With the holiday season behind us and 2013 officially here, the powers in Hartford are busy preparing for another jam-packed legislative agenda. Certainly, Connecticut is facing a wide variety of economic, fiscal and social challenges. And while national politics often capture the lion’s share of our collective attention, let’s not forget that what happens legislatively closer to home probably has a greater effect on our daily lives.
I recently had the opportunity to meet State Representative Gail Lavielle (R-143) over sushi and seaweed in Westport. I came away impressed with her calm demeanor, easy intelligence and rational thinking. One of my New Year’s resolutions—to write more about local politics—came to early fruition as she agreed to speak with me again about her plans for the upcoming legislative session.
Before Newtown, our interview and the 2013 inaugural "Patch Back" column was to have been about the Connecticut state budget. Indeed, there will be many future columns dedicated to how our tax dollars are being spent.
But for now, gun control legislation chatter is at a fever pitch—and rightfully so. Our citizens demand action. And our elected officials have an important opportunity to demonstrate bipartisan thinking with more than feels-good, accomplishes-nothing legislation.
Ms. Lavielle, for one, is paying close attention.
“I am listening at this point,” Ms. Lavielle told me after remarking that Connecticut’s current assault weapons ban is ambiguous. While acknowledging she is still learning about the finer points of weapons technology, she is firm in her belief that new any new legislation language must be clearly defined as well as enforceable.
“Grandfathering sounds wonderful,” she said. “But is it enforceable? Probably not.
“I am willing to participate in a very informed and level headed debate — we need this debate,” she continued. “It seems in current usage ‘semi-automatic’ can mean just about anything.
“We are elected to think about things clearly and bring clear heads,” she added, “and I intend to spend the next four to six weeks learning the facts and learning my constituents’ opinions.”
These comments, for this columnist, were so refreshing to hear. The Newtown disaster demands a thoughtful, rational, practical and actionable response from our state government. As Ms. Lavielle observes, we must listen first, gather data next and only then draw conclusions from these data. Finally, our legislators must act to produce a meaningful law that will ensure Newtown never, ever happens again.
Addressing the problem with enhanced weapons measures will only attack part of the problem, however. I am hopeful that Governor Malloy’s newly-formed Sandy Hook commission will also consider the practicality of implementing and enforcing mandatory mental health background checks prior to purchase as well as private gun sale regulation. The gun show loophole should be closed, too.
Although I am looking forward to the commission's legislative recommendations in addition to the public comment on the proposed legislation, I am not looking forward to political grandstanding, emotionally charged and mostly anonymous online debate, and absurd special interest lobbying.
Let common sense and calm reign in Hartford and in our populace. Let the Sandy Hook commission and our lawmakers craft clear, thorough and enforceable legislation that will do more than ban high-capacity ammunition magazines and increase security at our schools. Let them remember that the vast majority of Connecticut gun owners are law-abiding citizens who have the right to own weapons without fear of having their names published, as one legislator foolishly suggested.
Finally, let us remember the term “assault weapon” is redundant. All guns kill. In this writer’s opinion, it’s the access to the weapon that must be better controlled.
Do you want to participate in Connecticut’s gun control legislative process? Share your views with Representative Lavielle at (860) 240-8700 or Gail.Lavielle@HouseGOP.CT.gov.
***
They don't know much about spending reforms or constraints either and look at the results.
Charlie, I am not a gun expert by any stretch. But if what I understand is accurate, then can't a gun owner modify his weapon with an after-market accessory that makes it automatic? Just wondering. Lisa B.
The majority appear not to care about consequences of their laws or conversely they want to create thorough economic disaster in CT. But, how does the CT majority enact paralyzing and economically unsound legislation? The real issue...last minute changes to bills without respectful notice or without inclusion or discussion. Changes in voting laws that can only appear to corrupt the system and that come in the dark of the night. Did you know that there is such a thing on a Federal level as a 'Presidential Ballot' that in some precincts were allowed to be counted without gleaning whether the 'voter' were a citizen - just bring a utility bill or lease or some other document that says you 'live' here but doesn't prove one is a citizen. This is a good portion of the strategy of how the last election was won.
Well, what did it cost the state to prepare the judge, the state attorney's office, the police, the clerk,... for the new hearing? No one processed that cost apparently nor even asked the question. Do we think it cost the state much more for the judge, clerk, court costs, state attorney's office, investigator, and police to reappear or prepare than it would for the perpetrator to visit his or her probation office on a scheduled basis? What about the victim? The perpetrator had already had the process of defense, had not served out the completed negotiated probation, many times had not paid in full the damages to the victim and could string out those repayments or never pay. Rights of individuals seem to be a moving target in this state.
1. It is illegal to convert an existing semi-automatic to fully automatic. 2. There is no "gun show loophole" in CT. All firearms transactions--including those at gun shows and online--must be conducted by a licensed dealer, including background check and approval by the state police firearms unit. Handguns may not be purchased without a CT pistol permit. Long guns may be purchased without a permit but require a two week waiting period before the purchase can be made. It's trendy to say things like, 'It's easier to buy a gun than adopt a puppy" but that's far from the truth.
1. Yes, very true, and highly regulated. 2. I did not know that, having come from other states where such loopholes exist. Thanks for the update.
Ray T
Events like Newtown can't be blamed on any single factor other than mental illness. Its easy to project blame onto things like semi auto rifles and high cap magazines because they are tangible. You can pick up a 30 round magazine and throw it in the trash if you don't like it and that might give you some satisfaction, but it solves nothing. Mental illness and a violent society aren't easily understood or neutralized so it is in our nature to ignore them and focus on the easy things that we feel we can control. A lady on here yesterday said she would take a stand by asking anyone whose house she went to if they had an assault weapon. Does that make her or anyone safer? No, but it makes her feel better somehow. At the end of the day I don't think anyone truly believes that if Lanza only had 10 round magazines the outcome would be any different, but for some reason we choose to fixate on this rather than on the difficult reasons behind this and other attacks.
It is a creepy addiction to control that historically created most social ills and conflicts.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/09/vice-president-to-meet-with-gun-safety-groups/
1. He murdered his mother, a felony 2. He stole her firearms, a felony 3. He didn't possess a pistol permit, so walking out the front door was a felony 4. He transported the guns in an automobile without a permit, more felonies 5. He went onto school property with the guns, more felonies 6. He shot is way into the school, again, multiple felonies. 7. He shot 28 people plus himself, all felonies. So with all these crimes being committed by one person in one morning, what law would have stopped this? If it was an extra 10 years in prison for each crime, it wouldn't have mattered, he planned to kill himself anyway. And if 30 round magazines were banned, the same outcome would have occurred if he only had 10 round magazine, just would have carried more of them. The problem with limiting magazine capacity is how to know how many rounds of ammo I might need in a self defense situation. When seconds count, I need as much ammo to stop the attack as possible. AR15s are excellent self defense tools, thats why the police use them. Police react to crimes, we are the victims of crimes
http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/20500750/woman-shot-during-violent-home-invasion
She asks intelligent questions but there is no follow thru when it comes time to vote.