« Should Lindsey Lohan's lawyer be talking up interest in a plea deal for her client? | Main | "Longitudinal Guilt: Repeat Offenders, Plea Bargaining, and the Variable Standard of Proof" »
February 11, 2011
Connecticut legislators exploring creation of state-wide gun-offender registry
As detailed in this local Connecticut article, a "measure that would create the nation's first statewide registry for gun offenders went before lawmakers Thursday at a public hearing on a package of gun bills." Here are the specifics:
The gun-offender database, modeled after the sex-offender registry, would give police a potent new tool to combat violence, said Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney (D-New Haven), who proposed the idea. Several cities, including New York City, Baltimore and Washington D.C., have established such requirements for gun offenders, but no state has done so, Looney said.
Just as those convicted of sex offenses must check in with local authorities, gun offenders would be required to register with local police. But unlike the sex-offender registry, the information on gun offenders would be accessible only to law enforcement officials.
The requirement would apply to people who committed serious gun violations such as those who used a firearm to commit a crime, Looney said. "No law-abiding citizen or sportsman would have anything to fear from this bill," he said.
During the hearing before the legislature's public safety committee, several lawmakers questioned why the registry was needed. They pointed out that a national crime database already contains information about gun offenders. But Looney and other supporters said the registry, unlike the national database, would give law enforcement the ability to pinpoint where the offenders live.
And, like the sex-offender registry, the mere fact of filing with local authorities "creates a psychological impact of knowing [the offender] is being watched more closely," Looney said....
Looney's proposal was supported by police but drew criticism from gun owners and their lobbyists. "If we're going to have a gun-offender registry, why don't we have a carjacking registry? ... Why don't we have a DWI registry?" asked Robert T. Crook, executive director of the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen.
February 11, 2011 at 08:20 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e2014e5f26e9ce970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Connecticut legislators exploring creation of state-wide gun-offender registry:
Comments
Proposal: A registry of people who propose registries.
All product and service providers, all family, all fellow church members should shun them. All strangers should spit on them as they pass in the street. Anyone forced to register should be immune from criminal or tort liability if they beat their ass. To deter.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Feb 11, 2011 9:17:10 AM
All laws are ghoulish unauthorized ghoulish human experimentation. This legislator has a theory, of a psychological effect of being watched. Does it reduce crime? Prove the proposal is safe and works as intended, then enact it. If enacted without such proof, assign a minimum of 5% to outcome measures of any budget for implementation. If after five years, the intended rate of gun crimes does not change, then the law should be void. This automatic cancellation effect should be in the draft of all new laws. For example Sarbanes Oxley, lawyer enacted laws forcing banks to lend to irresponsible minority crack users, excessive environmental regulation cause a depression. Void automatically. Frivolous prosecution and tort litigation defunding drug companies result in a dry new drug pipeline. Void. The lawyer predators causing mass casualties by eliminating drug innovation? Fired. Draconian child porn laws fuel an explosion of child porn production by profit seeking criminal syndicates around the world. Void. War on drugs causes a drop in prices of illegal drugs as supplies outstrip demand. Void.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Feb 11, 2011 9:27:42 AM
Explanation for this craziness: Martin Looney is a lawyer.
"He received his J.D. Degree in 1985 from the University of Connecticut School of Law and, since his admission to the Connecticut Bar in 1985, he has been engaged in the general practice of law. He is a partner in the law firm of Keyes, Looney, and Murphy in New Haven. He is also a practitioner in residence with the Criminal Justice Program in the Department of Public Safety at the University of New Haven in West Haven and is an adjunct faculty member in the Political Science Department at Quinnipiac University in Hamden."
Under his leadership, New Haven is a crime ridden, tax sucking hell hole, with one of the biggest toxic waste dumps in the US, Yale University.
A Constitutional amendment is needed excluding the lawyer from all benches, all legislative seats, and all responsible policy positions in the Executive. They are members of a criminal cult enterprise with supernatural doctrines, unlawful in this secular nation. Rent seeking is the sole aim and achievement. The biggest criminal syndicate in history has totally infiltrated our government and is making 99% of all policy decisions, mostly to serve their sole aim, rent seeking. We mock and pity Mexican or Egyptian government corruption because the police has to be tipped like waiters. Meanwhile, this gigantic criminal syndicate totally runs government and sucks out $trillion in direct costs a year in lawyer rent, and perhaps $5 trillion a year in indirect losses, and lost opportunities. We pity and mock the inadequacy of the governments of Mexico and Egypt, where nothing gets done due to sclerosis and incompetence. Meanwhile, this self-dealing criminal enterprise is taking down the world's economy by its intentionally damaging rule making.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Feb 11, 2011 11:19:55 AM
What an unfortunate name, "Martin Looney". I wonder how much trouble he has getting taken seriously. I hope on this particular item that it's a lot.
Posted by: Soronel Haetir | Feb 11, 2011 11:55:37 AM
so what now a new residence restriciton law for those on the gun registry!
can see it now!
1. No registrant can live within 2,000 feet of any gun shop!
2. No registrant can live or work within 2,000 feet of where guns congragate!
guess this means most if LA is now off limits since most of it is gang controlled and they ALL have guns.
Posted by: rodsmith | Feb 11, 2011 6:48:55 PM
SH: I do not mock his fine Irish name. I mock the mental crippling effects of attending law school. After passing 1L, he could fairly be termed a dumbass. This is not an epithet. It is a lawyer term of art. It refers to modern people who have been stupid enough to undergo and accept the criminal cult indoctrination of law school. They now believe minds can be read, the future foretold, and in a fictional character who sets our standards of due care. Further, they are too stupid to figure this out, and have had 10th grade World History and freshman Western Civ 101 completely erased from their memories by this criminal cult syndicate. They have forgotten the Scholasticist meaning of the word, reason. They are too stupid to remember that the reasonable man is that of the New Testament, Jesus Christ, and that this meaning is unlawful in our secular nation. Dumbass. There is no lawyer in this country that remembers those courses and knows this, not even people who have set unmatched academic records at top Ivy law schools, and are experts in the First Amendment. No lawyer has ever been told the real, technical meaning of the word, reasonable. Worse, it is irritating to them to have a civilian who remembers high school point out how much of a dumbass they have been turned into, and they ban this high school grad from their blogs. Prof. Berman attended a top law school. Was he ever told the real meaning of the word, reasonable. I bet 10 cents he was not. It is a real cover up.
Mentally retarded special ed students have more sense than this dumbass, Looney, even without their having taken academic 10th grade World History or college Western Civ 101.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Feb 11, 2011 8:28:07 PM
Why not! we are starting to morally degrade against the ideals the nation was founded on.
http://predictgenderboyorgirl.blogspot.com
Posted by: Sarah "How Do I Have A Girl" Smith | Jul 8, 2011 10:55:18 AM
