Does Your Neighbor Own A Gun? You’ll Never Know In CT
by Christine Stuart | Dec 28, 2012 2:00pm
(20) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Civil Liberties, Town News, Hartford, New Haven, Newtown, Public Safety
In the wake of the Newtown school shooting, the Journal News of New York published an article and interactive maps including the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland county gun owners. It prompted outrage from some readers, while others appreciated the information.
The controversial decision by the newspaper may have some wondering why no Connecticut news outlet has attempted to replicate the story for readers in the Nutmeg state.
The answer is simple: the names and addresses of people issued gun permits in Connecticut are confidential, unless that person was denied a permit to carry a gun.
In July 1994, during a special session, the General Assembly exempted gun permit information from public disclosure.
Michael P. Lawlor, the governor’s top criminal justice adviser who was a lawmaker involved in the 1994 discussions, said the disclosure of gun permit information was a trade-off they made with the pro-gun legislators and lobbyists in order to get the bill passed.
In addition to exempting the information from public disclosure, the underlying legislation made it harder for convicted felons to obtain firearms and gave the commissioner of Mental Health and Addiction Services access to gun permit information.
Sen. Majority Leader Martin Looney of New Haven said he understands the arguments regarding confidentiality, but believes it’s something that should be debated next year.
“The argument from gun owners is that potential thieves would know where to find a gun,” Looney said.
On the other side of the argument, “people have said they would like to know if there’s a gun in the house where they’re sending their children to play,” he said.
There are currently 179,092 valid pistol permits in Connecticut, 8,825 registered assault weapons, and 2,304 registered machine guns, according to the Connecticut State Police.
“It’s probably a policy discussion worth having,” Looney said.
But Robert Crook, head of the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen, said he doesn’t believe it should be part of the discussion.
“I’m happy the names can’t be released,” Crook said.
It would only make legal gun owners targets, and “virtually every instance of gun violence is being done by a person without a pistol permit,” Crook added.
Rich Burgess, president of Connecticut Carry, agreed with Crook.
“I can’t think of any reasoning or logic that would make someone think that it would be a good idea to give potential criminals an idea of where to go (or not to go) based on where potential firearms exist,” he said.
Burgess wondered what good it would do to release the information.
“There are 170,000+ pistol permit holders in Connecticut and the vast, vast majority do nothing to harm anyone each day,” he said.
But Lawlor said in most states gun permit information, like personal information about divorces, mortgages, and property values, are public record.
Ron Pinciaro of Connecticut Against Gun Violence has been advocating for stricter gun laws in the state since 2001. He said making gun permit information public is not something his organization “would fight very hard for.” He said at this point he’s focused on other legislative solutions such as banning large capacity magazines like those with the capacity for 30 bullets that the gunman used in Newtown.
“Right, now we’re in the process of working on a lot of legislative solutions,” Pinciaro said.
In the meantime, there is some information out there about the number of gun permits in the state and how many exist in each particular municipality in any given year, but there’s not much information that can be gleaned from it aside from the fact that some towns have more gun permit holders than others.
In Newtown where the shooting occurred, there were 296 handguns and 237 long guns sold in 2012. In Monroe, which has about 8,000 fewer residents than Newtown, there were 253 handguns and 205 long guns sold in 2012
In New Haven, there were 472 handguns and 172 long gun sold this year and in Hartford there were 364 handguns and 146 long guns sold. In West Hartford there were 532 handguns sold and 283 long guns sold.
The state’s Board of Fire Arms Permit Examiners does provide a public record of the permit holders who have had their permits denied or revoked.
That list of names, and sometimes the town they live in, is on its website.
Tags: gun, public disclosure, Martin Looney, Rich Burgess, Ron Pinciaro, Michael Lawlor, Newtown, dh
(20) Comments
posted by: DrHunterSThompson | December 28, 2012 2:31pm
Making this information public would prove to be a useful resource for criminals looking for free guns.
More useful, I think, would be an interactive map of Twinkie consumers. That way we could locate that group of people that are responsible for skyrocketing health care costs. We can confront them and embarrass them.
HST
posted by: kenneth_krayeske | December 28, 2012 3:19pm
We must register guns like cars. Whether the registry is public or not is another issue, but I know Robert Crook doesn’t like the idea of registering handguns. We have to register boats, cars, motorcycles, airplanes and snowmobiles. We need insurance on most of the above. Why not gun insurance? Because while guns must be disclosed for a homeownership policy, no insurance company would underwrite the risk that a single gun represents. Homeownership policies often limit gun-related liabilities. If the insurance companies won’t touch them, we should not be so cowed against regulating them in the public sphere.
posted by: THREEFIFTHS | December 28, 2012 6:30pm
So should the address of people who keep control drugs and Alcohol in there homes have there address public.
posted by: AntonK | December 28, 2012 7:44pm
The obscenity of publishing that stuff was such a hit in NY!
posted by: sparkplug | December 28, 2012 8:05pm
Since criminals don’t like taking unnecessary risks I’m sure they’d appreciate a list of homes to avoid.
posted by: Chien DeBerger | December 29, 2012 10:50am
@Ken- You forget history about gun registration. Every government which has conquered its citizens have relied on gun registration to disarm them.
Look at our own country’s start. The battles of Lexington and Concord was over the British attempting to disarm the colonists.
The southern democrats tried to keep all of the freed men after the civil war from being armed, so that their reign of terror could be carried out against them.
Adolph Hitler made lawful possession of firearms by Jews illegal, disarming them before implementing his solution.
As stated above, there is good reason why these databases should not be available to the public. Especially because there is no law being broken by those complying with the restrictions. It just fascinates me how quick we as a nation are to demonize someone for exercising their God given rights.
posted by: kenneth_krayeske | December 29, 2012 11:51am
Economist Nouriel Roubini thinks that gun insurance should be mandatory. h/t Joe Nocera at the NYT
posted by: oliviahuxtable | December 30, 2012 9:56am
The simplest reason for keeping the permit information confidential? So they cannot come and disarm us.
Cherish your second amendment rights, folks. We have not experienced tyranny in this country, so it is easy to be lackadaisical about the need to defend oneself, but it may not always be this way. When you need protection you will be happy you have it. The vast, vast, vast majority of people who own guns are responsible owners…don’t punish them.
posted by: kenneth_krayeske | December 31, 2012 10:42am
Chien DeBerger - The problem with bringing God into political debate is tough, which is why we are not a theocracy. I just don’t see the right to bear arms as a God-given right, if the God of the Bible is the God you describe, especially since that God says “Thou Shall Not Kill” and “Turn the Other Cheek.” The prospect of armed religious warfare on American soil is as chilling. God did not write the Bill of Rights, a bunch of flawed, really rich, white and hypocritical men did. I can’t imagine God saying it is your right to own an AR-15 or a rocket launcher for personal protection. I just don’t see it. And I don’t want to, because God has no part in the debate on gun control in our non-theocratic country.
posted by: Captain Hook | December 31, 2012 1:04pm
The murderer was not even a gun owner. His mom was! Why not have a state database of all mentally ill people instead? The politicians should be addressing mental illness if they really want to focus on the real problem.
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | December 31, 2012 1:57pm
While I agree with Ken Krayeske to a point, do those who lobby for a greater role for religion still have a place in your country? You imply that the secular lines as they are drawn now are immutable and that religious inspiration for legal decisions results in a theocracy rather than safe, sane ethical practice.
As far as gun control goes I’m apolitical. I do have one warning: the illegal gun trade is closely related to the illegal drug trade.
Is the answer to legalize both drugs and guns? I have a hard time listening to either side when arguing for strict regulation of one black market and permissive legalization of the other. A good black marketeer is product agnostic. Whatever sells to the underground for a premium is their ticket.
What are the stats in CT for gun-based suicides? Around 55% of all gun-related deaths? Has CT been successful in predicting these outcomes and preventing them? My understanding is that most are performed by legal handguns by undiagnosed individuals. This is an entirely different profile from the mass murderer or the illegal drugs and gun trade which escapes sanity definitions and avoids legal registrations like the plague.
It seems many of the same people who profile the mentally suspect would blanche at programs to similarly profile the illegal guns and drugs trade among minority communities.
In the meantime I will resort to escapism and listen to Bruce Cockburn’s “If I had a Rocket Launcher”. I really don’t need an AR-15 but do need someone to express my disgust and outrage from time to time.
posted by: Chien DeBerger | December 31, 2012 3:17pm
Ken-
In America the founding fathers listed the right to worship your god as the first right. So I ask GOD for help in the direction of our country, because we need it. We are rotting from the inside. You also need to read the Scriptures, because you are missing those areas and are too many to list and I am sure you would not check anyways. God Bless you!
posted by: gutbomb86 | December 31, 2012 3:43pm
What’s interesting here is that the gun owners are so afraid of being identified. They’re supposed to be the ones who are capable of defending themselves. There’s a level of conflict there that makes me think they’re full of nonsense.
First they said that if people are aware that guns are around, it serves as a deterrent and they’ll be more likely to avoid targeting said location. Now they’re saying that if people know there are guns around, they will be more likely to break in. Well which is it?
We’ll never know if this would have been the case, but there is a good chance that someone might have had a red flag go up in their mind had they seen Mrs. Lanza’s name on a list of local folks who own multiple firearms. Particularly if they were acquainted with her son.
It appears to me that the Journal News has taken a step toward cross-referencing some important data sets ... gun permit holders and their addresses with mentally ill people and their addresses. The paper provided half of the data. The public at large has the rest of the data. It’s public service journalism, essentially. Was it effective? Certainly less than it could be.
posted by: sparkplug | December 31, 2012 4:17pm
I’d say most people that are breaking into homes are looking for cash to support a drug habit, not guns. You can’t even pawn a gun in CT without the proper paperwork, and the penalty for getting caught with a stolen gun is very high. Then again, drug addicts don’t always use the best judgment.
posted by: Joebigjoe | December 31, 2012 5:55pm
Gut bomb I have no ssue being identified as a gun owner as long as people that are against guns put a sign on their house the size of an election season sign that says Gun Free Zone.
posted by: Chien DeBerger | December 31, 2012 6:57pm
Sparkplug-
Stolen guns are constantly traded for drugs. Since most of those involved in drug sales or distribution have disqualifying convictions to purchase firearms.
posted by: Mopar | January 1, 2013 2:37pm
Comparing cars and guns is not really valid. First off, you do not actually have to register a car. You only have to register it to drive it on public roads. If you trailer it and only use it off of public streets, you need no registration.
As far as public access goes, automobile registration is protected just like gun permits are. You can not just go to a website and look up a license plate number and get all the personal info. Nor can you easily look up what kind of car someone (say like Christine Stuart) drives. This is for some of the same reasons gun permit info is confidential. You don’t want crazies and criminals to easily find out where people live. By listing permit info OR car reg info, you allow anyone who wants to easily find someone who might not want to be found by just anyone. That someone might be a judge, a police officer, or a politician. It might also be a pretty woman, or an abused ex, or a journalist (say like Christine Stuart) who wrote something that someone else didnt like. There are almost 180,000 people in CT with permits to carry a gun, out of 2.5 million or so adults over 21. Do the math. One out of every 14 people over 21 in CT has a gun permit. Those people have been fingerprinted and had to undergo local, state, and federal background checks. They’ve had mental health checks. They have never committed a crime, and they have never had someone file a restraining order against them. They are not known to abuse drugs or booze. CT is a may issue state, that means that even if you meet ALL the legal requirements, you still may or may not be issued a permit. Even if you have never been charged with a crime, if your local police know you to be a trouble maker or consider you a risk, you still don’t get a permit.
These are not people to fear. These are already people you know. People you trust. The ones to worry about are those with illegal guns. Those without a permit. Those who won’t follow any new laws or restrictions. Those who use a gun to commit crimes.
posted by: dano860 | January 1, 2013 7:35pm
Registration, insurance, disclosing the names and address’s of permit holders will do nothing to prevent any person intent on doing harm from completing that desire.
Releasing those names will inform the felons and persons intent on robbing a home of their drugs, jewelry and cash where they will possibly meet little resistance from the homeowner.
Because a person has a carry permit doesn’t mean that they own a firearm. Not having a permit doesn’t mean there are no firearms in that home. A carry permit or hunting license isn’t required for a person to own a pistol or rifle. Anyone that passes a criminal background check can purchase and retain a firearm in their home. They can transport it to a club or range to enjoy the sport of shooting. Skeet, trap, sporting clay’s, long range target, pistol competition there are more types of firearms fun than I will list here.
If they choose to release the names and address’s of fine law abiding american citizens then they need to release the names of those that have been or are being treated for mental and addictive issues.
One might ask how the “war on drugs” is going?
One has to ponder why a city like Chicago closed out the year with 539 murders?
Chicago has the most restrictive firearm laws in the nation…what gives there?
Single parent families with gangs replacing the family unit.
Single mothers are lauded as hard workers that want the best for their children. Of course it’s hard when you depend on the government for your rent, food, baby sitting and education.
It’s not the firearm or the honest legal firearm owning citizen that is the problem in this beautiful country.
One needs to look at our pathetic society of liberalism that is creating an atmosphere of entitlement and instant gratification our children are learning faster than they learn to support themselves and a family.
posted by: ad_ebay | January 2, 2013 12:05pm
Saw an interesting bumper sticker: “If Gun-owners were as violent as non gun-owners say, there’d be a lot less non gun-owners”.
posted by: Joebigjoe | January 2, 2013 3:13pm
I just saw something on the news that makes me want to vomit.
On the gun permit information that the NY newspaper provided, includes women that were victims of domestic violence that was so bad that the State of NY granted them permits. Also included are former NYC police officers that put away some very bad people that have made attempts to find them and their families to exact revenge.
If one of you people that supports this act was in front of me right now, you would be very afraid. I am so mad right now.
This left wing media outlet put innocent people at risk that followed the law. Whats next? Lists of women that got taxpayer funded abortions?