.
Feedback

Connecticut Conference of Municipalities Proposes Gun Legislation

The group that represents towns at the state capitol has several recommendations on gun control that it issued today.

 

As schools, the state and federal government grapple with the issue of gun control following the shootings in Newtown, the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities today issued a list of legislative initiatives that it would like to see, including a ban on assault weapons.

“The CCM membership recognizes that the reduction of gun violence in our country requires a federal-state-local partnership that addresses firearm regulation, mental health, and school security issues.  CCM supports the enactment of a new, comprehensive, federal ban on assault weapons.  In addition, CCM supports the following state legislative initiatives to reduce gun violence that, at the same time, respect the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United State Constitution.”

1. Expand the state definition of an assault weapon to conform to current California law (attachment 1), which includes limiting the magazine capacity of rifles and handguns to no more than 10 bullets. (Current state law lists approximately 57 specific firearms as an assault weapon.  Additionally, any semi-automatic firearm not listed but meets particular criteria (attachment 2) is also considered an assault weapon.  Current state law does not restrict magazine capacity.)

2. Require a rifle permit for the purchase of any long gun, unless the owner is already in possession of an up-to-date handgun permit.  A hunting license will no longer allow the background check and waiting period to be waived. (Current state law only requires a permit for handguns.  To purchase a long gun, only a 14-day waiting period is required for a background check.  If an individual has a pistol permit or hunting license, the background check and waiting period are waived.)

3. Allow municipal CEOs to designate a Chief of Police, Resident State Trooper, or the Connecticut Board of Firearms Permit Examiners as the issuing authority for firearm permits. (Current state law specifically lists the chief of police, or, where there is no chief of police, the warden of the borough or the first selectman of the town as the issuing authority for pistol permits.)

4. Allow municipal CEOs that deny permit applications, but such applications are subsequently overturned by the Connecticut Board of Firearms Permit Examiners, the ability to appeal said decisions before the Superior Court.  Permit applicants are already afforded such appeal rights. (Current state law does not allow local officials to appeal a Connecticut Board of Firearms Permit Examiners decision.)

5. Consider expanding the list of offenses that would prohibit an individual from obtaining a firearm permit. (CGS §29-28 (attachment 3) specifically lists the requirements and offenses that prohibit an individual from obtaining a firearm permit.)

6. Improve the enforcement of existing state law:

  • a. Require registration of all firearms (exempt antique firearms as defined in statute) and allow individuals a one-year, no-fee, grace period to complete such registration; 
  • b. Require the State to utilize existing firearm registration data by providing electronic access to a registered firearms database.  Such database would be available to law enforcement only;
  • c. Increase the capacity of the Connecticut State Forensics Laboratory to provide timely processing of firearm and ballistic data to local officials. (It can now take 6-8 months to get this information); and
  • d. Create a statewide Gun Offender Registry that would require individuals convicted of gun crimes to register with the State every six months (or when they change address) for a duration of five years.  Registering will be required at the time of conviction, or after their jail sentence has been served.  Registry would be available to law enforcement only. (Current state law requires all firearm sales to be recorded and a copy be sent to DESPP and local law enforcement.  Connecticut does not maintain a Gun Offender Registry.)

7. No firearm permit shall be issued if:

  • a. An individual has a serious mental disorder or illness that has been diagnosed, or determined in a court proceeding;
  • b. A mental health facility or licensed psychotherapists has reported, as they would now be required, to local law enforcement, DESPP and DMHAS any individual that has been determined to be a danger to themselves or others, or communicates a serious threat of physical violence against others; and
  • c. They have ever been confined in a psychiatric hospital by the probate court or found not guilty of a crime by reason of a mental disease, unless a licensed mental health official affirms that they are now mentally fit. (Current state law requires DMHAS to report data on an individual that has been confined to a psychiatric hospital by the Probate Court within the 12 months preceding the request for a permit, or an individual discharged from custody in the proceeding 20 years after a finding of not guilty of a crime by reason of a mental illness.)

8. Require an updated background check to be completed on all firearm permit renewals.  (Current state law does not require an updated background check to be completed.)

9. Require a firearm permit for the purchase of ammunition. (Current state law does not regulate who may purchase ammunition.)

10. Regulate online purchase and delivery of ammunition by banning the use of rights-of-way for the transportation of ammunition. (Current state law does not regulate online sale or home delivery of ammunition.)

11. Prohibit individuals from purchasing more than one weapon within a 30-day period.  Thus eliminating bulk purchases of firearms, as recommended by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. (Current state law does not limit the amount of firearms an individual may purchase.)

12. Require gun/trigger locks to be provided with each firearm purchased. (Current state law does not require gun/trigger locks to be provided with each firearm purchase.)

13. Outlaw the possession and purchasing of body armor (exempt law enforcement and active military), defined in Connecticut law as being any material designed to be worn on the body and to provide bullet penetration resistance. (Current state law restricts the sale and possession of body armor for anyone convicted of specific felonies or serious juvenile offenses.)

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from East Hampton-Portland Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
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
Bob May 22, 2013 at 02:41 pm
1st of all - LOWER income community's " certainly Is not referring to places such as PortlandRead More or East Hampton so I'm confused why the writer implies it does since clearly it doesn't ! the other comment the writer chooses to include is "society lets kids down" referring to not allocating enough $$$ for supplies or education ..... THIS is JUST CRAZY !!!! on a Larger Level the USA throws more $$ at education thinking it will make a difference when it will not - and the results show it... 2ndly - has anyone that agrees with this Assertion actually ever looked at the Budgets these school systems receive ? it's clear that the majority if our tax $ goes to educators and the system - and it's mainly comes down to a few simple things when we talk about why teachers are taking cash outta their own pockets to buy supplies. it has NOTHING to do with not having the $$ it comes down to - the educators and Dept Leads NOT planning correctly. if they had planned correctly and put it in their HUGE inflated budgets they wouldn't have to go buy things .... Also it cones down to the administrators not working with the boards to put a system in place that if for some reason - something is needed - they have an Avenue To obtain it or get reimbursed for it Easily. So we really need To put a stop to continuing to put a slant on these types of stories - and just start stating the facts. the last thing I find VERY strange is that Nowhere the PTA is mentioned and What a great resource they are !!! The majority of the time these groups have plenty of $$$ ON HAND that they actually need to "" THINK of "" year after year what to do with it all...... they are great groups that really add to the overall assistance to the depts within the schools. last year alone for an example is that our PTO purchased over 1200 dollars in tee shirts for the 1st graders to wear at an Assembly as well as Utilizing their funds to purchase a $800 Color laser printer. So let's all take a step back and Realize Yes maybe our teachers are out there purchasing supplies however It is not due to a lack of funds with in the school systems budgets