Justin
Moderator Emeritus
I thought this was an interesting article that gives some insight into the requirements to purchase a firearm in the state of Connecticut.
Sticking to Their Guns
In the wake of the Cheshire triple murder, local residents go to the gun stores in droves
By Jennifer Abel
"God made men and women, and Sam Colt made them equal.”
Who said that first? Not sure, but it explains the motivation of a certain reporter who genuflects in reverence each morning when she walks into the Advocate offices and sees the blue dome of the Colt building framed in the picture window.
“That blue dome in Hartford?” Scott Hoffman said as he stood behind the counter of Hoffman’s Gun Center in Newington. “If it were anything else but guns, it would be a national monument. It started the industrial revolution … you hear them talk about Eli Whitney and the cotton gin, but not about guns.”
That’s true. Generally speaking, the only time you hear “them” say much about guns is when one’s used to commit a well-publicized crime. Then “they” talk about how peaceful life would be if only everyone would beat their guns into plowshares. But there weren’t any guns waved about during last month’s horrific home invasion in Cheshire. Turns out that a pair of criminals determined to rape and murder three people don’t need a gun to do it.
Might things have worked out differently had the family owned a gun? That question’s been picking at the back of many minds, if the increased customer traffic at Hoffman’s is any indication.
“We’ve had a lot more people coming in since then,” he said. “Can’t count how many offhand … what we noticed was a lot of people who were in the middle, not anti-gun, not pro-gun … this pushed them over the edge. When you hear of a shooting in Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, the average suburbanite isn’t affected by that.”
But a triple murder in a tranquil town like Cheshire is more likely to strike a suburban chord. “People are scared. You can see it in their eyes.”
Despite the extra customers, Hoffman’s store had a well-stocked look when the Advocate dropped by. Not what you’d expect the shelves to look like after a sudden surge in sales. That’s because same-day purchases are effectively illegal. Hoffman’s extra customers haven’t decreased his stock because they’re legally precluded from doing so.
“Over the years, I’ve seen people come in [the store] after being assaulted, robbed, raped … and they say, ‘I have to get a pistol permit and wait three months?’ People are amazed by how stringent the laws are in our state.”
What might be even more amazing is that these laws restrict citizens’ ability to exercise a right explicitly spelled out in the state constitution, where article one, section 15 says: “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”
“Right now a gun is the most effective weapon for that purpose,” Hoffman said.
The right to own weapons is spelled out more clearly in Connecticut’s constitution than the national one, which says “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There’s been a long debate over just what the Founders meant by this: must the “people” allowed to bear arms be members of that “well-regulated militia”? Those who support additional restrictions on the right to gun ownership say yes.
The opposing view says that once America had her independence, the Founders understood the need to maintain a peacetime army but were concerned that a regular army could be used repressively. In this context, the second amendment is interpreted as “Since the government must maintain an armed militia, ordinary citizens must be allowed to have weapons, too.” Which interpretation is correct? It doesn’t matter in Connecticut, where the right to self-defense is written less ambiguously: “every citizen has the right to bear arms.”
But there is a waiting period. If you start the pistol-buying process right now you can use that pistol to defend yourself from a home invasion that takes place after Thanksgiving.
Suppose you’re destined to be attacked sooner than this? Hoffman says that legal shotgun acquisition can be accomplished more expediently, in just over two weeks. “You fill out two lengthy forms we submit to the state police. Two weeks later, you come back, they do a national background check.”
Though Hoffman would like to see this process streamlined, he has no blanket opposition to gun laws in general. “I don’t mind gun laws. I don’t want [just] anybody to be able to buy a gun.”
Here’s a rare occurrence: you don’t often hear the owner of a gun shop agree with a spokesperson for an organization with a name like “Connecticut Against Gun Violence.” But that’s what happened when the Advocate called that group and spoke with Executive Director Lisa Labella.
“In Connecticut our Constitution says you can have guns for protection. We respect that fact,” said Labella. “We want to make sure gun owners are law-abiding citizens.”
At the same time, Connecticut Against Gun Violence wouldn’t mind seeing the number of gun owners shrink. “I personally would not want a gun … I think a home alarm is more effective than a gun you may or may not have next to you.” ●
Sticking to Their Guns
In the wake of the Cheshire triple murder, local residents go to the gun stores in droves
By Jennifer Abel
"God made men and women, and Sam Colt made them equal.”
Who said that first? Not sure, but it explains the motivation of a certain reporter who genuflects in reverence each morning when she walks into the Advocate offices and sees the blue dome of the Colt building framed in the picture window.
“That blue dome in Hartford?” Scott Hoffman said as he stood behind the counter of Hoffman’s Gun Center in Newington. “If it were anything else but guns, it would be a national monument. It started the industrial revolution … you hear them talk about Eli Whitney and the cotton gin, but not about guns.”
That’s true. Generally speaking, the only time you hear “them” say much about guns is when one’s used to commit a well-publicized crime. Then “they” talk about how peaceful life would be if only everyone would beat their guns into plowshares. But there weren’t any guns waved about during last month’s horrific home invasion in Cheshire. Turns out that a pair of criminals determined to rape and murder three people don’t need a gun to do it.
Might things have worked out differently had the family owned a gun? That question’s been picking at the back of many minds, if the increased customer traffic at Hoffman’s is any indication.
“We’ve had a lot more people coming in since then,” he said. “Can’t count how many offhand … what we noticed was a lot of people who were in the middle, not anti-gun, not pro-gun … this pushed them over the edge. When you hear of a shooting in Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, the average suburbanite isn’t affected by that.”
But a triple murder in a tranquil town like Cheshire is more likely to strike a suburban chord. “People are scared. You can see it in their eyes.”
Despite the extra customers, Hoffman’s store had a well-stocked look when the Advocate dropped by. Not what you’d expect the shelves to look like after a sudden surge in sales. That’s because same-day purchases are effectively illegal. Hoffman’s extra customers haven’t decreased his stock because they’re legally precluded from doing so.
“Over the years, I’ve seen people come in [the store] after being assaulted, robbed, raped … and they say, ‘I have to get a pistol permit and wait three months?’ People are amazed by how stringent the laws are in our state.”
What might be even more amazing is that these laws restrict citizens’ ability to exercise a right explicitly spelled out in the state constitution, where article one, section 15 says: “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”
“Right now a gun is the most effective weapon for that purpose,” Hoffman said.
The right to own weapons is spelled out more clearly in Connecticut’s constitution than the national one, which says “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There’s been a long debate over just what the Founders meant by this: must the “people” allowed to bear arms be members of that “well-regulated militia”? Those who support additional restrictions on the right to gun ownership say yes.
The opposing view says that once America had her independence, the Founders understood the need to maintain a peacetime army but were concerned that a regular army could be used repressively. In this context, the second amendment is interpreted as “Since the government must maintain an armed militia, ordinary citizens must be allowed to have weapons, too.” Which interpretation is correct? It doesn’t matter in Connecticut, where the right to self-defense is written less ambiguously: “every citizen has the right to bear arms.”
But there is a waiting period. If you start the pistol-buying process right now you can use that pistol to defend yourself from a home invasion that takes place after Thanksgiving.
Suppose you’re destined to be attacked sooner than this? Hoffman says that legal shotgun acquisition can be accomplished more expediently, in just over two weeks. “You fill out two lengthy forms we submit to the state police. Two weeks later, you come back, they do a national background check.”
Though Hoffman would like to see this process streamlined, he has no blanket opposition to gun laws in general. “I don’t mind gun laws. I don’t want [just] anybody to be able to buy a gun.”
Here’s a rare occurrence: you don’t often hear the owner of a gun shop agree with a spokesperson for an organization with a name like “Connecticut Against Gun Violence.” But that’s what happened when the Advocate called that group and spoke with Executive Director Lisa Labella.
“In Connecticut our Constitution says you can have guns for protection. We respect that fact,” said Labella. “We want to make sure gun owners are law-abiding citizens.”
At the same time, Connecticut Against Gun Violence wouldn’t mind seeing the number of gun owners shrink. “I personally would not want a gun … I think a home alarm is more effective than a gun you may or may not have next to you.” ●
