observed in the lot. Safety is key here! Procedures need to be put in place and perhaps limitations on when other police department(s) can use the range. It is not fair to the surrounding residents to have to hear the bang bang bang on Saturdays and Sundays. It scares some of them, and I know that one person who lives nearby says her dog gets scared right inside their house! What will it take? A child or an adult wandering near the range, thinking it is OK because the Forest is open... and then, all of a sudden, there is shooting and one gets shot, especially a child? This may sound extreme, but children can move quick and suddenly. I think of that little boy running up toward the range. He could have very well traveled through the woods. I can picture bullets being shot over the berm, not on purpose, but it can happen. Or shots go to the left or to the right; and people could be in the same general area - out of sight of the shooters. Bottom Line: The "public" can not be in the park while the range is "live", or in other words, when there is shooting taking place. As how to ensure that the public is not in the park, is not for me to determine. But the Town has to step up to the plate and address this very important issue.
bpiretti June 13, 2013 at 11:17 am
So happy to hear that your dog has been found! :)
ShirleyJ June 11, 2013 at 09:00 pm
Great shot! We were looking for the rainbow!!!
samgranata June 12, 2013 at 08:12 am
Great shot! One of my favorite places to take pictures of weather
Jaimie Cura (Editor) June 12, 2013 at 02:03 pm
That's beautiful Carol! I'm surrounded by land so this is so great to see!
re26 June 14, 2013 at 04:19 am
Reagan's quote is from the 1988 GOP convention that 'facts are stupid things'...John Adams made theRead More original quote.
Steve Raguskus June 15, 2013 at 10:20 am
I hope people note how these comments go. Anonymous right-wingers try to change the discussion,Read More prove a point that no one is arguing, and then declare victory. Both "Goodie Bassett" and "Reagan Night" say Ms. Daponte is lying because Tony Smith won't be removed from office. I just re-read Beth's piece to see where she made this claim, but she never said anything of the sort. What she did say was "Both Tony and Linda serve until January 1, 2016." So, where's the "half-truth"? The point of the post is that the new land use District II, comprised of the 3rd & 4th council districts, has no representation on any of these boards. Tony Smith will be the District II Zoning Commissioner, even though he doesn't live in that district. The extreme right can't defend this, so they try to change the subject.
richard brown June 15, 2013 at 12:29 pm
Isn't it odd that the half truths are written by people that won't sigh their real name but theRead More Democrats sign theirs. Huh, guess they don't want to be held accountable for their inuendo's and false acusations.
Robert Chambers June 10, 2013 at 04:15 pm
If the worst thing against Mayor Harkins is the lack of allowance of golf carts on the streets ofRead More Lordship then he's doing pretty well.
Mike Reynolds June 10, 2013 at 10:25 pm
Robert Chambers...a voice of reason in Lordship.
Truckie June 11, 2013 at 09:54 am
What a wonderful town we live in that the only problem we have worthwhile to discuss is golf cartsRead More driving down the street! WHO CARES? I have kids riding their go carts and mini bikes around our neighborhood. They learn how to fix them and have some fun which doen't include stealing or damaging my property. Actually I enjoy helping them and occasionally lend them a tool or two. The parents make them be considerate by not allowing them to ride around early morning or late evenings. SO WHO CARES! I guess you will want to stop all the people at Oronoque condos from driving across the road up there too? Hey..on the road is on the road. Again, WHO CARES? Get informed and worry about a real problem facing us here in town!