Take our gun survey

On March 3, Hearst Connecticut Newspapers surveyed 60 state representatives and senators from Southwestern Connecticut to gauge their opinions on eight specific gun control measures. The results were surprising.  Now we want to know what you think. Tell us, and Hartford, where you stand.

Read more here

Do you support expanding the 1993 list of banned automatic weapons to include semi-automatic, assault-style rifles?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Do you support banning magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Do you support universal background checks including guns that are sold between private parties and at gun shows?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Would you support requiring people who own or purchase rifles to have a gun permit?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Do you support banning the possession of body armor by all except law enforcement and military personnel?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Would you support the creation of a Gun Offender Registry for individuals convicted of a gun crime?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Would you support prohibiting the purchase of more than one firearm in a 30-day period?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Do you support a 50 percent sales tax on ammunition? Proposals would provide exemptions for ammunition purchased and used at a shooting range.

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Categories: General
Deb West

84 Responses

  1. Pablo ThoMas says:

    I oppose any and all legislation requiring universal gun registration and make, model, and size restrictions. #1 because it is contrary to our Constitutionally guaranteed Second Amendment rights and is therefore illegal under federal law, and #2 because criminals with no respect for our laws (like illegal aliens), wouldn’t comply with it anyway. Democrat liberals have already murdered 55 million unborn babies in our country via abortion since it’s inception thereby negating any and all moral justification to even speak about protecting the lives of anyone much less children! Especially since their against the common sense of protecting them in schools via armed guards. Murder is already illegal and those who choose to ignore that and do it anyway will use whatever means necessary. That is why we FREE law abiding citizens should continue to have and use whatever it takes to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm, including an over reaching government lead by an imposter / poser / non-citizen like we have now.

  2. Understand says:

    Just because someone did something bad doesn’t mean my rights get to be taken away. The bill of rights and constitution are there to point out the rights of free people. It’s not there saying government gave us these rights. YOU HAVE THEM ALREADY! You can’t legislate evil out of the world. Also medical tyranny is just another way to disarm americans for they can just say everything is a mental disorder like in the DSM-5 manual. Stop being victims and arm yourself against evil instead of thinking the govt can protect you. It can’t. The police are only there to pick up your dead body if you can’t defend yourself. The real reason the 2nd amendment is there is to stop tyranical forces via foreign or domestic. Stop being sheep FFS!

  3. pjaugie says:

    Do we really want our present day politicians to determine how gun control should be managed.Looking at their record of how they have handled our fiscal issues, and immigration programs that are viewed by them as a re-election vehicle only,their handling of SSec,healthcare as another gov’t growth program, and on and on..they will foul up gun control even more terribly..Looking at the issue covered here, they are taking the actions of perhaps 5 mentally disturbed individuals to eviscerate the rights of millions of law abiding gun owners.Imagine if this policy was applied to Doctors who perform surgical errors—we would eliminate the medical field..

  4. Robert Guernsey says:

    For those of you that support banning or otherwise restricting ownership of certain firearms, is it because you oppose the use of violence?

    If so, then consider that you are the only ones initiating the use of force in any means of enforcing a ban. If you ban 30-round magazines, and my grandfather keeps his, will you support sending armed police to his house to take his stuff and/or send him to jail? He isn’t hurting anybody, so don’t support sending armed people to his house to extract him, take his property, and lock him up.

  5. Jon Jay says:

    Why is the SERIAL NUMBER and MODEL NUMBER needed for a background check? It seems to me that you should ONLY check the person and be done with it. Nothing is gained with serial and model numbers, UNLESS someone is trying to build up a database for later confiscation.(which our government denies they want to do)

  6. William R. Meyers, MSgt., USAF(Ret.) says:

    Well, if you think that the 2nd Amendment is obsolete, how about we take away your 1st Amendment Rights, too? You don’t think I have the right to own firearms, I don’t think you have the right to have an opinion on the subject, or to express it. What are you going to do to defend your rights? Stab me with your pen? Give me a paper cut? The only way you can defend yourself is to have what the people whom you expect to have to fight for your rights have. If they (the government, the crooks, the invaders, etc.) have guns, you need them too. Go and read what Thomas Jefferson said about ownership and use of guns, for example. Then come back and talk about this some more.

    This is a good place to start reading:


  7. jesse says:

    Every serious crime that has made national news, including Newtown, was committed by some deranged man who broke a law, often more than one, when they obtained their guns. How is passing more laws going to help us? Law abiding gun owners should always keep their firearms locked in a combination locker. Politicians should also realize that most Americans blame the people, not their guns, for these crimes. Personally, I would feel safest knowing all my fellow citizens were armed in public. I tend to trust 99.999% of people, and would like to see these crazies dropped before they are able to rampage. We should be encouraging people, especially women, to carry. BTW, I live in CT, and my family was directly affected by Newtown.

  8. Brian says:

    Why are politicians even thinking about new laws when they are not enforcing current ones? I read a recent stat where in Chicago in 2012, 94% of criminals who used guns to commit crimes were NOT charged and one 6% were charged with a crime.

    What is the point of new laws which only punish the law abiding while the politicians do absolutely nothing about the real criminals?


  9. BobTheTomatoe says:

    Automatic weapons?

  10. Johnny J says:

    20,000 plus gun laws on the books…and we need more? NO!! Enforce whats on the books. Look, the only things these new proposals do is punish law abiding citizens..do you really think criminals will follow the law? Come on America!! Quit drinking the kool-aid coming from these gun grabbing Obamacrats…
    Bottom line – The agenda is to disarm America. Don’t believe it? Do some research on Obama, Holder, Emmanuel, Fienstien etc. Decades ago they were saying Americans should not have guns and they will exploit any tragedy to advance thier misguided agenda. Screw them, they are awakening a Giant that they will wish they didn’t!!

    Here is a prime example. One of the strictest gun control cities in the nation. Poor law abiding citizens in Chicago can’t even protect themselves. Its a disgrace. nationhttp://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130124/chicago/most-shooters-chicago-dont-face-charges?utm_source=outbrain

  11. Glockslinger says:

    To the hoplophobes who ask why we ever need 20 or 30 bullets: it is a BILL OF RIGHTS, NOT A BILL OF NEEDS. Why does anyone need more than 30 words for their freedom of speech? Is 40 words an “assault paragraph?” Questioning the round-count of a gun is EXACTLY AS IDIOTIC! Ask yourself this: why do COPS want to be exempt? Are they asking to be able to commit mass-murder and kill as many people as efficiently as possible? OR… could it be that our law enforcement and first responder heroes have REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE that shows that more ammunition = a better chance of making it home alive at the end of a shift?

    The gun-ignorant need to consider this: even the most well-trained police officer will miss when someone is actively trying to MURDER THEM. And they might miss a lot. This is due to involuntary reactions in the body and you can’t “train around” it. So if they’re only going to make a solid hit about 12% of the time, 30 rounds means less than 3 hits. ADD TO THAT how some criminals may fight on even after being hit — it might take several rounds to take a crazed perp high on meth down — and more ammunition can save an officer’s life.

    NOW THINK AGAIN: I have taken the training and obtained a CCW permit. I walk the same streets as those cops. I might blunder into those same bad guys. I don’t have a partner, nor do I have a bullet-proof vest. No “K-9 officer” at my side or back-up nearby. Is it FAIR, or even MORAL to ask ME to accept what police (professionals) will not?

    The term “Assault weapons” is a LIE. We’re NOT talking about machine guns — those are already illegal. It is a made-up POLITICAL term being used to demonize a whole bunch of guns that hoplophobes think are “scary looking.” They are no more lethal, deadly or powerful than those on the list of so-called “protected” firearms (which will come under attack the first time somebody uses one in a future attack). If you’re ignorant about guns, GET EDUCATED! Here are 2 good places to start:



    Blaming average gun owners for mass shootings is like blaming your local hot rod club for drunk driving or highway fatalities. Go yell at a Little League coach the next time somebody bludgeons someone to death with a baseball bat. Go blame your local photographer’s association for child pornography — that makes just as much sense. NOW are you getting it? If guns cause crime, all mine are defective.

    Sneer at and deride those who are fearful of government shock troops and show your ignorance of history. And I’m not talking Nazi Germany here. I’m talking about upstate New York, where a whole class of legally registered guns — registered by law abiding citizens who trusted their government — were removed by force by police after government potentates declared that their guns were now “assault weapons.” (There’s that LIE again, being used to seize private property.) The SAME THING HAPPENED in California, where residents were assured that if they registered their SKS rifles, their registry would NEVER be used to seize their weapons and that they’d be grandfathered in for their compliance. LIE! Soon the demonized rifle was banned and police went door-to-door, using the registry as their guide. I heard about this from a police officer who had one of the guns in his collection and opened his door one day to fellow police officers, come to take his gun. Was ANYONE made safer by that?

    It’s laughable that a paper posts a survey to stick a finger in the proverbial wind and get a sense of what the general public feels on a topic, and when the results aren’t what the gun ban fools like, they accuse it of being rigged. Sounds to me like sour grapes. People who understand guns, KNOW they’re being lied to and have no irrational fears of guns simply do not agree with you. The vast majority of Americans simply aren’t rushing pell-mell to divest themselves of their rights to self-defense. NOT HAPPENIN’.

    Get educated. Check your facts. If you still don’t want a gun, don’t buy one. But youu DO NOT GET TO DECIDE FOR ME. Dig it:

    “The very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” – Justice Robert Jackson, 1943

  12. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm people in order to prevent future tyranny. They need the tools to do this.

    The term “Well Regulated” in the Second Amendment meant “Well Manned and Equipped ” in 1791 as was determined in the 1939 United States v. Miller case after referencing the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. The concept of Government Regulation, as we understand it today, did not exist at the time.

    United States v. Miller also determined that the term “Arms” refers to “Ordinary Military Weapons” (not crew operated). American Citizens have the right to Keep and Bear, which means Own and Carry, any weapons that a soldier carries into battle. That includes past, present and future weapons. A Militia consisted of armed volunteers willing to fight with their personal arms and not under government control.

    The 2008 Heller v. Washington DC decision reaffirmed that the Right to Bear Arms was an Individual right. The 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision reaffirmed it yet again and made it clear that it applies to every state, every city and every town in the United States.

    To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to writings in quill pens.

    Liberty is worth the risk of death!

  13. Mike says:

    Why do liberals prefer restrictions, waiting periods, background checks, and user fees for the second amendment, but squeal like schoolgirls at the mention of merely showing an I.D. to vote?

  14. Mathew says:

    Have Faith and Courage.Read The Visions of George Washington.The Republic will prevail.

  15. Mathew says:

    Just to give you an Idea as to how left the Ct. Post is.Gun Grabbers get 4 full pages of news coverage while gun owners get 1/4 page.What ever happened to good old fashion honest journalism. Two words: Michael Bloomberg

  16. jude says:

    I remember when they passed the state income tax. 25,000 plus people showed up on the capital lawn to protest it and Weicker still pushed it through and NOTHING happened.They are still, to this day, doing what ever they want. I thought then what I think now, the time for talk has long passed. If you think you can vote them out think again. Why do you think they changed over to electronic voting? Living in one of the most liberal states in the Union I have yet to meet someone who voted for Obama.

  17. Mikeymoe says:

    Hey fairfiedjohnboy, If what you say is true, why was it 10 to 1 in favor of the second Amendment at the state hearings? Why don’t you wake up and smell what your shoveling.

  18. Ed says:

    There wasn’t a HELL NO button.

    Who wrote the questions? The 1993 ban was not “automatic” weapons. It was for certain sporting rifles only.

  19. John says:

    I really don’t understand how any AMERICAN thinks that any politician would consider modifying/eliminating the SECOND AMMENDMENT. It’s NEVER going to happen. Any politician that even tries it would be labeled unpatriotic. So why even enter into this game of gun control. It leads nowhere and solves nothing.

    Start by working on a national system to link mental health and gun ownership. That’s your solution. Get the mental health experts to come up with a plan. You need to have a system that monitors certain mental diseases and prescriptions. Any HOUSEHOLD where ANY person falls into ANY set mental health issues or under certain prescription medication would NOT be eligible to own ANY gun PERIOD.

    That’s your real SOLUTION!!!

    And if you doubt it… SHOW me statistics on gun violence where you ELIMINATE a mental health/issue connection that shows a LEGALLY obtained gun was used for mass murder… Keep searching.. you won’t find numbers worth discussing.

    More people are killed by “hands and feet” contact.

    EDUCATE yourself before blindly going crazy about gun control measures you don’t even understand.

  20. yourtypicalliberaldem says:

    I honestly dont know why anyone needs 30 rounds of bullet thingies in those army guns. Really, they only use those guns for murder and crime, anyone who owns one should be locked up. Im with Chris Murphey on this, all gun owners are criminals and should be treated as such. We dont want you in our society and dont need you here. If you feel you need a gun to “Save” you from a tyrannical government then your just as stupid as the governor thinks you are. So take your murder sticks and go move to texas with the rest of the cowboys and shoot eachother. Just like Chris Murphey says, “If you feel you need a gun to save or protect you from your own government, then you are indeed a treasonous fool!”

  21. Peter says:

    To Amber and Bob,
    Amber, there is no such thing as an Assault Weapon. There is a Asault Rifle which is a fully automatic rifle. As far a mass killings? Most are committed with handguns. Bob? Semi automatic rifles have been out for well over 60 yrs,and please define just what is a large capacity magizine? And you do realize that it takes about 2seconds to change out a magazine. As for you Eve, you probably have more of a chance getting injured/killed in a car crash then getting killed by a gunshot.

  22. Eric says:

    I am a gulf war vet, gun owner and pistol permit carrier. I defended this country and the principles it was based upon for 6 years. During that time (at 17 years old) I had on me and in my control weapons police officers do not have. I used those weapons towards enemies of this country with the flag flying behind me. However now back in the US and as a civilian, the question of taking away one of the basic principle or rights given to every US citizen being in debate of being taken away from me. What did I defend? Why did I serve my country? What did I protect? I thought it was the founding principles of freedom. I agree with regulating gun control, I agree with the two week waiting period, but I agree that no government should take away the rights of its people.

  23. David White says:

    I hate to say this people but we live in a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy.
    Your fear of guns does not trump my Constitutional Right to ownership. Sorry!

    If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

    This man has put down on paper what many people are thinking, but are too cautious to express openly. I hope it never comes to what he is advocating, but I can certainly see where the possibility exists. God help us all if it ever does happen.
    PS Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the author:

    Dean Garrison (born 1955) is a contemporary American author and crime fiction novelist. He was born in Michigan , grew up in the Indiana , Illinois , and Texas , and received his B.A. degree from Ferris State University in Big Rapids, Michigan . Garrison is a Crime Scene Technician in West Michigan . His research in the fields of crime scene investigation and Shooting Reconstruction are widely published in forensic journals under the name of

    D.H. Garrison, Jr.

    Subject: If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

    Posted on January 3, 2013 by Dean Garrison

    I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.

    About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights.

    If you are religious you might choose to think of it this way… Say that members of your congregation decide that mass fornication is a good thing. Do they have the right to change the teachings of your God? The truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter how many people try to stray from it. Did I just compare our founders to God? In a way I did, but please note that I am not trying to insult anyone. For the purpose of the American Government our constitution and founders who wrote it are much like God is to believers. It is the law. It is indisputable.

    Our founders did not want a “democracy” for they feared a true democracy was just as dangerous as a monarchy. The founders were highly educated people who were experienced in defending themselves against tyranny. They understood that the constitution could protect the people by limiting the power of anyone to work outside of it much better than a pure system of popularity. A system of checks and balances was set up to help limit corruption of government and also the potential for an “immoral majority” developing within the American People. We have forgotten in this country that we are ultimately ruled by a constitution.

    Why is a democracy potentially just as dangerous as a monarchy? Let’s look at something that Benjamin Franklin said because it answers that question more fully and succinctly than I can.

    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin

    Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. We have seen evidence of this throughout history. Ask Native Americans and African-Americans if this population can become corrupt.

    I think in 2012 we are seeing evidence of what Franklin was trying to tell us. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights.

    Next I’d like to review the text of the second amendment. It is very clear. This is the law of this land. So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution?

    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.

    This is a pretty clear statement. The fact is that it took 232 years for the Supreme Court to even rule on this amendment because it has never been successfully challenged. In 2008 a case of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. One also has to take this into consideration. The Supreme Court supports your right to own guns. If you want to research this decision further you can start here.

    For those who try to debate the spirit of the 2nd amendment, they are truly no different from people who will try to take Biblical quotes out of context to try to support their immoral decisions. The founders were very clear on the intent of the 2nd amendment. Let me share a few quick quotes here:

    The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

    Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good. -George Washington

    The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams

    I could find hundreds of quotes like these. This country was built on the right to bear arms. It was built on the rights of an individual to bear arms, regardless of what his government or neighbor happened to think. This is crystal clear. Ironically the people who voice their opinions against this right have their free speech protected by your guns. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement.

    We need to keep this in mind as our “representatives” try to push gun bans. I don’t care if 99% of people are in support of gun bans (which is far from the case), it is a violation of our constitutional rights, plain and simple.

    A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much in the minority. If I were the only person in America who believed in the 2nd amendment, I would still be within my rights to call upon it. You would all think I was insane and possibly celebrate if I was gunned down, but in the end I would be the only true American among us.

    Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment.

    It is not my right, at that point, but my responsibility to respond in the name of liberty. What I am telling you is something that many are trying to soft sell, and many others have tried to avoid putting into print, but I am going to say it. The time for speaking in code is over.

    If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson ’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority can not take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights.

    Congress could pass gun ban legislation by a 90%+ margin and it just would not matter. I think some people are very unclear on this. This is the reason we have a Supreme Court, and though I do not doubt that the Supreme Court can also become corrupt, in 2008 they got it right. They supported the constitution. It does not matter what the majority supports because America is not a democracy. A constitutional republic protects the rights of every single citizen, no matter what their “elected servants” say. A majority in America only matters when the constitution is not in play.

    I just wrote what every believer in the constitution wants to say, and what every constitutional blogger needs to write. The truth of the matter is that this type of speech is viewed as dangerous and radical or subversive, and it could gain me a world of trouble that I do not want. It is also the truth. To make myself clear I will tell you again. If they come for your guns it is your right to use those guns against them and to kill them. You are protected by our constitution.

    Most of the articles I am reading on the subject are trying to give you clues without just coming out and saying it. I understand that because certain things in this country will get you on a list that you don’t want to be on. I may well be on that list. This blog is small and growing so I may not be there yet, but I have dreams. I also have my own list of subversives and anyone who attempts to deny my constitutional rights is on that list.

    I am not the “subversive” here, it is the political representatives who are threatening to take away my inalienable rights. If they come to take my guns and I leave a few of them wounded or dead, and I somehow survive, I have zero doubt that I will spend a long time in prison and may face an execution. But I would much rather be a political prisoner than a slave.

    If I go down fighting then I was not fighting to harm these human beings. I was simply defending my liberty and yours. It is self-defense and it is what our country was built on. We won our freedom in self-defense. We would not be ruled by a tyrannical government in the 1770′s and we will not be ruled in 2012 by a tyrannical government. There is no difference.

    This is a case of right and wrong. As of now the 2nd amendment stands. It has never been repealed. If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. It is treasonous to say the least. They would likely say the same about me, but I have the constitution, the founders, and the supreme court on my side. They only have their inflated egos.

    I am not writing this to incite people. I am writing this in hopes that somehow I can make a tiny difference. I have no idea how many of my neighbors have the will to defend their constitutional rights. 2%? 20%? I am afraid that 20% is a high number, unfortunately. When push comes to shove many people may give up and submit to being ruled. I believe that our government is banking on this.

    I would hope that our officials come to realize that, regardless of our numbers, we still exist because they are calling Patriotic Americans to action. They are making us decide if we want to die free or submit to their rule. I can not tell you where you should stand on that. I do know that it may make the difference between living a life of freedom or slavery.

    You must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Not all conspiracy theories are hogwash. They may throw down the gauntlet soon and my suggestion is that you prepare yourself to react.

    I mean no disrespect to our elected officials but they need to understand that “We the People” will not be disarmed. If they proceed then it is they that are provoking us and we will act accordingly. We are within our rights to do so.

    For those who are in support of taking the guns, you need to ask yourself a very important question, and I am not just talking about the politicians, because if you support them, you have chosen your side.

    Are you willing to die to take my guns?


    Through regulations, taxation, inflation of the money supply, trade restrictions, and tethers on private associations, government itself is nothing but a massive drain on prosperity. The situation has become deeply dangerous for the future of freedom in America, with young people unable to find jobs, opportunities being destroyed in sector after sector, banks and corporations living on the dole, and so many regulations that we are living under something nearly as egregious as Soviet-style central planning.

    Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him — better take a closer look at the American Indian.

    Henry Ford

  24. Mark says:

    The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting.. Those are rights given to us by God or nature (your choice). So enough with the “what do you need an AR-15 or 30 round mag” comments. Stop telling people what they need.

    Talk about a war on women/gays and minorities. Limiting their ability to defend themselves….of course the Dems/Libs/Socialist/Progressives are all about protecting women and minorities and gays…just on their terms, which means “suck it up and call 911″.

    EVERY woman/minority and gay should be OUTRAGED that the gov wants them to have a limited choice when it comes to self defense….what a joke.

    Not ONE of these laws will ever do one thing to stop crime….not one. If anything, they will only make it better for the criminal.

    Ask yourself this? Do you think criminals are for or against tougher gun laws?? Really, think about it.

  25. Amber says:

    I am supportive of the ban on assault style weapons. There is no reason for the public to have access to these guns… look at all these mass killings. Now I am also very highly in agreeance that the gov’t needs to step up the mental health help for us Americans… All these medications they perscribe to us have so many bad side affects they need to start giving us herbal remedies to help us… less side affects!!! This gov’t is out of control… I dont feel safe in this country anymore… PTSD at it’s finest!!!

  26. Jim D says:

    The most outrageous, absurd notion is to raise taxes on ammunition – a punishment for being a legal gun owner? Or a method of raising more tax revenue for politicians to line their pockets or fund agendas?

  27. Bob says:

    If you require a semi/auto/assault, large magazines weapon to go game hunting. You need more practice to become a better hunter.

  28. EveT says:

    I support all the controls proposed in this poll. These controls should be enacted not just in Connecticut but nationwide. We regulate the ownership and use of cars; guns should be regulated just as well. My right to live in peace and safety should not be trampled by the 2nd Amendment.

  29. david e says:

    many of the proposed gun laws (i.e. those mentioned in this poll) seem designed to infringe on law abiding citizens. Law abiding citizens are sitting ducks for both the criminal and the gov’t. Meanwhile, the anti gun crowd (many who have honorable albeit misguided intentions) doesn’t realize that the greater threat to their safety is a broken criminal justice system that fails to keep criminals behind bars and mentally unstable people housed in state hospitals.

  30. RC says:

    Another poll which spits out results which overwhelmingly refute the opinions that current Democratic leadership espouse, namely that Connecticut citizens are calling for new regulations.

    The people have spoken, on multiple polls and multiple occasions; will our leaders listen?

  31. Tom says:

    continued….but when it’s time to show up at a rally 90% of you stay home. Maybe if you can’t browse the counters at your local gun store for two days you will all realize that this is what the future of Ct. will be like if you sit quietly and never support the freedoms that you claim to cherish.

  32. Tom says:

    Income tax. Does that sound familiar to all of you? Approximately twenty years ago despite a public that was steadfastly against it, the Connecticut legislature along with it’s Governor rammed an income tax down our throats with the promise that it would “get our fiscal house in order”. Did it? We are in worse shape than ever. The will of the people seem to mean very little to our elected officials in Connecticut and once again they seem to want to move against the people and impose restrictions that will criminalize law abiding citizens. I implore the Connecticut Gun shops and shooting ranges to close their doors with the exception of training classes for two days next Saturday and Sunday. Why? Look at this poll! It’s obvious that the majority of people in Connecticut believe the current proposals are WAY OVEROARD

  33. Patrick says:

    The 50% sales tax on ammo. Is a bunch of crybaby liberal unfair unreasonable scamming bs. All it will do is unfairly punish and demonize law abiding gun owners. And unfairly rip them off as well. F.U. to all the law makers if they pass that

  34. they are blowing the gun laws out of whack

  35. larry says:

    The Constitution of connecticut states that the citizens have the right to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State.Why is this not mentioned? Legislators take an oath to uphold the constitution.Why are they not living up to their oath? We don’t need more gun control, We need more insane people control.The irony of Newtown is they used to have Fairfield Hills hospital to treat and get people off the streets who were a danger to themselves or to others.It was the state that closed that.How did that experiment work out? Just wondering

  36. Mikey says:

    Why is it that politicians would listen to 5 advocates for gun control and ignore the 500 against gun control?It’s pretty clear at this stage it has nothing to do with gun violence.There is an evil movement being perpetrated by evil men and it’s end goal is the total disarmourment of the American people.All those who choose to stand against the Republic will one day get their just reward. Just remember this all important truth,God is on our side.

  37. Genellen says:

    Looks like the NRA agitated its sympathizers to respond with these kind of results. Say goodbye to freedoms for citizens who don’t NEED guns for whatever wacko reason. I am now convinced that Second Amendment types truly are mentally ill. Very frightening.

  38. John says:

    glad to see the majority of pollers are reasonable. I would encourage people to get educated on gun and gun crime statistics. Banning the so called “assualt rifle” will solve nothing… spend your enery and dollars on linking mental health checks with gun ownership and you actually SOLVE someting

  39. Typical Liberal Poll , Slanted questions and only allowed to vote for 1 question. Then I have to “wait for prossessing “. I’ve been waiting 2 hours.

    You better get this poll working…How the heck are the Demoscums supposed to vote more than once with it working like this ???

  40. laurie langley says:


  41. Don C. says:

    This is NONSENSE! How come the results clearly indicate the overwhelming opposition to further regulation, yet the politicians clearly have their own agenda, separate from the people! Open your eyes people, where this is headed is crystal clear…

  42. Caoman says:

    They cannot enforce the existing gun laws…but yes there are a few more that should be on the books…just incase!!..
    However I feel that ‘they’ will not be able to enforce many if any of the existing gun laws just as much as they are unable or… they just don’t want to… enforce existing immigration laws

  43. Charles De Joseph says:

    Seems like the pro-gun citizens win again. Now we will see if you print the real truth in the post. All gun owners do not belong to the NRA,there are millions of us out there who are sick of all the anti-gun BS. Go after the arch criminals on the street and take thier ILLEGAL guns away. I don’t keep saying the Police are out gunned, they all have full auto M-16s in thier inventorieS, tell them to stop driving around and do thier job!!

  44. Mike says:

    It’s either a call to heaven or a call to arms!

  45. MICHAEL FRANCO says:

    There are enough laws. I suggest they start to enforce them,especially when felons are found carrying guns.

  46. Rob from Trumbull says:

    In 2010 the FBI listed the number of the homicides:
    6,009 were committed with a handgun. Another 373 with shotguns.the total for ALL rifles and “Other” (FBI cannot determine caliber of bullet and to include black powder and even pellet) is 454. These were not all assault style rifles so its safe to say less than 5% were used violently. Knifes were 1704 people while hands and feet deaths were in at 745 followed by blunt objects or listed in a category as Other Weapon was 1772. the most interesting death total was Medical Malpractice tipping the scale just over 98,000! Why is something not being advanced by the federal government about that? Oh wait, there is. It’s called Obamacare, or we know it as “more government.”

  47. Peter says:

    After I voted I got: You Had Already Voted For This Poll. Poll ID #66. Never voted on this before. This Poll SUCKS.

  48. Jim Gallagher says:

    The problem with gun offenders is not the existing laws, it is the administration of them by the courts. It is incredible how often people convicted of weapons violations are out on the street doing it all over again.
    Violations of existing statutes concerning weapons should command severe punishment for the criminals, not for the rest of America.

  49. Stu Keating says:

    Every law passed restricting our second amendment rights only restricts and limits law-abiding citizens and emboldens the mentally unbalanced, gangs, drug cartels, terrorists and criminals!
    We the good folks obey the law and others ignore the law with impunity, because the government will not provide the funds to enforce the laws and do not incarcerate the offenders!
    Lastly, many of our legislators are ignorant buffoons!!

  50. John Negrich says:

    Please stand by our sec. Admement

  51. c f simjian says:

    None at this time”

  52. Scott says:

    Pass more laws that they cannot enforce….pfffttttt…..vote them out !!!!

  53. G Mones says:

    There is nothing sensible about Maloy,s New Gun Laws.If He wanted to stop the So Called Gun Show loophole He should pass this law ….Background checks required at all ORGANIZED Gun sale/Show events..Where 3 or more guns are being sold.The Gun show Organizers /Promoters Would have to have a Gun dealer on the premises to do the NICS Check.The state could set a nominal fee That the Gun dealer gets to keep (Not The state) to do each check ,So He gets Paid …Problem solved..Loophole Closed!!,& every Gun owner would BACK IT Because unlike Malloys other Proposals This wouldnt Infringe on Law Abiding citizens Gun rights!! I thought It was all about Banning Assault weapons They will use Any Scheme they can to pass as many unreasonable laws they can! Laws including common firearms, Laws against Ammo& Ammo regestration,which will jack up the price. Ammo is Now going for .50cents a round to $1.50 a round ! Malloys Plan will Raise prices 3X to 10X that price & No More online Purchases, So Gun owners Will Just Buy Out of State.Gun owners use Bulk Ammo Purchases on line for the the same reason people go to costco or BJs .To save $$$ These measures Do Nothing to stop criminals!!& wouldnt have prevented Sandy hook!

  54. G Mones says:

    I think its time to Get the Message out “Any Politician that votes for these Draconian Gun laws WILL BE VOTED OUT! next election! ” There are Many Districts Where some of these Reps are unopposed,Lets Fill the Ballots & STACK the deck With our own Independent Pro gun Reps . If all us Gun owners Vote for our own Reps we will WIN Many seats in the CT Legislature .Our GUN reps if elected By us for issues Involving Firearms! They Don’t have to be Experienced Politicians! We might be able to WRITE them in on the ballot! I would vote for the 90 year old lady Down the street,Or Mickey Mouse If it causes these Anti Gunners to Get Voted out!! We have to become Single Issue Voters Because NOTHING is more important Than the 2nd Amendment !! Lets Take off the Kidd Gloves & Let them Know now They are GONE NEXT ELECTION !!!They are out a JOB!!

  55. G Mones says:

    The legislators Claimed It was All about So-Called Assault Weapons,But as usual they are trying to Pass even MORE Gun laws Against everything From Common Semi-autos,to Ammo Registration/Tax,Body Armour (I guess Store owners shouldn’t Be able to protect themselves!)Put on your Thinking cap people…What does this have to do with stopping a Adam Lanza,or Criminals? Nothing! Gang Members & Drug dealers are responsible for 99% of all shootings/Deaths! So why are us innocent/Law abiding citizens Having our Guns& ammo Targeted ?? Wake-Up! Its Not about Crime Its about Disarmament & destruction of the 2nd Amendment!!!

  56. XDROB says:

    Come on enforce the laws we have.All these new laws do NOTHING to stop or curb the ability of the criminal from getting their guns. They don’t go to the local Police Dept and get their fingerprints taken or the apply to the State Police for a permit to transport their guns the range legally. All these laws and restrictions keep the legal gun owner from getting anything. KKeep in mind that the people who are trying to (DO THE RIGHT THING) have an ARMY of ARMED people around them to protect them and their loved ones.They don’t need or want a gun Who protects the average citizen. I have GREAT RESPECT for our Local and State police,BUT they cannot be there when the crime is happening. WHAT MAKES THEIR LIVES AND THEIR LOVED ONES BETTER THEN THE REST OF US???

  57. Bleve says:

    Please stop blaming the instrument… BLAME THE PERSON… Tim Mcveigh used fertilizer and a ryder truck when he blew up the murrow buildein (BTW Killing 19 children) and I didn’t hear about any of you rabid anti-gun freaks protesting in front of the local agway or truck rental place… The 9/11 terrorists used box cutters – still no protests… Hum, I’m seeing a pattern here. Banning guns are the answer to everything, right???… Until some other mentally disturbed a-hole uses a butter knife to do something horrific… THEN WHAT WILL YOU DEMAND TO BE BANNED… CUTTLERY?

  58. Martin says:

    Go into the bad areas like Chicago,Hartford,New Haven,Bridgeport and take away the illegal gun’s and see how much gun crimes go down. There is no sense to take away the legal permit holders rights. All the politicans not working on the economy and jobs and taxation should be voted out next time. Stop using your positions for your own personal agenda. The people marching for gun laws or anything else just want their 15 minutes of fame.

  59. Arlene S. says:

    I am very disappointed in the CT POST Gun Control Survey.
    My husband was allowed to take the survey, but I was blocked and told that I already took it. THIS SURVEY WILL
    NOT TELL THE COMPLETE STORY! The Second Amendment in our
    Constitution should stand as is “THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS”. There are existing gun laws that need to be enforced, not more socialist laws that infinge upon our rights. Go after the real criminals and stop treating every law biding citizen as one! Don’ mess with our rights! This is a DEMOCRACY. I HOPE!

  60. Liberty First says:

    Words like always and never are absolute terms. They mean what they say.

    The Second Amendment uses an absolute term and the ignoramus lawmakers cannot understand that. They must all be products of our failing public school education system and have no reading comprehension. What don’t they understand about the absoluteness of…”the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” It is a right that vests in the People not the ever controlling political class!

    Maybe the puurpose of the Second Amendment, to be the last line of defense for the citizen against tyranny ought to be exercised and put some fear into the hearts of the vile ruling class. Maybe then they will really represent the People and not the government’s interest nor their own selfish interests.

  61. Donna Moffly says:

    We need much stronger gun laws.

  62. Rob S. says:

    Will Dannel Malloy’s son be on the Gun Offender Registry for individuals convicted of a gun crime? Remember, his son was arrested for robbery of a convenience store in Darien CT/ and to refer to killing Bambi with an AK-47 shows how people are aware of what is and is not law already. The AK-47 was banned in CT already – driving the price of it on the pre-ban list price well close to $2000. Most of your firearms of the “BAD TYPE” are very expensive to own already so the law abiding collector is punished for no reason what so ever. Try focusing on the real problem which is mental health.

  63. Savage Henry says:

    A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    all laws, regulation, lists, permits, burdensome taxes, and restriction on ammo and accessories are INFRINGEMENT.

    Have a nice day :)

  64. LyleLovett666 says:

    I guess I’m crazy,but I’m a little more worried about the president trying to justify using drones on US citizens w/o due process than I am about the law abiding guy next door with some defensive rifles and high capacity magazines.

  65. Tom says:

    To people like “fairfield john” I would simply say if you’re so certain that a poll like this “has no basis in a factual representation” (like your minority opinion does) because you obviously don’t like what you see then all of the anti-firearms people such as yourself should be more than happy to have a statewide referendum on these new restrictions. I doubt that you and your kind are truly interested in the will of the people. the next local elections and every one after that in Connecticut will indeed be a one issue vote for me.

  66. jjflash says:

    Will the CT Post still publish the results of this poll,
    even though it definitely goes against their liberal, biased anti-gun political agenda? Enforce the laws already on the books. None of the knee jerk, emotionally charged proposals being bandied about in the CT Legislature will do anything to stop the criminals. Disarming the honest gun owners and the public at large is unabashedly real goal of the gun grabbers. To our elected officials in Hartford – we will remember in November.

  67. Law Abiding says:

    It’s a shame these lawmakers are exploting this tragedy. They are just going to make more people “criminals” by definition because I doubt many will follow “lets pacify some people” laws they are trying to pass. Is Malloy going to have his CSP bodyguard leave his/her weapons home? Doubt it. Is Obama going to go to an outing with unarmed guards? I doubt it. They want to buy 2 billion rounds of ammo and supply Syria and the Mexican cartels with guns (ohhh that was by accident)but disarm it’s own citizens…that makes a whole lotta sense.

  68. Harry Sachs says:

    With are open borders do you think the government can keep guns out of the hands of criminals? They do such a good job of keeping drugs off the streets of America Stopping being stupid Look at all the areas with strict gun control DC Shitcago NY LA all have high murder rates

  69. Eugene Gore says:

    As A Law Abiding Citizen–DO NOT infringe on my Constituional Rights. Go after the Gang related thugs and START to enforce the LAWS which are on the books.

    Agree %100% !

  70. roy says:

    Yeah, right, all these proposed Commnistic Laws would have prevented Newtown.
    The first question has nothing to do with machine guns.
    Limiting one gun purchase a month is like dehydrated water. Just add water.

  71. Michael Parrella says:

    The State hearings proved exactly where most residents stand. With our forfathers and the Patriots before us, in support of the Second Amendment.So why another poll? I’ll tell you why, because you can’t fix the state hearings.

  72. fairfieldjohn says:

    I think this poll has no basis in a factual representation of the people of Connecticut. The only people who click on it are the people who are really jacked up about it (it being the boogey man coming to take their precious guns – which no one has ever suggested).

    Seriously – delude yourselves to thinking everyone agrees with you, and you need your guns to provide dinner (AK47 to kill bambie to feed your kids – yeah right).

  73. Tom says:

    Please remember this poll when you vote because the politicians that are intent on banning ALL GUNS will not stop at so called “assault weapons”. If Adam Lanza had used two 357 revolvers and a pump shotgun and killed 20 instead of 26 they would have gone after semi autos ALONG WITH revolvers and shotguns. An armed guard would have been the ONLY thing that could have stopped him. We all buy life insurance decades before we believe we’ll pass on but some people just will never accept the fact that armed guards are the insurance against evil people.

  74. Justsayin says:

    Well, I see those who think deriding those they disagree with stands in for having a rational counterpoint, have been busy.

    Note to self, when lacking a fact based, rational opinion, simply call those I disagree with:stupid, crackpot, irrational, insane, paranoid, etc.

    Seems to work for some folks, and most with a liberal mindset.

  75. Lisa says:

    Every single poll, blog posts and comments are on the side of the Constitution. Upcoming elections WILL CERTAINLY be one issue elections. The will of the people is being ignored and subverted.

  76. Harry Kowalkski says:

    looks like the crackpots at the NRA have been busy

  77. Big John says:

    Well it seems a majority of law abiding citizens taking this poll have some common sense left, unlike the media or the most of the clueless politicians. “Ban body armor”, where the heck did some idiot dream that up??? As a person who does not own body armor I don’t have a hand in this game, HOWEVER- who the heck am I to say that another person can’t own it or wear it if they feel a need? I would imagine body armor worn on a woman that is under threat of violence from her ex-spouse would be a bit more effective than waiving a restraining order at him. This makes about as much sense as our foolish politicians who never go skydiving putting forth legislation to ban reserve parachutes. What ever happened to the false “if we could just save one more life” argument.

    My crystal ball tells me there will be sweeping change in the State Legislature and Governors office over all of this. Most of our elected officials ARE NOT representing the will of the people and firearms owners in Connecticut have LONG memories.

    Constitution State??? Not anymore!

  78. burbanite says:

    Gun offender registry? Really? It makes me wonder how much free time some people must have if they dream up stuff like this. At this stage we all know that isn’t about safety or the children and has become exactly what was predicted. Now that the anti gun nuts have admitted it openlyand have no more reason to pretend all I can say is Game On!

  79. Dom says:

    Horribly worded questions. The 1993 law did NOT ban automatic firearms, but went after semi-automatics, just as they’re doing again now.
    These are all bad proposals that even if were the law of the land on Dec. 13th wouldn’t have done anything to prevent Adam Lanza from doing what he did on Dec. 14th.

  80. Kai says:

    The poll results indicate that public opinion seems to mostly side with responsible, legal gun owners such as myself, as expected (hoped). And yet the knee-jerk legislators seem to think everyone wants more draconian (and ineffective) laws that will ironiclaly *not* affect criminals.

    Also, Deb West, your link is broken in “The results are surprising” sentence — you added an additional ‘http’.

  81. Ed Faulkner says:

    Personally, the next election is going to be a “one issue” election for me at both the state and federal level.

  82. lck says:

    Those with their heads in the sand are against controls, as the carnage continues you can be proud of your resistance to any change.

  83. John R Vitka says:

    As A Law Abiding Citizen–DO NOT infringe on my Constituional Rights. Go after the Gang related thugs and START to enforce the LAWS which are on the books.

  84. St says:

    Hmmm, Hearst is on the wrong side of this it seems. 71% against you!