Poll: Fairfield Readers Share Thoughts On New Gun Laws

  • Comments (9)
Connecticut is now considering new laws for gun control, school security and mental health issues after the shooting at Sandy Hook School last December.
Connecticut is now considering new laws for gun control, school security and mental health issues after the shooting at Sandy Hook School last December. Photo Credit: Al Branch (File)

FAIRFIELD COUNTY, Conn. – Connecticut’s state legislators are expected to vote this week on a set of gun control laws inspired by the Sandy Hook School shooting. Readers in Fairfield, Easton and Weston had differing opinions on the proposal.


What do you think of the new laws proposed by the Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety?

View Results
Reader Results

What do you think of the new laws proposed by the Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety?

  • I agree with all of the suggestions.

  • I think the laws go too far.

  • There are some good ideas, but the task force needs to do more work.

  • I don't know.

Back to Vote

This week the Connecticut General Assembly is expected to vote on the measures recommended by the Bipartisan Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety. The task force’s proposal covers three areas: gun control laws, school security provisions and mental health issues.

Posts announcing the new laws received several “likes” on The Daily Voice’s page. But some commenters expressed doubts with the proposal.

“It’s a knee jerk reaction to a tragic incident,” reader Kent Lyman posted on The Easton Daily Voice Facebook page. “It only punishes the law abiding citizens.”

Robert Davis had similar criticisms on The Fairfield Daily Voice page. Davis called the idea “Knee jerk reaction, feel good legislation that will save no lives.”

On gun control, the bill would require background checks for all firearms purchases and require residents to get permits to buy rifles, shotguns and ammunition. The bill would also ban the sale of magazines that hold more than 10 bullets. It also includes a provision that would prohibit someone from buying weapons

The proposal would also establish a registry of all those who have been convicted of a weapons-related offense in Connecticut. This database would operate similar to the state’s sex offender registry, but it would not be public information. Only law enforcement agencies would have access to the registry.

For school safety, the bill would set up a School Safety Infrastructure Council, which would set up new standards for school building designs to for better physical security. It would also issue $15 million in bonds for a state grant program to reimburse districts that want to improve their security. It also requires all schools to have a security plan that would be reviewed by the state police.

On mental health issues, the bill would institute programs that are designed to make it easier for children with mental problems to get help. It would set up training programs to help educators better identify the warning signs of mental illness, and would ask the Department of Education to consider making this program a requirement for teacher certification.
Join the conversation yourself by liking our pages in Fairfield, Weston and Easton.

  • 9

Comments (9)

The gun nuts are always so quick to blather on about their idiocy and they are sickening. The thing they ignore is they take the opposite position of every major police organization; the overwhelming majority of police chiefs and big city mayors who support bans on semi-automatic assualt rifles, large capacity magazines and armor piercing bullets. I will defer to law enforcement before I defer to ignorant gun nuts.

A second study in a month has reported that the majority of states with the least restrictive laws has more gun violence in the form of homicides, suicides and assaults, while the states with the most restrictive laws regarding firearm legislation have the fewest incidents (authored by A. Gerney, C. Parsons, and C. Posner)...

Even if a person is against new legislation regarding firearms ownership/possession, I do not see how it is going to restrict the average registered gun owner... Why would anyone be against knowing that people have passed background checks or, or the personal need to amass an arsenal of ammunition for high powered firearms??? If it is for the intention to 'ward off an attack from gov forces', well, I don't think you'd even hear the drone overhead...

well one way it effects me is that my magazines are 16 round not 10. so for 6 extra rounds they are illegal now. plus i was going to buy a shot gun with a pistol grip and now i can't. plus this can be just the beginning to more bans. listen if i thought it did any good then its worth the sacrifice but i truly think that those kids were used to carry out a long time agenda. that has nothing to do with keeping those kids safe but to only make the second amendment weaker.

John, I again ask in all honesty, what would you do in the situation we confront now??? We don't want to have another school tragedy... What would be a satisfactory approach to this issue??? I ask this sincerely for good ideas to aid in the safety of our young children... Please give your input for this challenging problem we face... Thank You -- and anyone else with ideas to put forth...

The fact is there are somethings you can not prevent, With out stereo typing certain individuals, its hard to identify the types of people that can go out and commit mass murder until they set out to do it. In the case of Sandy Hook there were some people close to the family that could have raised the red flag. But unless there is due cause or probable cause no action would have been taken. I am very responsible with my guns. They are either on me or locked in a safe. my children do not have access. So if I had a child that was mentally unstable I wouldn't want someone to tell me I dont have the right to possess them. Its easy to pass laws that aren't going to have any effect on you. I try to put myself in their shoes, before I pass judgment.
As Far as the mother that owned the guns though, i believe she had some mental issues such as alcoholism, there's where periodical screening of legal gun owners may be a good prevention.
We need to also spend more attention on mental health, Bullying by fellow students and teachers.
I think there should be more video surveillance in schools and schools should be locked.
There should be Vigilant "trained" Security (not Cops) in schools with direct communication to police.
There are just some ideas. But ill tell you one thing, if someone wants to go out and kill a bunch of people they're not going to care that they have an illegal gun or magazine. Just because you ban something they dont disappear. They are still available to people who want to break the law.

Our constitutional rights to bear arms, "A Well Regulated Militia" is sufficiently met by our National Guard, it is open to any Patriotic Citizen who wishes to protect his homeland with a gun. He will be well trained in the use of his assigned weapon, which he will carry with an 80 pound backpack, running in hot weather. NRA Go Away.

The National Guard is Still our military. we have a right as a citizen to protect our selves. whom ever that enemy may be. If you give someone sole power over you for "your own good", soon that person will be your enemy.

John, in your opinion, what legislation, if any, would be appropriate for firearms' laws??? What you change (or not change)??? Do any other people posting here have any ideas???

Here's an idea: find a way to get "time bombs", like Lanza and Eric Harris of Columbine, off the street and into institutions. Harris announced his intentions several times on line, and orally, and got nothing but a few ineffectual visits from the sheriff before he and the other idiot committed their crimes. Focus on the sickos rather than "scary" weapons, and you will have the willing support of gun owners.