<$BlogRSDURL$> abbr, acronym { cursor: help; font-style: normal; font-weight:bold; color: #2a548d; /*border-bottom: 1px solid; */ }

Eminent Domain Stuff

New London Update (2/24/06)
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)

Wednesday, February 15, 2006


Election Year Politics

The other day I had occasion to rip a bit of proposed legislation suggested by Gov. Rell concerning taxes. Now the powers that be have had a "summit" to address the issue of increasing violence in Connecticut, specifically gun violence. There were not a ton of details in the articles I found, but the general consensus appears to be that the black market has been "flooded" with guns, which is leading to violence (pay no attention to the violent criminals behind the curtain!).

From the info that's out there regarding this closed-door "summit", I have to give Jody Rell at least some credit (although that is subject to change if my fears are confirmed, as I'll discuss below):

The two mayors [New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr. and Stamford Mayor Dannel P. Malloy] called for the passage of legislation that would require the reporting by gun owners of lost or stolen guns, a measure that Perez asked Rell to endorse during their meeting.

Rell said she would study the measure, but sounded a skeptical note: "Most of the guns [traced to violent crimes] are not necessarily falling in the category of lost or stolen guns."
Exactly! Here's the thing. The make, model and serial number of handguns sold in CT (and long guns sold by FFL dealers in CT, although not private transactions) are already recorded and kept on file. I don't know whether there is a law requiring that lost or stolen guns be reported (I've never come across one), but even if there isn't, a gun recovered after the commission of a crime would be quite easy to trace if it had been legally bought in CT.

So...what's the deal here? This measure proposed by Rell's potential challengers is one of two things; either they're feel-good proposals meant to drum up support from the Left or they're just part of more comprehensive gun control measures these two favor but haven't talked about yet. Of course, Rell herself might be a gun-control wolf hiding in wolf-dog clothing:

Rell said at a news conference afterward that most of the discussion was about how to take guns off the streets and keep them out of the hands of children, including whether loopholes in the state's gun laws need to be closed.
Admittedly, these "loopholes" might just be the author's way of referencing proposals similar to the one mentioned above (mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns)...but since the phrase is used with respect to Gov. Rell specifically (who, according to the first article did not immediately endorse the mandatory reporting proposal) it makes me wonder. To add to my worry regarding what "loopholes" Gov. Rell is referring to, she also said this:

"In all candor, what we are seeing right now are a number of guns that are not registered. They are not necessarily stolen or lost," said Rell. "We don’t know where they’re coming from." The governor said renewed efforts are being made to track the weapons to their sources.
The only thing that might fit the bill as a "loophole" would be the lack of an official gun registration program in CT.* Other than that, the gun laws in CT (in terms of restricting access by children and buying and selling) are relatively strict already. Of course, I suppose we could always go to a '1-gun-per-month' or some other unfairly restrictive load of BS. Let's hope not.

If anyone figures out what she's actually talking about please drop me a line. Dang, I much prefer it around here when guns are not a topic of political conversation. The laws aren't all that bad right now...but this state is way too Blue for me to be comfortable if guns become a campaign issue. I'll be keeping my ear to the ground.


* As I mentioned at the outset of this post, gun sales are recorded and the pertinent info (buyer, make, model, serial number, etc.) must be maintained by the gun dealer for something like 10 years. There is, however, no government run registration database such as exists in NY, CA, MA, IL and maybe a few others. Don't be fooled by the rhetoric, this lack of registration is a good thing as they inevitably lead to confiscation. Just as [once] Great Britain and NYC.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?