OPINION: Rep. Smith on Post-Newtown Legislation

Taking Meaningful Action Following Sandy Hook

By State Representative Richard A. Smith (R-108)

In the early hours of Thursday morning the General Assembly passed a package of legislation aimed at enhancing mental health services, gun violence prevention and school safety in the wake of the unspeakable Sandy Hook Elementary shooting.

While this bill is far from perfect, I voted in favor of the legislation because it struck a reasonable balance between defending public safety and protecting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding gun owners. With that, I would like explain how the legislative process unfolded, what the law accomplishes and more on why I ultimately voted for the legislation.

Legislative Process

In January both chambers and both parties came together to form the Bipartisan Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety in an effort to develop an appropriate and thoughtful legislative response to the shooting.

For obvious and unfair reasons, the focus has been squarely on gun control. When the process began, the dialog coming from Democrats was drastic and radical. There was talk of gun confiscation, ammunition confiscation, egregious ammunition taxes, and universal registration for law-abiding citizens. Democrats, who control the House, Senate and Governor’s office, came to the negotiating table with these and other unprecedented reforms that would have, in my opinion, undoubtedly violated our constitutional rights.

As members of the minority party with a 2 to 1 disadvantage in the legislature, we had two choices: 1) sit back, do nothing and stubbornly vote NO as the Democrats legislated our rights away; or 2) enter the fight and attempt to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners by balancing the discussion, while trying to craft a piece of legislation that enhances public safety.

This bill is far from perfect; however, it has many aspects – particularly in regards to school safety and mental health – that I truly believe will help make our families safer.

Gun Control

The most high profile aspect of the three-pronged legislation is undoubtedly the changes relating to gun sales and ownership. Some of the measures include:

• Creates a dangerous weapon offender registry for law enforcement
• Requires universal background checks for the sale of all firearms
• Expands the existing assault weapon ban prospectively – grandfather provision allows current owners to keep their weapons provided they declare them
• Bans the sale or possession of large capacity magazines prospectively – grandfather provision allows current owners to keep their weapons provided they declare them
• Requires a firearms permit or eligibility certificate for the purchase of long guns
• Extends the psychiatric involuntary commitment look back period for firearm permit/possession from 12 months to 60 months
• Prohibits violent criminals from participating in the early release prison program

To be clear, this bill does NOT:

• Confiscate any weapons or ammunition
• Create a universal gun registry
• Tax ammunition
• Limit bulk purchase of firearms

There is no doubt these measures create some hoops for gun owners to jump through, but the basic right to purchase, possess and use firearms is not infringed upon. Please note that the expansion of the assault weapon ban and the ban on large capacity magazines will only apply prospectively, meaning law abiding citizens who already own them may keep them as long as they declare them to the Dept. of Emergency Services and Public Protection by January 1.

Many folks are concerned the legislation tramples on their Second Amendment right – a right I strongly support. However, had it done so I would have voted against the bill. I firmly believe this bill does not violate the constitution as it does not ban an entire class of weapons, nor does it call for confiscation of any weapons or ammunition lawfully purchased.

It would have been impossible to develop a set of solutions universally supported by the diverse parties involved, but I believe this modification to existing law is a reasonable compromise.

Please also note one of the strongest policies of this bill prohibits violent criminals from eligibility in the Risk Reduction Earned Credit Program – a controversial system, which I voted against, that allows violent criminals to leave prison early for “good behavior.” This change will make a real difference to the wellbeing of our communities.

School Safety

I believe school security is a critical part of the equation as we seek to make our children safer. Some of the provisions of this bill relating to that issue include:

• Authorizes a grant program to reimburse school security infrastructure upgrades
• Establishes school safety plans be developed at each school and submitted to the state with optional recommendations for future legislation
• Establishes committees to investigate disturbing or threatening behavior in schools
• Creates threat assessment teams and security vulnerability evaluations for institutions of higher education
• Orders a study to determine the value in creating police departments for community colleges

I believe the cornerstone of the school safety reforms is the authorization of an infrastructure grant program to reimburse towns for school security upgrades. The reimbursements, which will be distributed on a competitive basis, total $15 million and will fund between 20% - 80% of cost.

I believe it is essential that we grant districts the right to heighten security in schools to protect our kids using whatever modifications they think will be effective and appropriate for their schools. While I appreciate the “à la carte” style menu of options districts can opt to either utilize or not – as opposed to a one-size-fits-all mandate system – I think that no cost should be incurred by municipalities.

If the state is willing to offer and endorse security upgrades, they should fully reimburse the construction so that cash-strapped towns are not faced with raising property taxes in order to keep their kids safe. Moreover, the state should not raise taxes to fund this effort. If we are serious about making school security a priority, we should make the funding a priority. I think most would agree that school safety funding should trump, say, the hundreds of millions of dollars appropriated to the Hartford to New Britain busway.

Mental Health

In my opinion the largest contributing factor to the horrific shooting was a lack services and treatment options for mentally ill and at-risk individuals.

This package includes the following measures in an attempt to address this deficiency:

• Allows school districts the option to provide teachers with mental health training
• Provides new training and support for pediatricians helping children with mental illness
• Adds new slots for case management to assist people with mental illness
• Creates a task force to completely reevaluate Connecticut’s mental health system
• Expands the Assertive Community Treatment program to provide more recovery-oriented treatment and services

I believe strongly these policies will be effective as we help to address the unfulfilled needs out there. Mental health training for teachers and enhanced training for pediatricians, for example, are common sense solutions that contribute to a well-rounded approach.

As with any bipartisan compromise, the bill left some things to be desired, and I would have preferred the mental health reforms to be even stronger. For example, I advocated for a “duty to report” provision that would have required counselors and physicians report individuals who indicate they intend to cause serious harm to themselves or others. This concept, which is somewhat divisive, will be subject matter for a study through this legislation.

It is a precarious balancing act for government to ensure citizens’ the right to privacy and also protect citizens who may be in danger. Ultimately, I believe the right to confidentiality does not supersede the right of others to be safe.

Conclusion

December 14th changed Connecticut forever and highlighted the need to provide more comprehensive support to our communities so that our schools are safer and at-risk citizens are provided help. This tragedy has also forced us to reevaluate existing gun laws, which have not been examined for loopholes and weaknesses in years.

As with any compromise, I am not supportive of every component of this legislation, but I am pleased my caucus had a seat at the table and played such an instrumental role in ratcheting down the more radical proposals favored by Democratic leaders.

Making a decision on these complex and challenging issues was difficult, and I hope this provides a better context for why I chose to support this legislation.

For a detailed summary of the bill, log on to www.cga.ct.gov/ASaferConnecticut/