Gun Violence Prevention Conference Underway in Danbury

by Categorized: Newtown Date:

\"biden\"The gun violence prevention conference hosted by Murphy, Blumenthal and Esty began Thursday morning with a clear message, from both panelists and politicians: enact legislation to change and strengthen the country\’s gun laws, and do so at the federal level.

\”No state can do it alone,\” said Blumenthal.

\”The policy changes that we talk about here today are incredibly important,\” said Murphy. \”The most important of those changes are those at the national level.\”

Murphy said the conference would focus on the debate at the federal level, and said support from the President and Vice President was necessary.

State Police Captain Dale Hourigan described the horror of arriving at Sandy Hook on Dec. 14. \”It\’s our hope as law enforcement officers that as a result our laws are strengthened.\”

He called for strengthening those laws by developing a \”standardized set of laws that all 50 states abide by so we\’re all in tune and in sync.\”

Hartford Mayor Pedro Segarra echoed that and said \”incongruent and inefficient national legislation\” creates problems for municipalities. \”The work that needs to be done at the municipal level to counter…really drains our resources,\” he said.

Segarra said the \”costs of making up for the lack of federal legislation\” fell on the poor residents of his city.

The second panel featured professionals from the fields of mental health and education.

Many spoke of the importance of improving access to mental health, especially in schools.

Murphy asked them about how to determine whether someone who is mentally ill should be allowed to own a firearm.

\”We\’re either going to draw the line too broadly and include too many people or we\’re going to draw the line too narrowly,\” said Dr. Kathryn Seifurt, author of Path to Violence.

\”The ones in treatment are less likely to be violent,\” she added saying that the people who were more likely to commit crimes were less likely to be in the system.

When the panel was asked about School Resource Officers, Dr. George Sugai, UConn NEAG School of Education, said if SROs were put in schools, it would be important for them to develop trusting relationships with students.

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on courant.com articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

5 thoughts on “Gun Violence Prevention Conference Underway in Danbury

  1. pete

    This is how Hitler came to Power. Take away your guns and books and brain wash you. obama wants to disarm you so only his supporters – THE CRIMINALS – will have guns. Notice how none of the Liberals support the death penalty but they support taking away your RIGHTS Yes YOUR RIGHTS. Who does blumy represent us or obama. This is what you get when you vote for liberals like blumy

  2. America Is Dying

    Brain Washed American Sheep.
    Balance the budget, enforce existing laws, address mental illness and stop dividing the country!
    America will have another Civil War before it disarms its Honest citizens!

  3. Steve M

    Its really a shame that the administration of this State has to stack the deck on this gun control issue to get what clearly is an agenda and not a will of the people. Bringing in the Vice President, prescribing outlines of results of what the biparistian committee should come up with and our to federal representitives already clearly on the side of stricter so called gun laws. Anybody can see that regadless Mallory will force his will on the people of this state and call it the will of the people. So far I have seen 5000 people out of the 2+ million that live in this state voice there opinion and have the cover it. There are at least 250,000 gun owners in this state and none of their thoughts or wishes are being considered. I am of course a gun owner and I don’t remember anyone asking my opinion on this subject. I beleive the state constitution requires my vote on matters which effect my constitutional rights, especially those granted to me by the the Constitution of the United Staes and defined by SCOTUS.

    I happen to agree with some points of the proposed legislation. But you can’t make requirements which define what is acceptable and not acceptable when the acceptable doesn’t even exist. There are no AR type weapons with one military characteristic. The state of connecticut in the last round of defining outlawed two completely and defined only two could be acceptable, now were down to one. Basically they will saying you can only have what doesn’t exist.

    For those of you who support the goverments position you are more than likely either not going to be effected by additonal gun control measures. But the day will come when allowing this type of we will tell you what your rights are legislation will hit home.

    These legislators are there to protect our rights, liberty and to enforce the state and federal constitutions are they are in place. Changes are to be made at our will not thiers.

    1. rally no guns BillY

      The gun control movement brought out 5,500 in our rally. Your pro,gun rally brought out about 750 a few months ago. Nealy 80 percent of the population of CT want stronger laws against guns.

      You speak without truth or facts.

  4. sam

    If our politicians are serious and are not just doing this for the media exposure and really want to do something, I agree with the State Police Captain some what. I think it is time the federal government needs to step in and make “ONE SET” of federal regulations overriding any and all local or states regulations. No more feel good non enforced or under enforced laws made by our state legislators. The second amendment is federal and so should “ALL” the regulations and laws that pertain to it. They should not be made to fit what local and state dim witted politicians feel they think is what is needed because they are trying to please a certain group of citizens or more importantly “voters”. There should be national standards and laws and “only” national standards and laws pertaining to gun ownership and what type of guns are acceptable. If every states doesn’t have the same laws you cant control the flow of guns from one state to another that will make there way to our streets via the criminals and nut jobs in our society. They will just bring them from another state that they arent ilegal in. Of course that is just common sense and we all know there isnt to much if any common sense in politics.
    Then the federal government needs to make all gun carry permits from each state “Federal Permits” legal and accepted and recognized by “all states” and put them in a federal data base like commercial truck licenses. No more state permits only good in the state you live. This way they can monitor the permits on a federal level. You already have to pass a federal background check to get a state carry permit so why not make “one” permit good in all of the United States?
    This meeting with the Vice President to day is a nice Photo op for these politicians though, at the taxpayers expense of course.

Comments are closed.