If you own a gun in this state your name and address could become public under a bill introduced in the General Assembly by State Rep. Stephen D. Dargan, D-West Haven.
Dargan filed the proposal in response to the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown that killed 20 children and 6 women on Dec. 14. His proposal would overturn a law passed in Connecticut 20 years ago that keeps private the names and addresses of gun owners.
In an interview with the Hartford Courant, Dargan said he wants gun ownership information to fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act in part so that parents can know whether the parents of their child's friends have guns in their homes.
"Maybe their kids are going over to Johnny Smith's, and maybe they want to see whether they have guns in the house," he told the newspaper.
Dargan's proposal follows another bill that was filed recently that seeks to limit who can own gun ammunition in Connecticut and to keep such ammunition out of the hands of felons. Gun control issues are expected to dominate the General Assembly's winter session, which formally begins next week, in the wake of the Newtown massacre.
Now no offense to you but asking every one of your friends if they have a gun in the house is a little crazy, you probably won't be getting many party invites going forward;) I can understand asking if you have kids going over, but as long as the owner is responsible and keeps the guns stored safely you really have nothing to worry about.
As far as asking friends if there are guns in the house upon receiving an invitation, I will and if they have a problem with that, then I won't go to their house. I don't think it's crazy at all. It doesn't mean that I won't go to their house if they own a gun... My husband used to have a gun. I won't go to a house that has an assault rifle in it. Period. And I have no problem with staying away from any house with an assault rifle... Just my little stand and if it means I lose a friend, then I lose a friend! :) my little stand in memory of the children and teachers killed because of a disturbed young man and his mother who thought it a good idea to keep an assault rifle and lots of ammunition in her house.
Its also bears noting that knives (1,694), body parts (728), and blunt objects (496) all contributed to more deaths than assault style rifles. Source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
I especially like Ropeik's summary http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/06/what-the-fight-over-guns-is-really-about/?ref=opinion
First this will do nothing to ID the ILLEGAL Firearms---What percentage of killings are Really dne by those---You might be surprised. Second a Gun in the House--A Play Date--Hah Why don'yt you check the driving record of those parents also--Drunken Moms or CELL PHONE Talking Moms driving their Fairfield County SUV's pose a greater risk. Neither side is wrong nor is Neither side right--The answer has to lie in a co-operative effort. Al ready the Media and the Politiciand are "Making Hay" over this--we as a people must solve theissue. Start in tyyour Own House !!!!
I don't think there is an easy answer to this. Gun ownership has long been part of the American experience pre-dating the Constitution. Part of settling a new continent I suppose. It's enshrined in the Bill Of Rights. It would be impossible to 'confiscate' a fraction of the millions of guns out there...and voluntary returns would not put a dent into the inventory; especially those held by criminals. I therefore think bans on certain types of weapons and perhaps the ammo used by them is the only response that might improve upon our sense of security but this too might have only a limited effect on homicides.
Assault rifles are already illegal in CT.
How about the Kid from your town who was so invoved talking on her cell phone that she Struck AND KILLED a person on the side of the road. How about the Drunk Drivers who can barely drive their SUV's who kill more peopl than Guns in your Town(and Nationwide) Think !!!!!!! >ook at yourself and YOUR life style !!!!!!! LET the COMMISION do its Job !!! There are several other factors here--ONE BEING an Impaired SPOILED Kid--Like you don't havre that in Fairfield County ??????? It's not just Guns Karla !!!!! Get a Grip and Get out in the Real World !!
Freedom IS NOT FREE that's the sorry state of the world around you.
Keep it up !!!!! No side is either right nor wrong !!!! Agressive comments you bet !!!!!!Put the emotions aside and Let the appinted people-Mature, welleducated and balenced DO THEIR JOB !!!
I support common sense regulations but banning AR-15's and 30 round mags doesn't make any sense. It won't make anyone safer and it won't keep guns out of the wrong hands.
What is the correct # of rounds a magazine should carry? 10 is frequently mentioned as it was set to that in the last federal ban, but that's an arbitrary number. Most full size semi-automatic pistols carry at least 12 & commonly 15-17. This is standard. Attempting to restrict magazines greater than x number of rounds is a fool's errand (not directed at you, just speaking generally). There are 10's of millions of magazines in circulation & they're not going away. There are valid reason for their use, both in competition as well as self defense. The police only average something around 33% hit rate when they have to use their firearms. If a citizen has to protect themselves from 3 meth heads, how many rounds will it take to stop the attack? Will they wait for you to reload?