More Connecticut Gun Control
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 9 months ago
If a police officer stops and asks a person to show their pistol permit, most gun owners comply.
But that is not the law in Connecticut, where police must have suspicion of a crime in order to force the gun owner to display the permit. If the gun owner refuses, police say there is nothing they can do.
That’s why more than 35 police chiefs joined key legislators Tuesday in Hartford to call for changing the law.
The issue has prompted controversy in West Haven and Bridgeport, where gun owners refused to show their permits when requested. The issue arose in June 2013 when two men were walking on the boardwalk in West Haven with their guns obvious to public view in hip holsters.
When stopped by police, one of them agreed to show his permit. The other did not and was charged with interfering with police. A judge dismissed the case, and a prosecutor said the arrested man, Scott Lazurek of Derby, had a permit but simply did not want to show it to police. Lazurek told police that he did not need to display the permit under the law – and the prosecutor and the judge agreed.
Rep. William Tong, a Stamford Democrat and co-chairman of the judiciary committee, said the bill is “a very simple, but important, initiative” that is necessary at a time of increased concern about gun violence and mass killings in Connecticut and beyond.
“It’s because of Newtown,” Tong said. “It’s because of Aurora and Columbine and other places across the country. We know that reality far better than other states and other communities. We feel that acutely.”
Tong rejected arguments that the issue was a violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful searches and seizures.
“It’s not an infringement on your liberty,” said Tong, an attorney who has studied constitutional law. “It is not even considered a Fourth Amendment stop.”
Tong said he is concerned about Second Amendment activists “staging confrontations with police officers … to make a point.”
Uh huh. To make a point. Except in the case cited, the carriers were doing nothing whatsoever to justify being detained, much less arrested. It’s the LEOs who staged the confrontation.
Let’s finish this thing about Newtown and Sandy Hook once and for all. From the comments in this article, one commenter linked this video. Watch it in its entirety.
|
|
On March 8, 2017 at 11:53 am, Archer said:
“It’s because of Newtown,” Tong said. “It’s because of Aurora and
Columbine and other places across the country. We know that reality far
better than other states and other communities. We feel that acutely.”
Oh, no it’s not, either. Tell me: in which of those events did the scumbag have a CCW permit that could have been demanded by police? Further, which of those events might have been prevented by an officer demanding to see a CCW permit?
Don’t go invoking bad apples to justify restricting oranges.
“It’s not an infringement on your liberty,” said Tong, an attorney who
has studied constitutional law. “It is not even considered a Fourth
Amendment stop.”
On this I agree, but not in the way he thinks. Stopping someone who is openly carrying a firearm and demanding to see a CCW permit isn’t a “Fourth Amendment stop” (hint: there’s no such thing). However, it also doesn’t meet the standard of a “Terry stop”, which requires reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime being committed. Open-carrying a firearm is a legal activity that in and of itself doesn’t rise to ANY level justifying a stop of ANY kind.
Tong needs to go study constitutional law some more and let the adults handle things.
On March 8, 2017 at 12:10 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Yes. All of the above. ^^ THIS ^^