Social Networks We Use

Categories

CT Tech Junkie Feed

Connecticut Consumers to Begin Receiving E-Book Settlement Refunds
Mar 25, 2014 4:09 pm
Connecticut residents will start receiving refund checks or credits this week for e-books purchased between April 1,...more »
Like New Jersey, Direct Retail Sales of Tesla Automobiles Not Allowed in Connecticut
Mar 19, 2014 12:24 pm
The Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection is co-sponsoring a contest for the auto dealership...more »

Our Partners

˜

Leaders Remain Optimistic After First Meeting

by Christine Stuart | Mar 7, 2013 12:26am
(3) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Town News, Newtown, Public Safety, State Capitol

Christine Stuart photo

House Speaker Brendan Sharkey, House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero and Sen. President Donald Williams

The six legislative leaders responsible for fashioning a response to the Newtown shooting emerged Wednesday from their first meeting optimistic that they will have a bill that the General Assembly can vote on in the next week or two.

The private two-hour meeting was the first between the bipartisan leaders since the three subcommittees forwarded their recommendations on public policy changes in the areas of gun control, school safety, and mental health. Two more meetings are scheduled later this week, but if the gun control subcommittee’s divided report was any indication, both sides may still be far apart on expanding the assault weapons ban to include semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines.

Sen. President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, who did not vote in favor of the assault weapons ban in 1993 when he was a freshman lawmaker, has been vocal about his desire to see the definition of assault weapon expanded to include semi-automatic rifles.

Asked early Wednesday if he anticipated any legislation that didn’t include the two items in question, Williams said “those are critical building blocks. They’re the basics for what we need to do in response to the Newtown tragedy.”

Williams’ position was buoyed Wednesday when a Quinnipiac University poll found 68 percent of the 1,009 voters surveyed support an expansion of the assault weapons ban. However, the 27 percent of gun owners included in that poll opposed an expansion of the assault weapon ban 49 to 44 percent.

While standing with the other legislative leaders after the private meeting, Williams said he stood by his earlier remarks, but declined to say whether it was essential for the final draft of the bill to include those two items.

“We’re going to take it one day at a time and keep talking,” Williams said. “The message, as far as I’m concerned, is we’re seeing some areas of agreement and that’s a positive thing.”

House Speaker Brendan Sharkey said he’s optimistic they’ll be able to reach a conclusion at “an appropriate time.”

Fifty-four percent of voters surveyed by Quinnipiac University said they were not optimistic the legislature will be able to reach a bipartisan consensus on gun control and 33 percent felt Gov. Dannel P. Malloy was moving too quickly, while 17 percent said he’s not moving fast enough.

Quinnipiac Poll Director Doug Schwartz said Wednesday that he thinks Democrats have the “upper hand” and that the public is “clearly on the side for gun control measures.”

House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero said the meeting Wednesday was productive and he believes all the leaders are working toward the same goal, “which is a bipartisan comprehensive, effective agreement.”

Cafero is one of about two dozen lawmakers who were in the General Assembly 20 years ago when it passed the state’s first assault weapons ban. After a lengthy debate, Cafero eventually voted in favor of the ban after his party initially tried to end debate on the bill before it even began. Senate Minority Leader John McKinney was not in the legislature at the time, but he did vote in favor of a bill strengthening the assault weapons ban in 2001.

The Republican recommendations submitted to legislative leaders Tuesday include items such as increasing the age for owning a long gun from 18 to 21, universal background checks, and requiring eligibility certificates and completion of a firearms safety course for purchases of any long gun. The Republicans also recommended increasing the requirements for ammunition purchases and would prohibit anyone who doesn’t possess a firearm from purchasing ammunition or magazines.

The Democrats were able to find a lot of agreement with the Republicans on the above recommendations, but they were the only ones to call for expansion of the state’s assault weapons ban and a ban on high capacity magazines.

Democrats control a majority in the General Assembly.

Tags: , , , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

(3) Comments

posted by: Chien DeBerger | March 7, 2013  9:22am

If the republicans are smart, big IF; they will let the democrats institute all anti-second amendment legislation without one republican vote. But that was if they were smart.

posted by: sanecitizen | March 7, 2013  10:15am

The Dems are going to botch this.  If they were smart they would include grandfather clauses..this lets them pretend they did something effective but saps away the will of people to oppose.

Instead they force disposal and limit transfer. This will lead to immediate legal challenges and likely cost the state a ton of money.  Their ‘supporters’ will flee and they will take a beating in 2014.

Think anyone is thanking Cuomo now?  He’s taking a beating and everyone who cheered him in when passing the SAFE act threw him under a Fung Wah bus when all the legal challenges started.

posted by: ASTANVET | March 7, 2013  12:33pm

I love this poll chasing system of government we have in CT.  What happened to a representative government.  In CT, we seem to have a state of liberal bullies who want to force their will on the rest of us.  Why do you want to ban AR-15’s?  The facts do not support the ban, the statistics do not support the ban… why then?  Easy target?  I think they will take whatever they can - then come back and take more… They will not rest, they will not stop, this is not about stopping crime, this is about the anti-gun crowd seizing on the opportunity to gain more control.  10 rounds vs. 15 rounds… they cannot even define what a standard capacity magazine is.  Which changes based on the manufacture of a weapon, or why 15 rounds is evil and 10 rounds is ‘appropriate’. 

I wish calmer heads, rational heads, and some reasoned arguments would interject themselves into the CGA regarding this topic, but we live in CT, where we must act first, with emotions before we let cooler heads prevail.  Once, JUST ONCE, I would like to see an elected official state that we have enough laws, and that they do not want to overreach, over regulate, and over administer our lives.