Sen. Williams: Bipartisan Support On Guns Neither Mandatory Nor Guaranteed

by Categorized: Newtown Date:

\"williams-head\"The day after Malloy released a five-part plan to reduce gun violence in the state, Senate President Don Williams released a statement voicing support for the governor\’s proposals.

\”The ideas are not new,\” said Williams. \”Our bipartisan task force heard these and other good suggestions from police chiefs and mayors at our public hearings.\”

Malloy released his proposals after expressing concerns about the effectiveness of the bipartisan task force.

\”As I have said before, we must vote on a strong and comprehensive bill – a bill that will send a powerful message from Connecticut to the rest of America,\” said Williams. \”While I hope we have bipartisan support for such a bill, that outcome has never been mandatory or guaranteed. What is most important is that legislators take the action necessary to keep weapons of war out of the hands of those who would harm our children.\”

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on 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.

107 thoughts on “Sen. Williams: Bipartisan Support On Guns Neither Mandatory Nor Guaranteed

  1. gun control bill

    Thank you senator Williams. Those of us who agree that major restrictions and bans on assault weapons and magazines must be reduced or eliminated are no long the silent majority. We are the vocal majority. We have the money the will and the energy to make sweeping changes in the way this disease of gun addition has been allowed to kill and create untold sadness across the nation.

    We will be victorious.

    1. Kim

      that’s right senator. Thank you for this staatement “What is most important is that legislators take the action necessary to keep weapons of war out of the hands of those who would harm our children”.

      Not responsbile, legally armed citizens but ‘those who would harm our children’.

      Glad to see you on the right side of things for a change billyboy

        1. The Conn-servative

          It certainly does: from the left coast,to Washington DC spearheaded by our current Commander in Thief,to the incestuous left here in CT government.It’s in our institutions of marriage,schools k-##,and our courts,all of which have one thing in common: DEMOCRATS.

          1. Kim

            The recent Orange County shooting rampage by Ali Syed was carried out with a shotgun – not an ‘assault weapon’. o now what? Do we ban shotguns as well?

            This, people, is the real agenda of the 2nd amendment haters – every gun must go

    2. Nate

      You do realize that this is just like saying that you cannot practice Islam because the 9-11 hijackers were practicing radical Islam.

    3. CT Guy

      “Sweeping changes in the way this disease of gun addition (addiction?) has been allowed to kill and create untold sadness across the nation.”

      Should read ” knee jerk reactions to horrible crimes committed by those who have no respect for current laws, and will ultimately refuse to follow any new baseless laws, put in place by irresponsible legislators pandering to feel good restrictions on Constitutional Rights.”

      Fixed that for you.

    4. CT Guy

      “make sweeping changes in the way this disease of gun addition (addiction?) has been allowed to kill and create untold sadness across the nation.”

      Should read “Make knee jerk reactions to horrible crimes committed by individuals who do not follow current laws, and will blatantly disregard any future meaningless ones, put forth by pandering legislators set on disregarding the fundamentals of our Constitution.”
      Fixed that for you.

      1. Gun control bill

        No. In my perfect world, you may keep,home protection. A couple of 12 gage double barrel shotguns. If you want to hunt, a single action rifle.

        But we are forgetting banning handguns in our move toward restrictions. Handguns are by far, the biggest threat to society. So yes, let’s ban handguns.

        1. Kim

          The recent Orange County shooting rampage by Ali Syed was carried out with a shotgun – not an ‘assault weapon’.

          So now what billyboy? Do we ban shotguns as well? Time to turn yours in. If you don’t, you’ll be subject to arrest and full persecution. The majority of us clearly believe that you should not be allowed to own a weapon – especially a shotgun. I for one will be outside your home cheering on the police as they kick in your door and relieve you of your shotgun.

          This, people, is the real agenda of the 2nd amendment haters – every gun must go

          1. The Conn-servative

            The hypothetical question to ask is, if all guns were banned and confiscated would law enforcement the melt down theirs?
            I didn’t think so. This my friends would then smell like Nazi Germany.

    5. Independent thinker

      Maybe they will understand if there’s another mass exodus. These clowns have already driven an incredible amount of residents out of state. I will soon be among them if at all possible.

      They can and have ignored our numbers at hearings and rallies. They can and have ignored our thousands of letters and phone calls. They will not be able to ignore the economic impact of their misguided, emotional and senseless actions.

      Can’t wait to see the new license plates which will replace ‘The Constitution State’, perhaps ‘The Authoritarian State’ is more fitting.

  2. Richard

    I don’t believe WIlliams is capable of bringing a bill to the floor that will pass both houses and the Governor’s Chair. Instead the bill will contain a wish list of items that no one wants passed but will appease various interest groups. Months later we will see the real bill after many amendments and dropped or rewritten bullet points. Wake me when its over and it looks like Malloy’s s proposals stuffed with pork for school security

    1. Palin Smith

      This farce will finally bring balance back to the General Assembly. Democrat-Socialists will be removed by the dozens in 2014.

  3. Tru-facts

    I feel that the lies from the left are corrupting or society, I think that the government is just
    looking for ideas that are quick and cheap. When they should be looking at the criminals getting
    guns and not making more criminals out of ordinary citizens. Or trying to trample on the
    Constitution without remembering the oath they took in office. But then I guess the oath
    Is different when you really have to defend it compared to just sitting at a desk. But all I see
    coming from left states is the one up system where they see how far the can go destroying
    the Constitution.

  4. Sean

    Sen Williams – I encourage you to continue blindly pursuing what is an ill advised and unconstitutional pursuit of disarming law abiding citizens. You have demonstrated not only a lack of understanding of the facts, but an aggressive, impressive desire to remain uninformed. The package proposed by the Governor, which you seem eager to sign onto (thus eliminating any further effort, or appearance of effort on your part) will do nothing to prevent the next tragedy, and would have done nothing to prevent an unhinged madman from going about his work in Newtown on Dec 14th. I encourage you to continue because come November of next year, law abiding gun owners – and there are hundreds of thousands of us in the state, Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike – will work tirelessly to ensure that you and your ilk are thrown out of office. While I recognize that once out of office, the prospect of finding actual, legitimate employment may be intimidating, you can simply ask a gun owner how to go about doing so, working for a living and contributing to our communities is old hat for the average gun owner. The average legislator? Not so much.

    1. Connecticut is Dying Too

      Well said. It would be wonderful to see the support of more idiotic gun laws be the very thing that cleans house in Hartford come November.

  5. Ken

    So basically this guy is saying that while he wanted bi partisan support & legally produced & voted upon legisalation, he is entirely willing to IGNORE the desires of the people of CT if we do not agree?
    Funny thing this obsession with gun control.

    Let me pose a question if I may. Since the founding of our country we have had free access to weapons. For MOST of our history the citizens had free access to BETTER guns than the military. For most of that time we had no real gun control & no school shootings. Then, about 20 years ago, we decided to create “gun free zones” in our schools. At that point these tragic shootings BEGAN. Given these facts doesnt it seem plausable, very likely even, that these shootings are a result of gun free zones and not guns?
    Guns are not new, military type guns are not new. Whats new are these shootings & gun free zones.

    Use your head people, dont let these elite political criminals con you into thinking guns are the problem, they are not. Overbearing govt is the problem. A Govt that legislated helplessness and then pushes for MORE helplessness when their scheme failed IS the problem.

  6. Johanna Galt

    Why don’t you just coronate yourself King and dictate from the LOB. Whatever happened to reasoned debate and getting all of your facts? No, you’d rather carry water for the citizen disarmament crowd and punish law abiding gun owners in this state for a crime THEY did NOT commit. None of Malloy’s proposals will make a whit of difference in stopping another Sandy Hook from happening. You are a disgrace to your oath of office and hardly serve the people of CT .. you choose to serve Washington, DC instead. Where is the toxicology report Sen Williams? Where is the police and other investigation reports which will shed light on the real causes to the Sandy Hook tragedy? You choose to ignore them because you are more interested in disarming American citizens and denying them their right to self defense. Shame shame. I wonder how you will sleep at night when someone’s home is invaded and they don’t have enough bullets in their magazine to fend off criminals, and end up dead because of it.

    1. Bast

      Johanna: Do you think having a double barrel shotgun is sufficient defense for a home? Just wondering. I don’t think anyone is talking about removing this kind of home defense. I have one and I think it is enough to fight off a home invasion.

      1. Kim

        good for you Bast. Now how would you feel if these 2nd Amendment haters added shotguns to the list of banned weapons? As long as you have something you are comfortable with and feel is sufficient, you are happy right? That’s all that matters, right? Forget about those who feel that a handgun is easier to carry, easier to use (those with arm/hand/shoulder injuries for instance), less harmful to the target, etc. Or who prefer handguns because the ammunition is cheaper. Or any number of other reasons, as simple as personal preference. As long as your preferences are honored and you’re happy, the rest of us can go to hell, right?

        Hypocrisy is the middle name of liberals and bullies who want to force their views on everyone else, even when those views don’t line up with the 2nd amendment.

        1. Bast

          Maybe it would have done you some good to view the body of Noah Posner – whose bottom half of his face was blown off. Do you think this would at least give you pause knowing anyone can get a hold of an assault weapon and do the same kind of damage?

          1. Kim

            As basdly as I would have felt for the victims and their families, seeing what you describe would only reinforce my feelings that we have the right to defend ourselves from the wolves, which is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. I am able to distinguish between emotions and reason.

            I’ve answered your question – answer mine if you would.

          2. The Conn-servative

            We can go round and round on this. Maybe it would be good for you to see some of the Holocaust pictures again.

          3. johngaltwhereru


            Are you under the impression that a 6 year old child shot in the face with a double barrel shotgun at close range would still have the lower half of his face in tact?

            That is remarkably ill-informed.

  7. Scruffy in Ellington

    This should come as no surprise. Sen. Williams said as much on an NPR interview last week. His actions and those of Gov. Malloy have given the appearance that the whole “bi-partisan advisory panel” was a sham. Since when is it OK for Gov. Malloy to use Connecticut as a lens to magnify himself on the national stage. Why is it “up to us to send a clear message to the nation”? Gov Malloy’s five points do NOTHING to further the investigation into the mental health aspect of mass shootings. His attempt to vilify a large portion of his constituency and an outright ban on modern sporting rifles smacks of elitism.

  8. jenmorezz

    The majority is for no more gun control legislation…even the SOS Merill stated that at their gun control rally…IT IS 100 to 1 NO MORE GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION…so those who advocate gun control are actually the 1%.

  9. Vice President CCDL, Inc.

    Bipartisan approval is not required, this is true. What is also true is that, the people WILL HAVE THE FINAL SAY during the next election.
    Anyone willing to take away rights guaranteed by the Connecticut Constitution will NOT be reelected. Williams and Malloy would both be better served to remember the oath that they took to DEFEND the state constitution!

    1. Palin Smith

      It’s going to be so much fun watching on Election Night, Nov. 6, 2014, as Democrat after Democrat are swept away like the trash they are.

  10. lol

    when will the idiots realize that it is to late. Guns are too plentiful and no ban/restriction/tax is going to stop ANYTHING. All you are attempting to do is disarm the millions upon millions of legal gun owners. Doing this in essence makes our community less safe. Stop worrying about “assault rifles” that consist of a very small percentage of gun related crime. Go after the sick individuals and ENFORCE the hundreds of laws that are already on the books. This Lanza scenario only happened due to irresponsibility and hundreds of broken laws. If not with an AR its going to be with a more powerful hunting rifle next time.

  11. Joey

    Hey gun control bill, where did you get your money from. We are independant working citizens. You are either super rich from the golden coast of CT. Or you got the money from Bloomberg or other gun-grabbing groups. Thanks for letting us know that proper legislation and people of CT cannot out weigh your reactionary “we are richer and smarter than you” attitude which apparently gives you the right to force your doctrine and views on all of us. I am tired of this nanny-state buffoonery. We in CT already have an “AWB” look it up and do your homework. Why is it that the state that have them are riddled with crime? Nj, Ny, Il, CA

    1. Libertarian Advocate

      Joey: I’m betting that gun control bill is the same character who shows up on Chris Fountain’s Blog under the name dollar bill. Same tone, same expression of absolute need to submit to the power of the state.

      1. Gun control bill

        There is but one possibility that you might come to your senses. And that is if a member of your family needlessly lost his life through a gun just as 20 little children did on December 14, 2012. Yes, we will use that as our battle cry. We will have many more to quote from.

        Consider this: When a conservative Republican gets cut down as did James Brady, he founds his own gun reform foundation.

        Lastly (well maybe not lastly), I am not a pawn for the state. There is always danger of over reach of the state. I will acknowledge 2 such incidents in memory. Ruby Ridge and Waco – both examples of jack booted federal thugs who use might instead of negotiation to end the situations. And the government learned after Oklahoma City. Are you shocked yet that I mention these incidents and the position I have on them?

        Citizens will always rule this country regardless of your paranoia visions of authoritarianism. But we don’t need to be armed to the teeth to prevent government oppression. If anything, the reverse has more truth then being an armed counterweight. In this country but with exceptions, we fight our battles at the ballot box. Imperfect as it is, it has worked for over 200 years and I would rather put my faith in this system minus the concept that a modern armed citizenry is the corollary of the colonial period.

        I have already wasted more words and time then it is worth since I know this has gone in one ear and out the other – kinda like a bullet does when shot at the head.

        1. Kim

          fool. if the ballot box has worked so well for over 200 years, why did Kelo lose her property to eminent domain? Why can’t you buy a large soft drink in NYC? You can’t see the forest for the trees, ‘gun control’.

          Yes, you are wasting your breath. Do us all a favor and cease and desist with your repetitious blather based on emotions

        2. Greg

          “But we don’t need to be armed to the teeth to prevent government oppression. If anything, the reverse has more truth then being an armed counterweight.”

          That’s worked real well in Syria, Libya, communist (insert country here), etc…

        3. Kim

          Witness the lies, contradictions and hypocrisy of wildbill/rally/guncontrolbill:

          In his post to which I am replying he states “I am not a pawn for the state. There is always danger of over reach of the state.”

          Yet on another blog in this paper Titled “Blumenthal Counters Mississippi Lawmaker’s Invitation To Gun Makers” he says: “3) Guns as a protection against state oppression is the most idiotic, paranoid view ever heard in modern times for a developed nation.”

          There is no longer any question that billyboy/jimmyboggs/susan will say and do virtually ANYTHING to try to make his position acceptable, believable and palatable, as long as it pushes his agenda. He is a tried and true liberal right down to thinking the rest of us won’t remember or recognize his deception.

          Then, he’ll have the audacity and chutzpah to accuse others of these deceitful tactics, while tap-dancing around his own words to try to make them mean something other than what they really mean. Wait for it…..


    2. Gun control bill

      Joey: I hate to burst the bubble. I would like to claim one of those groups you ascribe me to. But alas, I am just like one of you. I own a micro business and I struggle every day to make ends meet.

      I could write a book for you filled with reasons we should live in a relatively gun-free country. Bu through all that effort, I would either put you all to sleep or just raise your ire more then it it already is raised.

      If I told you that I was in an incident that involved a gun and that I shouldn’t be here today, you would just dismiss my inexperience. If I told you another story about my father and a friend of his, both proud NRA members and gun owners – and a story that almost took the life of one of them in the 1960s, again you would accuse the, of being inexperienced. You would and do have an excuse and a reason for having guns no matter how many accidents occur or how many thousands are needlessly killed each year. You can only see no further then the end of the barel of you own firearm.

      The pain of loss of families means nothing to you. Hense, you are my enemy. I will fight against your stupid rights until I draw the last breath of life. We will in the end, be victorious. Do you know why, Joey? Because we will suffer and endless line of victims who will lose their lives on into the future until the sane part of society raises up with enough resolve – after we toss out the scaly wags who now support your rotation stinking NRA and other groups. We will continue to die until we win.

      It is a no loose game, my friend. We will suffer the blood of our neighbors on account of you obstinate behavior. If you have any sense of history, the ancient Romans tried to stamp out the early Christians but for each death, 10 converts came forth.

      Go ahead, make it a political battle. You will loose and we will win.

      It’s a new day brother. Join with us or go to hell. As much as I would like you to do the later, I would accept the first in the effort to end this bloodshed.

      1. Gun control bill

        “rotton” not “rotation” I sometimes can’t stand my IPad for it poorly corrects me with misspelling and puts words I didn’t intend to make. I can write better then this medium allows.

      2. Kim

        personally, i wouldn’t believe anything you say billyboy. I’ve been reading your posts for over a year and have seen your lies and contradictions from one day to the next. I see them even now when you pretend to have influence over the thoughts and actions of other posters, and try to stuff distorted views of history down our throats.

        Once you are caught in a lie, you won’t be believed again. You, sir, have been caught in dozens of lies. Your very identity on these pages is a lie because you use so many of them as a means to fool others into thinking your twisted views have the support of others. You know full well that if you tried to stand on your own two feet and preach your views as an individual, you’d be laughed off these pages. So you pretend to be other ‘objective’ posters in a lame attempt to feign widespread support. BUSTED

          1. Kim

            tell me Rick Green, why is this comment about ‘smelling your own flatulence’ acceptable to you, but you censored my comment about billyboy being the ‘enema of the state’?

            This is precisley the emotion-driven, subjective censorship hypocrisy that I have complained to your superiors about and that is the driving force behind my subscription not being renewed next month.

          2. Kim

            good argument, billyboy. Posts like this only support and prove my statements about your hypocrisy and lying – you’ve got nothing without insults

          3. Bill


            Poor little boy. So you go crying to the Hartford Courant… Are you really that screwed up, Kim?

            What a piece of work you are. You ate so out. A true twisto.

  12. bob

    Governor Malloy….the end does NOT justify the means. YOU demanded that this bill go through the e-cert process. YOU formed the task force. Now, when everyone won’t bow to all of your positions, you have the gaul to try to enforce your will. WE don’t tollerate bullying in schools and we WON’T
    tollerate bullying in Hartford!

  13. Harold Douglas

    Common sense laws? A few years ago a student was killed in a school bus accident not long after public act 10-83 (Connecticut school bus seat belt account) was created and as of 12/2012 there was $4.7 million in this account on 12/21/2012 7 days after Sandy Hook the funds were transferred to the general fund. public act 12-1 sec 27 Connecticut can’t even accomplish putting seat belts on school buses with funds that were already in place knowing seat belts save lives and now we are led to believe passing more gun laws is a solution knowing Connecticut is already ranked 5th in the nation with the toughest gun laws. I find myself with deep concern regarding the course I see Connecticut legislation taking. The course I see is a course of personal and political agendas and not of public safety as I am led to believe.

  14. Robert

    If you had no intention of going along with what the task force came up with *UNLESS* it went along with your pre-conceived notions all along why on earth did you even bother with the pretense of having one? Wouldn’t this whole thing have been easier if you’d have let king danny just enact his executive orders since that’s what he’s going to do anyway. Why even PRETEND you give a rats behind about what the people of this state want?

    Except for a few on the panels that paid attention, and no Donny I watched and it wasn’t YOU. You were quick to cut into anyone who didn’t agree with your pre-ordained truth.

    If I were one of the other members of the panels that are basically being told “your contributions whatever it may have been is pointless since you’re obviously not going to rubber stamp what dannel wants” I would be livid.

    This is no way to legislate and I hope to God the voters of this state remember your treachery and send you out into the mess you’ve created with no job and no prospects come election time.

  15. Tom

    At first I was amazed with how logically these guys approached the problem of violence in Connecticut. Instead of rushing to try and pass laws that have been proven to be ineffective, they assembled a task force to investigate and evaluate the issues to see what can be done to prevent them (ineffective laws meaning the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban which the Department of Justice said had no effect on crime, and the 1993 to current day Connecticut Assault Weapons ban that did not stop the shooting at Sandy Hook).

    At first Malloy took a sound approach, but now he’s heading down Governor Cumo’s path. He’s trying to force his own bills on us, and he’s trying to shut us out of the legislative process. This is completely unacceptable. Governor Cumo did this, and his approval rating dropped 15 points because of it. The difference is it looks like he can afford to do that, but Malloy cannot (his approval rating was 54% 2 weeks ago).

    If Malloy, Williams, and others continue down this path of shutting us out, we will do our best to shut them out of office come election time. We will not forget.

    1. Libertarian Advocate

      I suspect something else is going on here. I would not be shocked to learn that Obama has offered Dannel a big job down in D.C. on the condition that he get tough gun laws passed here in CT. It’s plain as day that Obama isn’t going to get what he really wants passed through a Republican held House. Accordingly, he needs his gun control agenda to be passed at the state level in as many states as he can get them through. CT – where the awful tragedy occurred – is obviously a major priority to the Obama Administration. If their agenda dies on the vine here, it basically dies everywhere. Danny – at his core an arriviste – is desperate for national exposure. Du to the fiscal condition of the state – and his huge and unpopular tax increases – Danny’s gubernatorial re-election chances are dimming and he needs to jump soon or be remembered – to the extent he is at all – as just another failed politician.

    2. The Conn-servative

      Danny boy does not believe in the legislative process,nor do all the leftists “democrats”. They are ruling via bullying and scare tactics and actually circumventing the legislative process.I belieeve ‘Ol Dan-o is now being twisted by BO to step up the pressure on the media in hopes of preventing it from falling out of the publics’ eye. Don’t worry, Ed Shultz,Chris Matthews,and others at MSNBC(More Stupid Narcsists Before Christ)will heed the call.

      1. Kim

        right again Connservative. Notice what’s NOT being said and who’s NOT involved in this red zone offense of BO and DM: not a word from Chicago and it’s mayor, Rham Emanuel. Everyone knows where he stands on the 2nd Amendment but he doesn’t dare join in the fray because his policies have so completely and obviously failed in Chicago.

  16. BobC

    None of the governors proposals targets the criminals and the deranged and none will prevent any further attacks by criminals and the deranged. Each and every one of these proposals will affect only law abiding gun owners, or turn law abiding citizens into criminals.

  17. Richard Collette

    On 9/11 nearly 3000 people were mass murdered, not by a gun but by planes. This did not cause people to suddenly fear planes. We did not reduce the size of planes, the number of planes in their air or in any other way dimish their capability. What we did is implement security. As a result hijackings went from 26 in the year 2000 to an average of 4 per year for years 2002 to present with numbers in the last 5 years averaging 2.4 (
    By contrast 323 people were killed by rifles of any kind in 2011. It would take nearly ten years for those number to match the number of deaths that ocurred on 9/11. Yet the reaction has been completely different. Instead increasing security as has shown to be effective in the case of preventing hijackings, legislators are seeking to infringe on constitutional rights to self defense guaranteed by the second amendment by banning AR and other semi-automatic rifles. Rifles that are considered personal defense weapons by the Deparment of Homeland Security (
    What is the reason? Senator Ed Meyer states that pursuing the root cause, mental health, would impose on individual rights to privacy ( as well as being excessively expensive ( Guess what, there is no explicit right to privacy guaranteed by the constitution but the right to bear arms is is explicitly, and without qualification, guaranteed by the second amendment of the constitution.
    Our legislators are using cost and convenience as an bad excuse and the victims of Sandy Hook as leverage to infringe upon our second amendment rights and assert control over the people rather than implementing solutions that would actually have an impact on the rate of mass murders.

    1. Brian C. Duffy

      2008 Supreme Court decision D.C. vs Heller dealt primarily with handguns. Those are the ones that Scalia referred to “in common use”.

      “AR platform” weapons are banned in D.C as they are not covered under the 2nd Amendment. Heller upholds this.

      Any gun – short on long – in D.C. must be submitted for inspection prior to registration and must be kept in the home for self defense only. No carry permit in public. Again, allowed post Heller.

      D.C. gun laws may be stupid, insane, impractical , etc., but they are all currently Constitutional.

      The NRA rarely mentions the Heller case and for good reason. The NRA is shrewd enough to argue against the proposed gun laws on “practical” reasons, because they know these laws, if passed, will all pass Constitutional scrutiny.

      NYC gun laws are similar to D.C.; no public carry, concealed or otherwise, no semi-auto long guns. If these laws violated the 2nd amendment, the NRA would be all over them. Don’t you think?

      Compared to D.C. and NYC, Malloy’s proposals are pretty weak and totally Constitutional. Should make both sides unhappy.

  18. Jessie Hartman

    Mr. Williams and Mr. Malloy, and to the rest of the panel…

    A tidal wave of opposition to firearm bans and restrictions has hit your doors, your phones, and your mailboxes. I was there on 1/28 in the LOB and felt that building shake with applause and cheers of over 1000 people for the better PERSONAL testimonies of normal citizens appealing to you with passion and logic. There was no NRA, only men and women of all colors, ages, and backgrounds. Most had never been before a panel like that in their lives.

    Your proposed bans and restrictions are more dangerous than you can imagine. This outrage you feel from us isn’t just about second amendment rights or how many bullets you deem we should have. The rage stems from a people pushed too far. You have stolen from us and our children. Our meager fortunes are worth less every day. Our elections have become usurped by corporate interests. We have no decent men to elect when ballots are drawn.

    And now, on the graves of our murdered children you propose over 90 asinine bills that do nothing to address the root cause of mass murder. You rush propose bills that infringe upon our rights to defend ourselves as we choose from you. You rush to ensure the final blood spatters in Newtown have yet to be dried.

    Well kind ladies and gentlemen of our legislature, I say you get not one more inch from me. Not a single inch from this free man. There are few firearms of any kind or ammunition available in any gun store from Hartford to California. All purchased in the last 2 months by a populace that knows how this ends.

    Who among you wishes to light that fuse in CT? Your jobs should be the least of your worries.

  19. Connecticut is Dying Too

    From the looks of the responses in this article, Connecticut Democrats have pushed the wrong buttons in the electorate. I hope a coalition of disgusted citizens can show many of these Democrats to the door in November and restore political balance and sanity to this state.

    1. gun control bill

      CT: Not true and you know it. Most posters here are retired couch potatoes who feel that exhibiting their opinions in bulk makes them the super majority here. Ha.

      Again; ha.

      1. Kim

        billyboy once again pretending he knows what he has not clue about. There is absolutely no way for him to know about ‘most posters’ but he doesn’t let facts get in the way of his lies and hypocrisy.

        And pertaining to opinions ‘in bulk': why do you feel the need to post here under 7 different names billyboy? That is the only ‘in bulk’ I see on these threads.

        As usual and obviously, you have no clue and nothing relevant to offer, so content yourself with misdirection, lies, made-up ‘facts’, and a pseudo-intellectual facade that fools no one but the other ignorant.

        In short, you have no credibility under ANY name. But please, continue as you are. It really helps the cause of the freedom lovers to see such obvious desperation and ludicrousness from your pen. This has always been the case with your posts – the only one who doesn’t realize it is you and your multiple personalities.

        You remind me of the court jester

  20. Clint

    How naive anti gun people are. They call supporters of the constitution ignorant and uneducated? Thirty years plus of gun control have not worked period. Why? Because law abiding citizens are not the criminals. What laws have you enforced and now again you go after the law abiding citizens for your scapegoat mentality. We are not the one percent and we will not back down nor bow down and cower from those who rule with tyrannical authority. Fail!

    1. Gun control bill

      When the laws are added to in effect outlaw assault weapons both rifles and hand guns, you will comply or be prepared to be fined and punished by the full extent of the law. You will be sent to prison and I will gladly pay more in tax in order to build prisons for your residency.

      1. Connecticut is Dying Too

        And when that happens you and I will be long gone. Lay off the mushrooms there BillyJimmySusan.

      2. Kim

        billyboy: keep clicking the heels of your ruby-red slippers together while chanting ‘there’s no place like home’. It’ll be more fruitful than your wishful thinking about banning weapons. But trolling seems to be your forte – not convictions.

  21. Myles

    Artfully put Sen Williams. Essentially you said that even if the bipartisan group proposes any solution, it doesn’t guarantee that it will be adopted over Gov Malloy’s dictatorial edict. How foolish to try to control lawless behavior by enacting more laws. Look to fix the issues that cause this crime versus going after the people who already obey the law. We will definitely remeber you stripping away our rights come the next election cycle.

  22. Jeffrey S. Bergmann

    Traitor. Enemy of the people. That is the only thing I see here, sir. You have not the right nor the authority to diminish, change, limit, nor abolish my GOD GIVEN right, guaranteed unto me, a sovereign individual, that CHOOSES to recognize your assembly. Enforce the laws you have, punish the offenders. Send a message to America and to Obama, Constitution First.

  23. John R. McCommas

    Williams loathes anything resembling bipartisanship. Whatever bill eventually is proposed he will ramrod it though with a straight party line vote.

    –And frankly what is a bipartisan bill on gun snatching supposed to look like anyway? Real Republicans are not going to vote for that.

  24. Jeff

    Want Connecticut to send a message to the rest of America? How about the message that our leaders stand for professional, fully deliberative due process, not laws railroaded through the legislature in order to please one political party? New York State is going to end up looking foolish when some of the laws they’ve passed in this fly-by-night manner have been struck down as unconstitutional. Do we really want to look like them?

  25. Paul Edward Zukowski

    In Connecticut’s Uniform Crime reports, from 1994 to 2011, there were 2138 Murders in the state. 361 were committed with a knife. 139 were beaten to death with bare hands or feet. 106 were killed with blunt objects. The total number of people murdered with a rifle were 36. If you factor in Sandy Hook your total number is 63 in 18 years. This is in a state with 3.4 million people. That means the odds of you being murdered in the state of Connecticut with *ANY TYPE of RIFLE* is 1 in 971,500; the odds of being hit by lightning is 1 in 770,000. Think about that.
    Next lets look magazine size limits. From 1994 to 2004 they were limited to 10 rounds under the federal assault weapons ban. Crime dropped after it expired in both the state and in the nation. Please watch this 1:30 second video I made demonstrating the difference between 10 round and a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. I think you will be shocked.
    Next it have its been suggested that we track ammunition sales. We logged all ammo from 1969 to 1986. It was part of The Gun Control Act of 1968. After 16 years not single crime was solved or prevented by tracking ammo sales. It was scrapped. Trying to run a NICS check on every ammo sale would overload a system that often gets back logged. Trying flag large ammo sales will not work either. 2 bricks of .22 long rifle on sale costs about $50. That is 1000 rounds of ammo. In fact, most target shooters buy cases of ammo, not single boxes. One or two psychopaths planning a mass murder will not stand out from all target shooters who are doing nothing wrong.
    I looked for any proof that any gun control laws have ever been shown to reduced violent crime anywhere in USA or in the rest of world for that matter. They either had no effect, like Connecticut’s Assault Weapons Ban or Nation Assault Weapons ban, or overall violent crime went up after the gun control laws were passed. The UK, Australia, Chicago, Washington D.C. and The Gun Control Act of 1968, are examples of this. Even Vice President Joe Biden admitted that any new gun control laws would not likely have any effect on crime when he was caught on a mic. The video is here, it runs 1:05. In fact features that politicians think make “assault weapons” are features that do not change the function or the ballistic performance of the rifle. In fact they no different then any other semiautomatic firearm. Its not based in fact, it is based in emotion, fear, ignorance and political talking points. A Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle is not an assault weapon, and the Bushmaster XM-15 is called an assault weapon. They have the same rate of fire and use the same .223 Remington cartridge.
    I did find an interesting comparison. Morton Grove, Il. a suburb of Chicago passed a handgun ban in 1982. Shortly there after Kennesaw, Ga. a suburb of Atlanta, passed a law that *REQUIRED* the ownership of a firearm by every head of household. They also have exposed carry. Morton Grove really had no change in crime. There were slight fluctuations that reflected national trends. In Kennesaw, Ga., crime dropped by 90% and remained there even though the population grew by 500%. Its a fraction of the national average. Morton Grove, they repealed the gun ban in July of 2008. Their crime rate dropped steeply. You see legal gun ownership deters crime. Its why crime dropped in every state that has a shall issue concealed carry law.
    Putting in place gun registration and requiring permits for long guns would be expensive. Canada had federal long-gun registry was first created by the Liberal Party in 1995, in the wake of the 1989 massacre at Montreal’s École Polytechnique, where a gunman shot and killed 14 women, mostly engineering students. It was $2-billion boondoggle. It did not reduce crime.
    Other than placating people overwhelmed by emotion and demanding something be done, I see no rational reason for doing this. Then again this pushed by people whose ideological beliefs are driving this position since the 1960’s. Facts do not seem to effect their policy positions.
    What does work to reduce violent crimes? Active policing with arrests
    for all felonies and class A misdemeanors. Do not plead winnable case down to lessor crime. Have stiff mandatory minimum sentences for anyone using any weapon in crime. Follow up actively on parole and probation violations. Make a make violations a new felony. Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky were both in violation of parole and probation terms. You also need to end foolish programs like risk reduction earned credit program.
    This was passed *AFTER* the Petit Murders. RREC already has at least 2 murders as direct result of this program.
    I do not see how extending NICS checks would hurt. It may reduce straw buyers. I doubt it will have a large effect. Most private sales are among friends or family.
    Finally we closed 4000 state inpatient mental health beds in 1995. We closed 3000 more in 1996. We closed another 125 in 2010. Right now we have under 350 state inpatient mental health beds at CVH and Riverview. Its virtually impossible to get a mentally ill person civilly committed. Even if you can, there no place to put them. We are one of the few states not to have outpatient civil commitment law. Since 1998 we have had 4 disturbed people who fell through the cracks, who committed mass murders in this state. Combined, they killed 56 people. 16 of them were killed with no gun involved. Please see my full 32 page written testimony (attached) or in mental health section at A Safer Connecticut. It actually touches mental health, crime, the justice system, gun control and constitutional law.

    Paul Edward Zukowski
    Hartford, Ct.

    1. Gun control bill

      Hand guns are the biggest killer and should be banned along with assault weapons. Then and only then murder as a result of the gun will reduce.

      1. The Conn-servative

        For all intensive purposes they are banned in cities like Chicago and New York unless your last name is Emmanuel,Bloomberg,O’Donnell,Feinstein,Schumer,etc… and look at the crime in those cities ,especially Chicago. You and your Marxist buddies in government are more concerned with suburbia America being able to put up a forceful resistance if not anti-government offensive if need be. That’s what you thugs are worried about and that’s what this is all about.

        1. Connecticut is Dying Too

          I think you’re on to something there Conn-servative. It doesn’t make sense that politicians ignore all the murder by those with illegal handguns in favor of more laws against law abiding citizens. It doesn’t add up.

      2. Connecticut is Dying Too

        Try again dimwit. They’re killing each other by the truckload in our cities with….wait for it…..illegal guns.

      3. Kim

        billyboy: notice how Paul offered facts? Contrast that with your empty, drone-like reply. You could learn from him.

  26. Harry Hoku

    There is only one ignorant liberal fool on this discussion board. Don’t you think he would get the message and go away?

    It is the epitome of ignorance to suggest that possessing guns by law-abiding Americans are the problem. We are the solution not the problem. We are the patriotic legacy of those who founded this country. We edfend our homes from danger. We send our sons to fight and die for freedom. If anyone doesn’t like the standards of freedom that we live by, they can always leave.

    Remember that old saying, “Love it or Leave it.”

    I am glad that so many posters here have their heads screwed on right. Thank you and keep the light burning.

    1. Mike Robinson

      Harry, or whoever you really are, you figure if you can shout a guy down you have “won” or something. Mostly I remain silent and laugh at the idiotic posts. For many of the usual suspects here, the bread-crumb trail back to sanity was eaten by the birds long ago. Count your messages, count your people at the rally, but the only count that matters is at the ballot box. Obama won Connecticut with an 18% margin. You’re just whistling in the graveyard if you think you outnumber liberals around here.

      1. Connecticut is Dying Too

        You are correct Mike in that we’re whistling past the graveyard that Connecticut has become under liberal rule. Liberalism is destroying this state and this country and I hope you are enjoying the bitter fruit of your labor.

        RIP America.

        1. Bill

          Kim: You are in need of attention. why don’t you seek out the Professor and ask him again to do what you wanted him to do to you last year in terms of gratification.

          You are on the wrong side of the gun debate. You are always on the wrong side period.

          1. Kim

            thanks for the facts and the proof to back your position up billyboy. Oh, wait, once again all you offer is insults and whiny behavior. Like I said, you have been caught in so many lies and contradictions that you have no credibility. These kinds of posts only add to that assessment.

            Like judge judy says: “if you tell the truth you dont have to have a good memory”

          2. Kim

            Your desperatin is showing Mike. You have embraced wildbill (steady, billyboy) to the detriment of what little credibility you had left. Good for you. This helps other readers to better understand where you’re coming from, which is a good thing. Whatever doubts that may have existed as to your veracity and subjectivity up to this point, can now be considered completely shredded.

            The only question left is which of the 8 (yourself and the 7 bills) is steering the ship of fools.

          3. Bill

            Mike: Kim is just my idea of cheap humor. It doesn’t cost me anything to joust with him. Believe me when I say this, but as I was writing something about Kim the other day, I made the mistake (as I have in the past) and took a sip of coffee. I felt it coming but I thought I could employ mind over matter and change the course. I spit the coffee up and sprayed my computer screen laughing my butt off. I had to get a towel quick.

            This is all Kim means to me. I feel no anger towards him. And no pity. In fact, because I have in the past made him so angry, I feel that I have done my job rather well.

            Kim, don’t bother my first cousin, Rick Green.

          4. Kim

            billyboy: you can’t use ‘mind over matter’ without a mind.

            Is Rick Green the ‘friend at the Courant’ that you used to brag so much about, the one who gave you confidential, private information about the posters on these blogs (according to you)? The ‘friend’ at the Courant who allowed you to get away with posts that others get censored for? That’s great – I’m compiling quite the impressive portfolio of screen shots showing the disgusting and offensive things he allows you to post while censoring my statements. You’re a great friend, putting his professional welfare at risk. With friends like you, who needs enemies, right?

            The readers here must love to see how much time you spend glorifying yourself and puffing yourself up by listing your pseudo-accomplishments (such as making me angry). If you’re not insulting someone you’re bragging on yourself and expounding on all your (in your mind) wonderful qualities. It’s all simply a means to make yourself appear to be what you’re not. Unkowningly, you are your biggest apologist – something inside you recognizes the lost, desperate, malicious child that you are. If you were half the psychologist that you pretend to be you would see this, but of course you’re not. Psycho maybe, but not psychologist.

          5. Bill

            Stop making me laugh Kimmie Patricia Henry. Naw, I don’t know Rick Green so don’t get yer panties up in a bunch. But if you are collecting a portfolio of stuff, then I’ve done a good job messing your head up and this completes my humor segment for the day.

            A lot of folks don’t think you should be in possession of a firearm, Kim. Give them up.

        2. Kim

          once again you exhibit your cluelessness, billyboy. My ‘portfolio’ has nothing to do with you except to the extent that your nonsense is uncensored while much less offensive material is blocked. It’s about mr. green and his censorship.

          Your delusions of grandeur are decidedly sad. And your assumption that you know what others think is ongoing and particulary foolish – unless the ‘others’ are your multiple personalities.

          You said you had a shotgun, billyboy? Everybody knows and feels that you, of all people, shouldn’t be armed – you do have a personality disorder given all the names you use here. You can’t seem to get your stories, or your position, straight, as I tirelessy point out to readers. By the way, see how I worked your style into this post using the ‘everyone’ reference? It is ridiculous when you use it, and ridiculous when anyone else uses it.

          And we all notice that you never responded to the shotgun question I asked you on another thread where, right after you insisted on your right to own a shotgun for self defense, a madman in CA killed many people with a shotgun.

          Your hypocrisy and childishness are legendary, and growing by the day. Your ‘humor segment’ is not over until you put down your keyboard – every time you open your mouth the laughter starts.

  27. Bill

    Kim “Patricia Henry” The Child Fool:

    I hope yor supporters can see how childish you are. What a piece of work. So you are complaining to Hartford Courant about these posts?

    You are kidding, right? No, I guess not.

    You must be very alone and lonely to have a need to complain, copy and paste in your scrapbook.

    Poor boy. Sniffle. Sniffle.

    What a real twisto piece of work these posts have dredged up from the pits.

  28. Pingback: Jenotes's Blog

  29. Walter Briggs

    I hope that before anybody votes on any gun restrictions that they will ask themselves, “How will this legislation help to prevent another Sandy Hook”?
    The answer is “No, nothing that has been proposed will do anything to prevent another Sandy Hook”.
    Now you can be honest with yourself and vote NO or you can be honest with the public and admit that your sole agenda is to remove ALL firearms from ALL citizens.

  30. Dale Athanas

    There is a real bottom line to all these idiotic “gun control” laws: criminals and the mentally ill DO NOT and never have obeyed the law. That being said, the only logical agenda is the destruction of the 2nd amendment and the disarming and disenfranchisement of the American people.

  31. Dale Athanas

    There is a pro-gun lobby day scheduled in Hartford on Monday, March 11. Free parking at Cabellas and free shuttle between Cabela’s and the State Capitol. So OK, all of you who, like me, feel we are being raped by the anti-gun groups exploitation of the Sandy Hook massacre, the balls in your court. If you really care about your 2nd Amendment rights, show up. I will see you there – you can be damn sure of it. (For more, see the NRA-ILA website).

Comments are closed.