A BATTLE, NOT THE WAR

Ban on high-capacity magazines part of deal struck on strict Connecticut gun laws

Published April 01, 2013

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 ones used 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 also 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.

The deal is “the most comprehensive package in the country because of its breadth,” said Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, a Fairfield Republican whose district includes Newtown.

McKinney said people tend to focus on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, but he said “there’s a lot here underneath the surface” addressing mental health, school security and other issues.

The proposal was revealed to rank-and-file lawmakers Monday after weeks of negotiations among legislative leaders. A vote was expected later this week in the Legislature, where Democrats control both chambers, making passage all but assured. The bill would then be sent to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who has helped lead efforts to strengthen the state’s gun laws.

Connecticut is sending a message to Washington and the rest of the country “this is the way to get this job done,” said House Speaker Brendan Sharkey, a Democrat from Hamden. Both Democratic and Republican leaders were expected to support the proposal, which had been in the works for about a month.

The shooting reignited the gun debate in the country and led to calls for increased gun control legislation on the federal and state levels. While some other states, including New York, have strengthened their gun laws since the shooting, momentum has stalled in Congress, whose members were urged by President Barack Obama last week not to forget the shooting and to capitalize on the best change in years to stem gun violence.

The gunman in Newtown blasted his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and fired off 154 shots with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle within five minutes. He went through six 30-round magazines, though half were not completely empty, and police said he had three other 30-round magazines in addition to one in the rifle. He gunned down 26 people, then shot himself to death with a handgun.

Six relatives of Newtown victims visited the Capitol on Monday, asking lawmakers to include a ban on existing high-capacity magazines. Some handed out cards with photographs of their slain children. They delivered a letter signed by 24 relatives that demanded that legislators include existing large-capacity ammunition magazines in the ban on the sale of magazines that carry 10 or more bullets.

Allowing such large-capacity magazines to remain in the hands of gun owners would leave a gaping loophole in the law, said Mark Barden, whose 7-year-old son, Daniel, was killed in the shooting.

“It doesn’t prevent someone from going out of the state to purchase them and then bring them back. There’s no way to track when they were purchased, so they can say, `I had this before,”‘ Barden said. “So it’s a big loophole.”

Jake McGuigan, a spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which is based in Newtown, said he wouldn’t comment on the proposal until he saw it in the writing, but he questioned the mechanics of a registry for magazines.

“How will they register a magazine? It seems a little weird,” he said

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/01/ban-on-high-capacity-magazines-part-deal-struck-on-strict-connecticut-gun-laws/#ixzz2PGayUOiE

:Connecticut Gun Ban Bills Revealed

Posted on April 1, 2013

Summary of Gun Violence Prevention Provisions

[via wtnh.com]

1. The bill establishes a first in the nation statewide dangerous weapon offender registry

The bill creates a first in the nation statewide dangerous weapon offender registry (a handful of cities across the country have their own gun offender registries). This has been the top priority of urban mayors and the Police Chiefs Association for the last several years. Under the bill, individuals must register with DESPP if they have been convicted of any of more than 40 enumerated weapons offenses (mostly gun offenses) or another felony that the court makes a finding involved the use or threatened use of a deadly weapon . . .

Individuals must register with DESPP for a total of five years after their release into the community. During that time they must keep their registration address current at all times, and they must check in once per year, on the anniversary of their release, with local law enforcement in the town where they currently reside. Unlike Megan’s List, this registry will not be public. Instead, it will be available to law enforcement only.

2. The bill requires “universal background checks” for the sale of all firearms immediately, upon passage.

Under current law, private sales of rifles and shotguns are completely unregulated (while the sale of any pistol or revolver or the sale of a rifle or shotgun by a licensed dealer requires a criminal background check). Under the bill, this glaring loophole is immediately closed, and all private long gun sales must be preceded by the buyer passing a national criminal background check.

Immediately upon passage, no pistol, revolver, rifle or shotgun can be sold to any Connecticut resident until the buyer undergoes and passes a national criminal background check — whether such sale is private, at a gun show, or through a dealer.

3. The bill significantly expands the Connecticut Assault Weapons Ban.

Currently, Connecticut is one of only a handful of states with a state-level assault weapons ban. Under current law, an “assault weapon” is defined as one of 66 different specified firearms, or any other semiautomatic weapon that contains “two or more” of a list of physical characteristics.

Under the current bill, a) an additional list of more than 100 new specified weapons will be designated as banned assault weapons, in addition to all of the other weapons captured by the “physical characteristics” test. Also, that characteristics test is being amended to add some new banned military-style features, and also to require an assault weapon to have ­only one of the listed features in order to fall under the ban.

Thus, many more weapons – well over a hundred additional models — will now fall under the Connecticut Assault Weapons Ban. Therefore, under the bill, effective on passage, they will no longer be allowed to be bought or sold in Connecticut nor imported into the state (with some law enforcement exemptions). Those currently legally possessed will have to be registered with DESPP, and their legal use and transport will be tightly limited.

4. The bill immediately bans the sale or purchase of large capacity magazines, and imposes extremely stringent restrictions on the use of those currently possessed.

Only 7 states and the District of Columbia have any limits on the legal size or use of ammunition magazines. The definition of those regulated large capacity magazines (“LCMs”), with regard to the threshold capacity, varies. New York recently went down to 7 rounds, but apparently is going to go back up to 10. Maryland is at 20 rounds, and may go down to 10 via a Senate bill currently pending in the House. New Jersey and Colorado are at 15 rounds. California and Hawaii are at 10, but the Hawaii law only applies to handguns.

Under the bill, Connecticut will now join these states. An LCM will be defined as one that can hold more than 10 rounds.

Immediate ban on sale, purchase or importation of LCMs: effective on passage, it will be a class D felony to sell, buy, transfer or import an LCM into the state (other than to turn it in or trade it in to law enforcement or a licensed gun dealer). Going forward, possession of any LCM not possessed as of the effective date will be a class D felony.

LCMs that are currently possessed must be registered with DESPP by January 1, 2014 to remain legal, and even when registered will be subject to extremely strict usage limitations:

· Possession of such magazines must be declared to DESPP by January 1, 2014. After January 1, 2014, any LCM that has not been the subject of such a declaration cannot be legally possessed under any circumstances (even if it had been possessed before the effective date).

· Even with regard to such legally declared LCMs, upon passage the bill will immediately impose the following stringent limitations on their use:

o Except for in an individual’s home or on the premises of a shooting range, an LCM can never be loaded with more than 10 bullets.

o Even if an individual has a permit to carry a pistol or revolver, they can never carry, other than at a shooting range, a pistol that has an LCM loaded with more than 10 bullets.

o If an individual with a carry permit has a pistol that they purchased prior to the effective date that accepts an LCM, they can carry the LCM in that pistol, but only loaded with 10 bullets. Moreover, under no circumstances can the LCM in such pistol extend below the pistol grip.

o If an individual has a pistol purchased after the effective date, an LCM can never be carried with that pistol other than at a shooting range. Instead, the individual must use only a magazine that takes 10 or fewer bullets in any pistol purchased from the effective date forward .

5. The bill requires new state issued eligibility certificates for the purchase of any rifle, shotgun or ammunition.

Long guns: The bill establishes a new revocable state-issued “long gun eligibility certificate”, which will require the applicant to undergo a firearms safety training course, be fingerprinted, and undergo a national criminal background and involuntary commitment /voluntary admission check. Under the bill, as of April 1, 2014, such long gun eligibility certificate will be required to be presented for the purchase of any rifle or shotgun (in addition to the aforementioned now-“universal” criminal background check).

Ammunition: The bill establishes a new revocable state issued “ammunition eligibility certificate”, which will require the applicant to pass a national criminal background check. The bill requires, as of October 1, 2013, that any sale of ammunition or an ammunition magazine to a Connecticut resident be accompanied by the presentation of either a permit to carry a pistol or revolver, an eligibility certificate for a pistol or revolver, a long gun eligibility certificate, a firearms dealer permit, or a combination of an ammunition eligibility certificate and a state issued photo ID. Therefore , as of October 1, 2013 there will be no legal sales of ammunition or magazines to any Connecticut resident who has not passed a national criminal background check, and is in good standing with regard to such check (i.e. their state issued certificate has not been revoked).

6. The bill expands the scope of Connecticut’s firearms safe storage law.

Under current law, the legal duty to securely store a firearm applies only when a person under 16 years of age is likely to gain access to the firearm, The bill significantly expands the scope of that duty, to situations where the firearm owner knows or should know that: 1) any resident of the premises where the firearm is stored is ineligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law, or 2) that a resident of the premises poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself or to other individuals.

7. The bill significantly increases penalties for many firearms trafficking and illegal possession offenses.

8. The bill expands the membership of the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners, and expands due process for local authorities in front of the board.

In addition to the current 7 members, the bill adds a mental health professional appointed by the governor but nominated by DMHAS, and a retired Superior Court judge chosen by the Chief Court Administrator. Moreover, the bill allows an issuing authority to receive one continuance for good cause shown.

9. The bill changes the status, with regard to the legal possession of firearms and permits therefor, of individuals who have been either involuntarily confined in or voluntarily admitted to a hospital for persons with psychiatric disabilities, as defined in section 17a-495 of the general statutes.

Involuntary committals: under current law, an individual who has been involuntarily committed by order of the Probate Court to such a hospital within the previous 12 months can neither possess a firearm nor receive a permit or eligibility certificate. The bill expands that look back period to 60 months, for those receiving permits or eligibility certificates after the effective date.

Voluntary admissions: current law does not address voluntary admissions. Under the bill, an individual who has been so admitted will not be able to receive a permit or eligibility certificate for 6 months thereafter, nor will they be eligible to possess any firearm for those 6 months following their release from the hospital.

10. The bill strengthens Connecticut law with regard to firearms in several additional respects.

· The bill establishes the offense of illegal possession of ammunition, so that an individual who is ineligible to possess a firearm will also now be ineligible to possess any ammunition.

· The bill requires applicants for a temporary permit to carry a pistol or revolver to apply only in their town of residence (as opposed to also where they work), and further limits such applications to only one per twelve months.

· The bill establishes a new age limit for the purchase of centerfire semi-automatic rifles (other than banned assault weapons). Under the bill an individual will have to be at least 21 to purchase such a rifle, as opposed to the current federal age limit of 18.

· The bill bans the sale of armor piercing ammunition, and makes it a class D felony to carry a firearm loaded with any such ammunition.

· The bill amends the Earned Risk Reduction Program to ensure that violent felons, including those who committed crimes with firearms, serve at least eighty-five percent of their original sentences.

Summary of School Security Provisions

K-12 Language

· Establishes the School Safety Infrastructure Council which develops safety standards for school building projects.

o The Council must have the initial standards developed by January 1, 2014 and then update them annually as necessary.

o Requires projects reviewed by the Department of Construction Services after July 1, 2014 to comply with the school safety infrastructure standards developed by the School Safety Infrastructure Council.

o Requires the already existing School Building Projects Advisory Council to include the school infrastructure safety standards developed in the model blueprints they have available to schools.

· Reauthorizes the school security infrastructure competitive grant program to reimburse towns for upgrades to school security infrastructure.

o The reimbursement rate is the same as the districts reimbursement rate under school construction (between 20% and 80% depending on the municipality).

o Authorizes the issuance $15 million of bonds for the program.

· Requires the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection in consultation with the Department of Education to develop school security and safety plan standards by January 1, 2014.

o Annually the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection submits a copy of the school security and safety standards along with any recommendations for legislation to the Public Safety and Education Committees.

· Requires that school security and safety plans be developed at each school.

o These plans must be submitted to the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection.

· Requires safe school climate committees established by the bullying law to investigate instances of disturbing and threating behavior reported to it.

· Requires the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to maintain a registry of school security consultants operating in the state.

Higher Education Language

· Requires all state and independent colleges and universities in Connecticut to submit their security plan to the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection.

· Requires a security and vulnerability assessment every two years.

· Requires the creation of threat assessment teams.

· Requires the Board of Regents for Higher Education to study the creation of a police department for the community colleges.

· Requires security audits of the state universities and community colleges to be performed by the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection.

Summary of Mental Health Provisions

With regard to mental health, the proposal focuses on helping individuals and their families overcome obstacles to accessing treatment and support.

· Requires DMHAS, in consultation with SDE, to administer a mental health first aid training program that teaches people to recognize the signs of mental disorders in children and young adults and connect them with services. Also allows boards of education to require teachers and other school employees to participate in mental health first aid training.

· Allows boards of education to offer mental health first aid as an in-service training.

· Requires the Commissioner of Education to consider whether mental health first aid training should be included in the teacher preparation program leading to certification.

· Creates a task force to conduct a comprehensive study of Connecticut’s mental health system, with a special focus on the vulnerable 16-25 year old population. Research topics will include: early intervention, gaps in insurance coverage, the mental health workforce, outpatient commitment, mental health professionals’ reporting responsibilities, services provided in the schools and stigma. Task force will report by 2/1/14.

· Expands DMHAS’s Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) program to three additional locations. ACT teams are currently operating in three cities and provide recovery-oriented treatment and support services through a mobile, multi-disciplinary team.

· Adds additional slots for case management and coordination to assist people with mental illness who are involved with the probate system. (The Melissa’s Project currently provides these services in some probate courts.)

· Establishes the ACCESS-MH program, modeled after the Massachusetts Child Psychiatry Access Project and similar programs in 26 other states. This program will provide training, support, and professional consultations for pediatricians to help them intervene with children who have mental health conditions.

In addition, the bill contains several changes to commercial insurance based on the recommendations of the Program Review and Investigations Committee and bills from the PRI and Insurance Committees:
o Requires Insurance Department to evaluate and report on its method for determining compliance with the state and federal mental health parity laws.

o Requires that certain mental health and substance abuse services be considered “urgent care” requests and shortens the review time for these requests from 72 to 24 hours.

Institutes a more robust definition of “clinical peer” with regard to the review of mental health and substance abuse services, to ensure that the health professional reviewing the claim has similar qualifications to the mental health professional who prescribed the treatment.

o Designates disorder treatment criteria for mental health and substance use, so that coverage decisions are more consistent from carrier to carrier and consumers are given a clear reason for a denial.

o Requires insurers to inform consumers that they have the right to appeal a denial, they can request additional information, and they can contact the Office of the Healthcare Advocate for assistance.

[h/t Pascal who writes “Not much to say except we are officially ******”]

Democrats push bill in Congress to require gun insurance under penalty of fine

Published April 02, 2013

FoxNews.com

The left’s assault on ammunition

A New York Democratic lawmaker is behind a national push that would force gun owners to buy liability insurance or face a $10,000 fine.

The Firearm Risk Protection Act, pushed by Rep. Carolyn Maloney and seven co-sponsors, follows efforts at the state level to create the controversial new kind of insurance for gun owners.

“For too long, gun victims and society at large have borne the brunt of the costs of gun violence,” Maloney said in a written statement. “My bill would change that by shifting some of that cost back onto those who own the weapons.”

The likelihood, though, of Maloney’s bill gaining any traction is slim. Republicans control the House, and even states where Democrats have sizeable majorities have not approved the insurance idea.

Six states — California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Pennsylvania — have all introduced gun liability insurance legislation over the past few months. None has produced any results.

In Illinois, the House rejected a measure 34-74 that would require people carrying concealed weapons to also carry $1 million in liability insurance. Chicago Democrat Kenneth Dunkin was behind the defeated bill. He said an insurance policy would cost between $500 to $2,000, but Illinois Republicans successfully argued the costs were too high for citizens exercising their constitutional right to carry a gun, and the bill was defeated.

Last week, a similar measure in Connecticut was withdrawn following a two-hour hearing on the issue. Connecticut’s proposal would require firearm owners to maintain excess personal liability insurance and self-defense insurance.

In Maryland, a bill that sought mandatory firearm liability insurance for gun owners was also recently withdrawn.

Because there have been so many setbacks on state levels, many have argued that trying to pass a liability insurance mandate on a national level would be near impossible.

Still, Maloney maintains she won’t back down from the fight.

“We have a long history of requiring insurance for high-risk products — and no one disputes that guns are dangerous,” she said in her written statement. “While many individual states are debating this issue right now, it makes more sense for Congress to establish a national requirement to allow the insurance markets to begin to price the risks involved consistently nationwide.”

Maloney also supports proposed bans on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

The push in Congress for a renewed assault weapons ban has faltered. Though it is expected to get a vote as an amendment to a broader gun control package, few expect it to pass. The debate in Congress lately has centered on whether lawmakers can agree to a system of near-universal background checks.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/02/democrats-push-bill-in-congress-to-require-gun-insurance/#ixzz2PNA0S0lT

The left’s assault on ammunition
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2273039383001/

Is CO Giving Secret Service The Power to Arrest Sheriffs?
Posted on April 3, 2013 by Ralph

Colorado sheriffs have gone on record against enforcement of the unconstitutional Colorado gun rights restrictions. Scuttlebutt is that noncompliant law enforcement officers are in the crosshairs of the governor. The rumor grew out of proposed SB 13-013, appointing certain federal agents as Colorado peace officers. To quote from the bill’s summary, “The bill gives a special agent, uniform division officer, physical security technician, physical security specialist, or special officer of the United States secret service limited peace officer authority while working in Colorado.” Should the Sheriffs be afraid? . . .

Under Colorado Statutes §16-3-110, federal officers who are licensed to kill authorized to use deadly force already have limited peace officer status in Colorado, entitling them to make misdemeanor and felony arrests for state law violations that they actually observe (they don’t need state peace officer status to make arrests for federal law violations, observed or not). SB 13-013 gives federal Secret Service Agents broadened powers to enforce state laws.

If passed, the Feds will have the additional power to make state law arrests based on observation, probable cause in an emergency, or when assisting Colorado cops by invitation or as part of a joint task force.

Sorting out the truth of the rumor first requires determining whether a sheriff’s willful non-enforcement would be a crime. Absent some statute or case that I don’t know about, I’m inclined to say no. If this proposal places anyone in the crosshairs, it would be Joe or Jane Citizen with a standard PMAG. But if that’s the case, why would Colorado enlist the Secret Service and not the ATF?

We’ll find out more about this bill in committee and floor debates.

Maryland House Passes Gun Ban Bill

Posted on April 4, 2013 by Robert Farago

“Maryland’s House of Delegates approved a major gun control measure Wednesday to ban assault weapons, require people who buy handguns to provide their fingerprints and limit gun magazines to 10 bullets,” foxnews.com reports. “The House voted 78-61 for the [Firearm Safety Act of 2013], one of Democratic Gov. Martin O’Malley’s priorities for the legislative session scheduled to end at midnight Monday. All 78 votes in support of the bill came from Democrats, while 18 Democrats joined all 43 Republicans in the chamber to vote against it.” The gun ban, mag cap limit and fingerprint requirements place Maryland firmly in the slave state camp once the bill clears the Senate (33 Democrats vs. 14 Republicans) and lands on O’Malley’s desk for signature. Berretta, who famously declared Berettas don’t bluff, will bail on the Free State [sic]. And others.

Rhode Island Set to Sink Into Slave State Status

Earlier today I told Lola we’re moving to Texas. My nine-year-old took it about as well as could be expected: she swore at me. Which was something of a shock. Which is not how I’d characterize my reaction to news that Rhode Island legislators will introduce nine new pieces of gun control legislation on Tuesday. rigunblog.com rightly reckons the gun ban bills will mirror New York’s SAFE Act and Connecticut’s Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety Act. We’re talking ”high capacity” magazine and modern sporting rifle bans, new registration requirements, universal background checks, etc. A state whose constitution enshrines the right to keep and bear arms, a state that owes its existence to Roger Williams’ love of liberty, is about to become a latter day slave state. With a bit of luck and the wind in the right direction, Lola and I will be in Austin before civilian disarmament becomes the deal of the day. Shame . . .

CPB Email to Agents: Qual Ammo Only

by Robert Farago

Here’s an email that’s surfaced from Customs and Border Protection (CPB) to its agents:

Enforcement Personnel,

Due to budget concerns and ammunition availability, we will not be getting issued any proficiency ammunition for next quarter. In addition to these reductions, we are also being limited to qualification ammo only. What this means to you is that you will not receive the normal 150 rounds for practice and we will not have any extra ammunition for a combat course following normal qualifications . . .

If you have the ammunition available and would like extra practice during your qualification day, the firearms instructors will have a training course available for Indio Station Personnel, keeping in mind basic marksmanship skills as well as tactical training with a limited amount of ammunition. You are not required to bring your own ammunition.

If you do not have extra ammo to bring, you will be given extra time to clean and maintain your issued handgun as well as station long arms.

If you have any questions about this quarters quals please feel free to send me your concerns.

Thanks.

You may be wondering WTF. Didn’t you read somewhere that the DHS bought billions of rounds of ammo over the last year or so? Yes. Yes you did. Thanks to Senator Coburn, you can click here to read who’s got what, who needs what and where all the cartridges are going.

CPB certainly gets the lion’s share of the DHS’ ammo cache. But it seems that CPB’s allocation is shrinking; down from 66m rounds in 2010 to 36m (saving tax payers $5m!). That said, CPB has 94m rounds in inventory. So what up with the shortage at the sharp end?

Hanlon’s Razor baby: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Or, in the case of government, inefficiency. Some DHS bean counter screwed-up somewhere and there the ammo sits, waiting for bureaucrats to get a clue.

The CPB’s union (NBPC Local 2554) disagrees. They have this to say about that:

Didn’t we (DHS) just get a massive ammunition contract? El Centro Sector Border Patrol agents were just informed (3/28/13) that due to budget cuts, they would not be issued any ammunition (in this quarter) for maintaining proficiency beyond the number of rounds needed to complete the quarterly qualification itself. We get a 32% pay cut, even though Congress gave CBP enough money to cover salaries, and now we can’t even maintain proficiency with our service weapons to defend ourselves in the field…

Why is there an ammunition shortage? Why can’t Border Patrol agents get enough ammunition to maintain proficiency, especially at a time of increased cross-border smuggling and illegal activity? Where is all this ammunition going?

Like I said, nowhere. Fast. And Furious? Sorry. Couldn’t resist.