Conn. reaches deal on tough gun laws after Newtown
Last edited Mon Apr 1, 2013, 10:14 PM - Edit history (4)
Source: USA Today
Connecticut lawmakers announced a deal Monday on what they called some of the toughest gun laws in the country that were proposed after the December mass shooting in the state, including a ban on new high-capacity ammunition magazines like the one in the massacre that left 20 children and six educators dead.
The proposal also called for background checks for private gun sales and a new registry for existing magazines that carry 10 or more bullets, something of a compromise for parents of Newtown victims who had wanted an outright ban on them, while legislators had proposed grandfathering them into the law.
The package also creates what lawmakers said is the nation's first statewide dangerous weapon offender registry, immediate universal background checks for all firearms sales and expansion of Connecticut's assault weapons ban.
A new state-issued eligibility certificate would be needed to purchase any rifle, shotgun or ammunition under the legislation. To get the certificate, a buyer would need to be fingerprinted, take a firearms training course and undergo a national criminal background check and involuntary commitment or voluntary admission check.
Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/01/connecticut-gun-laws-deal/2044167/
Vote planned Wednesday on sweeping gun-violence bill
http://www.ctmirror.org/story/19601/vote-planned-wednesday-sweeping-gun-violence-bill
Connecticut lawmakers reach deal on 'most comprehensive' gun limits in US
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/01/17557867-connecticut-lawmakers-reach-deal-on-most-comprehensive-gun-limits-in-us?lite
(snip)
While the measure would ban the sale of ammunition magazines able to handle more than 10 bullets, Gov. Dannell Malloy and parents of the Sandy Hook victims objected to a "grandfather clause" that will allow current owners of such magazines to keep them.
But state Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, a Democrat representing New Haven, told NBC Connecticut that the bill, which could be voted on as early as Wednesday, would still impose some of the nation's toughest gun control laws on Connecticut residents.
Legislators in Connecticut Agree on Broad New Gun Laws
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/nyregion/connecticut-legislators-agree-on-far-reaching-gun-control.html?hp
(snip)
It would require new state-issued eligibility certificates for the purchase of any rifle, shotgun or ammunition; mandate that offenders convicted of any of more than 40 weapons offenses register with the state; require universal background checks for the sale of all firearms; and substantially expand the states existing ban on assault weapons.
But the package did not include everything that anti-gun forces had asked for. It includes a ban on the future sale of high-capacity magazines with more than 10 bullets. But despite a dramatic plea on Monday from relatives of 11 of the victims killed at Sandy Hook on Dec. 14, legislative leaders did not include a complete ban on their ownership, although they agreed on new requirements requiring their registration. Legislation passed by New York in January included a ban on the ownership of high-capacity magazines.
The legislation in Connecticut, however, agreed to after several weeks of negotiations between Democratic and Republican leaders in the Democratic-controlled General Assembly, was hailed by gun-control proponents as a landmark package and an appropriate response to the tragedy at Sandy Hook.
Ron Pinciaro, executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence, said he was disappointed that the ban on possession of high-capacity magazines was not approved and that the bill would have little effect on handgun violence. But, he said, When you take all the elements and compare it, I think you could judiciously say this is the strongest bill in the nation.
tom2255
(37 posts)I don't believe any of these laws would have prevented newton.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Welcome to the site, though...
sylvi
(813 posts)that every opposing view is a talking point?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Please state your legislative proposals that WOULD prevent another Newtown massacre, if you have any...
CTyankee
(63,901 posts)How about being more specific. Your well thought out analysis and clear legislative proposals, based on rigorous research and thorough fact finding. You know, that sort of thing.
We've waited SO long for ANYTHING you have suggested or will suggest now...
sylvi
(813 posts)On our own site, posted over and over again.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Jesus christ, at least have the initiative to post an actual discussion thread...You can't be THAT intellectually lazy...
sylvi
(813 posts)in Gun Control & RKBA. I'm not going to the trouble of typing them all out here or C&Ping them just so the truly "intellectually lazy" can handwave them away with the standard "NRA Talking Point!" dismissal, as seen above.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Either start listing some proposals for discussion, or keep your ass in the gun forum when grown folks are talking...
sylvi
(813 posts)anywhere I like, but thanks for the advice. I can understand you not taking yours there, though, to avoid having it handed to you.
"Grown folks"
Response to sylvi (Reply #35)
Post removed
sylvi
(813 posts)But if you try some time, you just might find, you get what you need...
[url]http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172[/url]
..."son".
What it lacks in gravitas, it makes up for in density.
Skittles
(153,142 posts)the desperate attempt to minimize the slaughter of children
2ndAmForComputers
(3,527 posts)Skittles
(153,142 posts)THEY SCATTER!!!
valerief
(53,235 posts)lobodons
(1,290 posts)But.............
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Bay Boy
(1,689 posts)IOW a NRA certificate
krispos42
(49,445 posts)Yay, so gun owners get to be fingerprinted like common criminals.
I can't wait for the Republicans to try this guy voter registration.
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)...piss in a cup, like poor folks in FL.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)With snide remarks about the sensible laws that resulted from their deaths.
You truly are filth.
hack89
(39,171 posts)lindysalsagal
(20,648 posts)You should be putting up the costs of those you might hurt ahead of time, if you need to play with guns so badly.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Socal31
(2,484 posts)However, how expensive do you think gun liability insurance would be? The amount of accidents spread out over a risk base of total owners would be practically nothing.
hack89
(39,171 posts)but can you imagine what a competitive advantage a NRA endorsement would mean to an insurance company? They would be willing to give the NRA a cut for that. And then the NRA would negotiate a discount for members, resulting in increased membership fees as their membership swells.
It would be a sweet deal for them
NutmegYankee
(16,199 posts)The insurance industry went to the hearing and said no company would provide insurance for intentional, willful, or criminal acts. Only the Bill's sponsor ended up voting for it.
davepc
(3,936 posts)Also magazines aren't serialized so other then some sort of honor system there's no way to prove who did and did not posses them when they were legal.
madville
(7,408 posts)Magazines don't have serial numbers and mainly just the ones made during the federal AWB have dates on them.
Anyone can still easily go to a neighboring state and buy whatever they want. I'm sure the cops will run across an unregistered one occasionally though, I wonder if it's a felony or misdemeanor?
hack89
(39,171 posts)because they were unable or unwilling to ban the magazines.
NickB79
(19,233 posts)Same answer: nothing.
A patchwork high-capacity ban from state to state is unenforceable and only good for creating political points. Only a federal ban would have any impact, and that's not going to happen anytime soon.
Response to cal04 (Original post)
tom2255 Message auto-removed