Malloy Proposes Confiscating Guns From Owners With DUI Convictions

[SecularMotion]

Many of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s gun proposals allow gun owners to keep their current firearms, so long as they register them. However, one recommendation could have some current gun owners turning over their weapons.

The change would come as a result the governor’s efforts to make background checks more comprehensive and broaden the list of convictions that could make someone ineligible to possess a firearm.

Currently the state does not allow convicted felons to possess guns. It also prohibits people convicted of a handful of other misdemeanor crimes from owning firearms. Negligent homicide, low-level assault convictions, inciting riots, and possessing drugs can also prevent one from getting a gun permit.

Malloy would like to see that expanded to include people convicted of drunk driving or driving under the influence of drugs during the past five years. It would also include any offense involving a gun as well as any conviction involving the use or threat of force.

http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/ctnj.php/archives/entry/malloy_proposes_confiscating_guns_from_owners_with_dui_convictions

[ileus]

1. I wonder what other rights he'd love to strip away.

Wonder if he realizes a DUI doesn't even stop you from having an operators?

I do find it great that the regressives are finally admitting their ultimate goal is confiscation.

[Tumbulu]

2. Fantastic!

Especially any domestic violence, as well. Definitely anyone caught drunk driving should not have any access to firearms. I see these as minimal requirements.

[holdencaufield]

3. Yea -- screw that whole due process thing

Rights are a privilege -- not a right

(Oh, wait ...)

[Tumbulu]

4. Any perceived right to intimidate

Others is only perceived, not granted. Firearms in the hands of drunk drivers are more dangerous than the motor vehicle they are no longer allowed to operate. Talk to me after you've been shot at by drunk guys shooting rifles at imaginary coyotes.

These laws are so way overdue.

[holdencaufield]

5. Why stop there?

Anyone who have ever operated a motor vehicle under the influence obviously won't balk at more serious crimes. For example, they must be more likely to commit spousal abuse so they should never be allowed to marry. They must have poor judgement, so they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Obviously, they are danger to society so why not preemptively incarcerate them? Better safe than sorry, right?

While I would argue that firearms in the hands of a drunk driver ISN'T more dangerous than a motor vehicle -- for one thing the driver wouldn't be able to properly steer AND hold the gun and based on the number of drunk driving versus drunk shooting accidents -- how, precisely, do you come to the conclusion that anyone who has EVER once had a DUI will be drunk each and every time they pick up a firearm?

Do you assume they will always be drunk when operating heavy machinery or using kitchen knives? Should anyone with a DUI be automatically prevented from holding any job that requires them to do either?

[Tumbulu]

13. Listen, there are no enough prisons, IMO

jerks who intimidate using guns need to not only have their guns taken from them, they need to be in jail.

You have no right to threaten anyone.

There is mandatory drug testing in my state for those who operate heavy equipment. They are covered.

[holdencaufield]

22. I'm sorry you feel intimidated ...

... by the fact that Americans have rights. Freedom is a scary thing. A similar argument to yours was once espoused (by some) in the struggle to limit or eliminate Black Suffrage. It didn't work then, and it won't work now.

[Tumbulu]

24. It is no one's right to shoot at people

[holdencaufield]

25. Actually ...

... there are specific circumstances where it is perfectly legal to shoot at people. But, the situations which you claim happened to you are not among them. Those are what people call "crimes" (I believe that is the technical term for it).

If there are crimes in your neighbourhood that are -- for one reason or another -- not being dealt with by law enforcement, then you have a very strong case for legal reform in your jurisdiction, but a really terrible case for gun control.

You don't ban cars because someone was speeding on your street -- or, at least I'm assuming you wouldn't want that.

[Tumbulu]

28. It is not treated as a crime

Where I am to hit someone's house or barn if you were trying to shoot a coyote. If the property owner wants compensation you can be taken to court. Law enforcement around here applauds people shooting "varmints". Seriously, this is a very big rural problem.

[holdencaufield]

29. I've lived in rural America for years -- I've encountered no such thing as you describe it.

No one can legally shoot on my property without my permission. That is the law and local law enforcement would, if it ever happened, certainly enforce it. I think you might probably have a problem with your neighours.

[Tumbulu]

30. AZ, CA

Maybe it's a western state thing- the farmer in Kentucky reported the same problems, though.

What state are you in? Are you in a farming area?

You don't have to post signs?

Look, I've spoken to many a sheriff about this and hunters with licenses can go on any property private or public- unless the signs are posted every 150 ft.

[gejohnston]

32. I grew up in Wyoming

and found no such problem. Same with rural Florida. It could be a CA thing. Are the shooters from the west or are they transplants from, say, CA like Brewer or NJ like fascist Joe?

[Tumbulu]

36. A real mix

My first shootings were a group of hunters from LA. Only 15- 20 of them at my farm, ( Kern Co) but about 120 total in about a 2 mile area. The other farmers in my area simply shut their operations down the first few days of hunting season. A few years before a farm worker had been killed. Sheriff did nothing about it.

In AZ the hunters were a mixture of locals and vacationers from cities. Public lands surrounded my farm there. My neighbor kept cattle and he was always loosing livestock to these people. He leased BLM land and they essentially told him to shut up or give up his lease.

Where I farm now in N CA mainly the shooters are neighbors that get drunk or do drugs. But these guys have places 1-2 miles from me. The hunters that shot a neighbors window out.... Not sure at all if they were local or city people.

All over these western states the sheriff defend the people with the hunting licenses. It could be that farmed land is more attractive to hunters than wilderness.

[gejohnston]

38. farmed land is more attractive to deer than wilderness

easy food and protection from coyotes. Besides, how many of those big city fudds know how to use a compass? Never seen anything like that. Have you contacted the state game warden? That really is their jurisdiction in most places. I'm betting most of them are colonists that didn't learn properly as a kid. There is a difference between colonists and transplants. The transplant moves to Florida and becomes kind of Floridian and respects the place. The colonist builds a McMansion by the river and bitches about the alligators, buys a gun because he is afraid of working class people in pick up trucks (or wants to ban guns because he is afraid of said people's guns) and bitches about his right to speed through no wake zones in manatee habitat. Fortunately, Wyoming doesn't have that problem. We should create an Order of the Snowflake.

[Tumbulu]

40. The game people are very protective

Of the hunters, at least where I have farmed.

One thing is that for many of those guys from LA coming out to our farms it was fathers and sons. The dad's were trying to do something outdoorsy with their kid. Picking farms to shoot into- did I mention mine was fenced?- was odd. But in the big picture I actually was glad to see fathers trying to connect with their kids. Trying to get them outside of a city, trying to teach their kids something. I just don't want that something to be shooting me, my livestock, or people who work on my farm.

It is all very tricky. The last neighbor drunk shooting at my barn is the son of the neighbor back from Iraq. He gets drunk and then roams the hills trying to shoot coyotes. What should be done is the firearm needs to be taken from him. We could have been killed. But people think he will get better.... Get a job somewhere and move away..... I don't know.

I like people going outdoors and observing nature. I just don't want to be shot at anymore. And I am not ready to give up farming.

[gejohnston]

44. Maybe it isn't hunters as much as you think

Game officers in places like Wyoming and Idaho patrol huge areas of wilderness alone, may or not be armed, and stops people who they know have guns. IIRC, WFG only started wearing pistols within the past twenty years. The policy changed not because of beer swilling NRA members.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20111114/OPINION/111119875
http://www.wate.com/story/19487397/hiker-shot-twice-in-great-smokies
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-01-13/news/8501030307_1_booby-traps-marijuana-growers-intruders

Yes it should be legalized, but in the meantime let's face it pot growers are not always the best people either. Many probably like the status quo so they don't have to pay taxes.

[Tumbulu]

55. A family looking to purchase the farm next to mine

was leaving a farm in Central CA that had been in their family 3 generations because meth people were taking over their community. These guys burned their barn down- luckily the cows were outside, and have threatened their life. The sheriffs are overwhelmed and have told them that they cannot help them. They have rented a place in town and are trying to sell their farm and buy another in an area that the meth people have not taken over.

So far my farm shootings have all been hunters- with the exception of the son of the other neighbor who was high on meth imagining people coming up the road to "take his stuff" and shooting at my house and the road for two hours. At least he was taken away, but had he not had a previous felony, the sheriff said they would not have even taken him in as the jail is already beyond the legal capacity. As it was he was only in jail a few weeks and was given probation.

If there are not enough jail cells, then they better figure out a way to get these weapons out of the hands of these people terrorizing the rest of us.

[gejohnston]

57. California has a meth problem

According to the Brady score card, you shouldn't be having those problems. Funny it doesn't seem to be a problem in other places. The meth heads wouldn't be disarmed by any of these laws, the family you mentioned would be the ones disarmed.

[Tumbulu]

60. Of course they should be disarmed

But probably won't . But no one is going to win fighting them. Best to move away or go other routes.

[gejohnston]

62. I think you missed my point

the meth head and drug dealers will still have guns even if every law abiding person turns theirs in. Just ask anyone who has been to the wrong BBQ in Toronto. Can't remember the name, but one of the people killed in Aurora survived the Toronto BBQ shoot out a couple of weeks earlier.
You are not going to disarm the gangster or the pot grower up north either. Frankly, I'm more concerned about getting shot by some pot grower just for stumbling across his farm than I am any hunters. I'm not saying slob hunters don't exist, I'm saying I'm less likely to get shot or get killed by a poacher's booby trap.-

[oneshooter]

37. In Texas the law requires that every 150 feet a sign is to be posted.

However the law also states that painting a fence post purple every 150 feet does the same thing as posting a sign. And it costs a lot less.

[Tumbulu]

41. I wish we could just paint posts purple! NT

[sigmasix]

42. history of irresponsible actions endangering others

Anyone with a history of irresponsible actions that endanger others shouldn't be trusted among our children and other loved-ones with a gun. That's the point of regulating the bad guys' right to be armed with tools of death. A drunk driver is a proven irresponsible bad guy. Bad guys shouldn't have guns. This law suspends the bad guy's ability to legally own a gun. Only someone that is being purposefully deceitful or willfully immoral would percieve this law as a threat to the rights of responsible gun owners. The NRA is not a friend of the American people or the constitution; please stop parroting NRA talking points and narratives. It just underscores the insanity and hypocrisy of the gun fetish culture.

[Tumbulu]

61. Well said. NT

[Loudly]

27. You have a kind of warped view of what a "right" is.

You need to do more work on what a political indulgence is.

Versus a right.

Speaking one's mind is a right.

Clinging to the means of convenient murder?

No, I don't think so. Not a right, nor could it ever be.

That's a political indulgence of your personal kink.

[holdencaufield]

31. "Clinging to the means of convenient murder?"

Anyone who says murder -- regardless of the weapon -- is convenient has never had to dispose of a body. It's a lot harder than it looks on TV.

And my view of a "right" is pretty traditional -- that which the Constitution declares and the Supreme Court maintains is a right, I would call that a right.

[Loudly]

33. A right as Plessy discerns a right to be, perhaps.

But eventually, Brown triumphs over the Board of Education of Topeka

[DonP]

34. Just like Heller and McDonald triumphed over DC and Chicago

and put the interpretation back to what it was supposed to be, forcing petty local dictators and their ignorant lackeys to finally abide by the constitution.

[Loudly]

35. Ha. Right. And empower little men with pistols to dispatch us all.

Oh good god what foolishness you endorse.

[holdencaufield]

39. Do you feel in fear of being dispatched?

Bullets are over a dollar each these days -- do you know anyone who hates you that much?

[Eleanors38]

6. So, someone has a half oz of pot then the law can confiscate guns?

What other BOR amendments should be restricted or denied?

[Tumbulu]

12. I did not see that on the list

it lists violent crimes and drunk driving.

And yes, anyone convicted of a DUI should not be operating heavy equipment without drug testing, etc. which is standard in my state.

[Eleanors38]

17. Check Form 4473: Marijuana is mentioned by name.

You can regulate 'operating heavy equipment,' because it is not a right to have that job.

The Second Amendment is a right.

[AtheistCrusader]

51. Domestic violence is ALREADY treated like a felony conviction for the purposes of firearm ownership.

Goddamnit, nothing pisses me off more than people asking for laws that ALREADY FUCKING EXIST.

It's called the 'Lautenberg Amendment'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Violence_Offender_Gun_Ban

[Eleanors38]

7. "...nobody is going to take your guns away..."

[Tumbulu]

11. I only wish I could (along with and all the others who have been intimidated

by nuts with guns their entire lives) do it. Better get a grip - people like me are fed up and we are the majority now.

I am a voice that has been silenced way too long.

[Eleanors38]

18. So there you have it: Another one who wants to control/ban/confiscate...

Please note I am not impressed by your voice. And majorities shift month-to-month; week-to-week; day-to-day. That is why we have a Constitution which protects any "minorities;" by implication, that is what the Constitution is SUPPOSED to do. Maybe that is why the MSM mantra is plagued by cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, they say "the debate has shifted the debate over guns in a fundamental way," then hasten to add "There is a short time before the window of opportunity is gone."

Huh?

If the debate has permanently shifted, why is it a concern that the "window" will close? Maybe because the debate has not shifted things. The trouble with you and your fellow banners & confiscators is that you have polarized the debate so completely (along with your "nuts&quot that any real and meaningful measures will be lost to the "voices" of extremism -- when that window closes.

[Tumbulu]

20. How many times have you been shot at in your life?

If it is less than 5 times, then goody goody for you.

This gun insanity in this country is over. That is the deal.

I really do not care what you think of me. What I think is that the general public has had it and laws will be put in place that change the dynamic.

I doubt that I will ever get my wish- no guns at all anywhere- but there will be real controls put into place. At a minimum anyone with any convictions of any crimes loses their license to own a gun.

[holdencaufield]

23. "How many times have you been shot at in your life?"

Sound like you need to get a gun -- and the training to know how to use it safely -- and start shooting back. Either that or move out of whatever combat zone you are currently inhabiting. Where are you, Afghanistan or Detroit?

Why live intimidated?

[Tumbulu]

26. I farm in CA

And have been shot at while farming in AZ, CA north and central. All farmers have to put up with this and I am not going to try to shoot my drunk neighbor, or a drunk hunter, or his kid who made a huge mistake. Shooting a drunk hunter is still murder.

I was visiting a farmer in Kentucky. He had to run off in a huge hurry to go buy 50 of the damned no trespassing no hunting signs for his grandfathers farmstead- it was the last day of August. He was hoping his grandfather would not loose any livestock, as he had the year before.

[av8r1998]

46. ^^^THIS^^^

Thank you Eleanor

[Remmah2]

8. If a person has a DUI why not just take their car away?

Silly law makers.

[DonP]

9. Don't forget the need to search their home regularly!

After all, since they own a gun they should forfeit all other constitutional rights anyway. At least accordign to some of the more brilliant constitutional thinkers on DU.

They are the same ones that are now busy applauding Bloomberg for defeating a Democrat in a local Primary using his Citizen's United founded Super-Pac.

I guess it's OK to applaud Citizen's United on DU now, if it's used to hurt a Dem that's not sufficiently anti gun.

After all, we had people here applauding Scott Walker when he banned gun in some state buildings and we still have people that love the Bush Cheney Terrah watch list... when it's used to ban gun sales. Lot's of conditional ethics around here these days.

[Remmah2]

10. But if they don't have a car they can't go to the gun store or liquor store.

[Tumbulu]

14. their license is taken away

and if they are caught driving they do go to jail.

And they should never be allowed to have firearms after showing how irresponsible they are.

[Remmah2]

15. Many times the licenses is suspended.

If the license is revoked they can usually re-apply for a new one.

There are irresponsible people without guns, cars and alcohol. We should penalize them equally.

[Tumbulu]

16. Not right away

Sorry, firearms are too destructive to be allowed in the hands of anyone who ever is caught with a DUI.

And you better believe their homes should be searched for them. Should and would are entirely different.

Of the many times that I have been shot at, only on one occasion was it taken seriously, and even then the shooter only got probation- even though he was a convicted felon. There are not enough jail cells, they say. It is always this way. Law enforcement/sheriffs in rural areas are more concerned with protecting the rights of the shooters than those us of shot at.

It is sick and I hope in my lifetime this will change.

[Eleanors38]

19. Actually, you inadvertently touched on a worthwhile gun-control measure....

"Of the many times that I have been shot at, only on one occasion was it taken seriously, and even then the shooter only got probation- even though he was a convicted felon."

Persons who shoot at others should be prosecuted; those who shoot who are also felons should get a severe penalty -- perhaps mandatory. Trouble is, President Obama doesn't favor minimum mandatories; probably due to the understandably bad taste of too many young black males being jailed for long sentences for drug offenses.

But you would support minimum mandatories, right?

BTW, there is debate in Texas and some other states about closing unused & underused prisons. There is ample room for violent offenses, esp. those utilizing guns.

[Tumbulu]

21. No room in CA jails for people

they let sex offenders out and do not even jail them when they take the gps's off.

Of course I would support minimum mandatories.

In rural areas we are always getting shot at. No one cares. People loose their horses, their livestock, property is damaged. Farm workers are regularly injured this way. Once 15+ hunters were shooting into my farm- right at me and my coworker. I call the sheriff who informs me that he will not even come out unless I have already posted "not trespassing no hunting " signs up every 150 ft. That hunters can go anywhere they want and shoot anywhere UNLESS those signs are up. Hunters rights trump private property rights unless one has these signs up every 150 ft and they measure to see.

My neighbor lost their kitchen window- if they had been washing dishes at the time, they would have been killed. We all hide on Sept 1 the first day of hunting season.

Guys get drunk and hunt and all the sheriff does is tell them to go home. 2 months ago bullets flew past me and my co-shepherd in my barn, we dove to the ground and I called 911 on my cell and yelled "hey stop it!!!". Another drunk neighbor trying to shoot coyotes. The one felon who was put on probation for shooting a high powered rifle at my house and down the road for 2 hrs was only in jail a few weeks, not enough room in the prison.

Don't get me started. It is so out of control in rural areas, the shooting. The reason I want all guns gone is that the folks in law enforcement in rural areas want people to be shooting at things so that they do not have to come out themselves.

Dogs chasing your sheep? Why don't I shoot them they ask? They are not going to drive all the way out here and talk to the neighbor with the dogs, they expect us to shoot these dogs ourselves. If I do not want to shoot these dogs, well then I should expect all my sheep to be killed then. Tough luck, they do not have the time.

[AtheistCrusader]

50. Let the pot smokers out.

Fix that problem.

[Tumbulu]

54. They are not keeping pot smokers in and letting sex offenders out

It is a complete fantasy that the jails are filled with pot smokers here in CA. We apparently have a violent population. We have lots of people who think it is OK to shoot at people, hit them, rob them, etc. We have a very large meth problem as well.

[sigmasix]

43. drunken NRA members with guns

We lived in the woods of michigan- 6 1/2 acres of beautiful old growth oak and a small pond- I had multiple "no hunting" signs displayed prominently, yet every hunting season I discovered the same groups of drunkin yahoos- sporting NRA stickers on thier trucks- shooting and hunting on my property. LEOs tell me there's not much that can be done unless they hurt someone- I know it's all bullshit but the good ol boys protect each other when it comes to this sort of stuff. For 3 years, during every hunting season my daughters had to stay inside because of the dangerous actions of drunkin "responsible" gun-toting NRA members. Any nut that wants a gun, no matter what is in the nut's history, can legally buy a gun by making a private purchase. A lot of Americans want to change this dangerous oversite and force gun owners to accept responsibility for themselves. Responsibility includes proving that you can operate the gun safely and being aware of, and complying with, the laws of the land concerning the use, storage and saftey of the gun.
Only paranoid conspiracy theory mongers and those with a gun fetish find this threatening.
Regulation is not confiscation. If gun rights advocates want to honestly strengthen the 2nd amendment they will disown the NRA and the racists and pedophiles on the governing board. It sure seems that the gun fetish is a powerfully toxic sexual dysfunction. So powerful that the fetish sufferer is worried about the gun rights of drunk drivers, pedophiles and Klan members.

[Tumbulu]

47. Yes, such a common problem

Ask most horseback riders who take their horses out on a trail if they go out on Sept 1-4 and you get a lively reaction with many a horror story.

Time for responsibility to rule.

[gejohnston]

48. then there are the trigger happy pot growers

Game officers in places like Wyoming and Idaho patrol huge areas of wilderness alone, may or not be armed, and stops people who they know have guns. IIRC, WFG only started wearing pistols within the past twenty years. The policy changed not because of beer swilling NRA members.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20111114/OPINION/111119875
http://www.wate.com/story/19487397/hiker-shot-twice-in-great-smokies
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-01-13/news/8501030307_1_booby-traps-marijuana-growers-intruders

Yes it should be legalized, but in the meantime let's face it pot growers are not always the best people either. Many probably like the status quo so they don't have to pay taxes.

[Straw Man]

52. What LEOs?

We lived in the woods of michigan- 6 1/2 acres of beautiful old growth oak and a small pond- I had multiple "no hunting" signs displayed prominently, yet every hunting season I discovered the same groups of drunkin yahoos- sporting NRA stickers on thier trucks- shooting and hunting on my property. LEOs tell me there's not much that can be done unless they hurt someone- I know it's all bullshit but the good ol boys protect each other when it comes to this sort of stuff.

If they're telling you that you have no legal right to prosecute trespassers on your property, it absolutely is bullshit, and you need to take it higher. If they're town cops, go to the county. If they're county cops, go to the state. I have a hard time imagining that the state police would tell you there's nothing they can do about hunters trespassing on posted property.

[sigmasix]

53. no imagination needed- bullet holes are the proof

County Sherrif likes his hunting buddies and fellow Teabaggers- One of the reasons we moved from Michigan was all of the "accidental" shootings of people by NRA members out hunting, drinking and practicing thier 2nd amendment rights. Every hunting season we would have more dead and injured kids and parents because of the actions of "responsible" NRA advocates. Every one of these guys love to advertise membership with the NRA as they shoot my windows out, threaten the lives of my children and trespassed on my property. You have to convince the LEOs to come all the way out into the woods when reporting NRA members breaking federal gun laws. By the time LEOs show up, the law breakers have left the property. I found all kinds of dead wildlife on the back-end of my property after these early morning "visits" from NRA members. Animals that were not in season, and those that are protected as well. Lot's of "responsible" NRA gun owner activities seem to include terrorizing home owners in the woods and shooting anything that moves. My favorite tactic is the one used by gun nuts that think they have a right to hunt on everyone's property- they shoot to injure a deer and follow it for miles through private property- shooting anything that moves along the way. It's time for the NRA and it's immoral members to start taking responsibility for the crimes committed by them and for them, in the name of a twisted, antiAmerican radical interpretation of the 2nd amendment.
I know Teabaggers hate to do it, but it is time to grow up and take responsibility for your actions and answer for your dysfunctional sexual need to practice your gun fetish.
I own guns too, but they don't feature in my sex life or dominate my free time. Little boys must play with toys, especially if the toy can kill someone.

[Straw Man]

56. Call the state police.

That's my advice to you. Take it or leave it.

[sigmasix]

59. we moved to a less insane state

got tired of all the threats from the "reasonable" NRA advocates that wanted to shoot my family for not allowing them on our property to drink beer and "hunt". Wouldnt it be great if the gun nuts had to take responsibility for thier actions?

[Tumbulu]

58. Always got the same from my sheriffs- unless there is a sign EVERY 150 ft

they can do nothing, and even when they can do something, the people have already left and why am I being so silly about it?

[bubbayugga]

45. they should lose their access to social security, medicare, and welfare too. Fuck those losers.

[AtheistCrusader]

49. Not bad ideas.

The drunk driving thing is easy enough, just make a certain threshold a felony. In WA, 5 DUI convictions = Felony.

Could probably shorten that to 2.