State Can't Let Gun Scofflaws Off Hook

[mwrguy]

So much for the myth of the law abiding gun owner.

Gun Registration: Break the law, pay the price
February 14, 2014|Editorial, The Hartford Courant


Connecticut has a gun problem.

It's estimated that perhaps scores of thousands of Connecticut residents failed to register their military-style assault weapons with state police by Dec. 31.

That's the deadline imposed by a tough bipartisan gun-safety law passed by the legislature last year in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.

Widespread noncompliance with this major element of a law that was seen as a speedy and hopefully effective response by Connecticut to mass shootings such as the one at Sandy Hook creates a headache for the state.

The dimensions of the unregistered guns problem were outlined in a Tuesday column by The Courant's Dan Haar.

Guns defined in state law as assault weapons can no longer be bought or sold in Connecticut. Such guns already held can be legally possessed if registered. But owning an unregistered assault weapon is a Class D felony. Felonies cannot go unenforced.

First, however, the registration period should be reopened. It should be accompanied by a public information campaign.

Although willful noncompliance with the law is doubtless a major issue, it's possible that many gun owners are unaware of their obligation to register military-style assault weapons and would do so if given another chance.

But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law. Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers who might not have registered those guns in compliance with the new law.

A Class D felony calls for a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Even much lesser penalties or probation would mar a heretofore clean record and could adversely affect, say, the ability to have a pistol permit.

If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

http://articles.courant.com/2014-02-14/news/hc-ed-gun-registration-20140214_1_new-law-gun-registration-military-style-assault-weapons

[gejohnston]

1. civil disobediance

a very great American liberal tradition. 350K people, enforcement not happening. I don't think there is a background check database, or at least one that exists legally. Even if did, the estimate number of noncompliance is in the neighborhood of 350K. Imagine what that would do to the legal system. Imagine if they rounded up every pot smoker, same difference.

[clffrdjk]

2. Way to send mixed messages

"State Can't Let Gun Scofflaws Off Hook
Gun Registration: Break the law, pay the price
So much for the myth of the law abiding gun owner."

"First, however, the registration period should be reopened. It should be accompanied by a public information campaign. "

So they are going to be punished and the minimum penalty is a felony but you encourage them to turn themselves in with a second round of registration. Yea that seems like a smart idea.

[sarisataka]

3. So maximum penalty

For this guy? http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172136868

[ileus]

4. I'm not a myth.

[oldhippie]

5. "Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers .."

And then go door to door to arrest them, I suppose?

I wonder what they will run out of first, cops or scofflaws?

" Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers who might not have registered those guns in compliance with the new law. " And so it begins.

[oneshooter]

10. The data obtained by background check is deleted after 24 hours.

That was the only way they could get it passed. So sad for you.

[oldhippie]

11. Uh, I know that. You might want to re-read my post ....

.... as I was quoting someone else, and mocking the concept of using the data to confiscate guns.

I'm not sad.

[oneshooter]

12. I meant to reply to the same post. Long days/short nights.

[Lurks Often]

13. CT has it's own database

Background checks in CT go through the State Police database, not the Federal NICS, although I am sure data is shared between them. Additionally, when someone buys a firearm from an FFL or does a private purchase, which requires a background check as well, they must fill out 3 copies of the CT DPS-3C form, one the seller keeps, one goes to the State Police and one goes to the Chief of Police of the town the buyer lives in.

And while the law says the data from a Federal NICS check is supposed to be deleted, given the overreach exhibited by other departments in the government, increasingly I wonder if it really is deleted.

[Eleanors38]

6. 80-90 mill. "myths" floating 'round out there? Sounds like

a whole race, right here in River City.

[hack89]

7. So if they register their guns they immediately stop being a threat to public safety?

Is that the logic here?

[SQUEE]

8. If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

as the 2A is the law of the land, maybe, just maybe, the Commonwealth should follow this advice. I am an avid shooter, as such I am often in the company of people that, right or wrong, will fight to maintain their rights. This is not even remotely a road I want this country to go down. The talk is spreading, people are getting angrier and angrier, both sides have dug in and are pushing harder and harder to dehumanize and villify the percieved enemy.
I truly fear it will not end well for ANY of us.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. So much for the myth of the Constitution-abiding gun controller. n/t

[jeepnstein]

14. Some folks are just itching for an old-fashioned crackdown.

They really seem to be eager to bust a few heads. You know, in the name of preventing violence.