Rep. Rob Sampson |
As state legislators, we are often charged by our constituents to put politics aside and work across party lines to find solutions. I can think of no goal worthier of such cooperation than securing the safety of our schools.
Earlier this month, I was saddened by the reaction of our
Governor and the state’s federal delegation to the recent school shooting in Parkland, Florida. Governor Malloy even stated that lawmakers
who refuse to enact stricter gun control laws “have blood on their hands.” Other Democrat elected officials (and many
press outlets across) the country have engaged in similar rhetoric for the sole
aim of painting their political opponents as somehow responsible for the
heinous crimes of a troubled young man.
This is an absurd position since no one, certainly not
members of any political party, or even the NRA has any culpability in this or
any similar crime or tragedy.
Additional restrictions on law abiding firearm owners will
not prevent similar future acts of violence nor make us any safer. The truth is that lawfully possessed firearms
in the hands of “good guys” (for lack of a better term) are a very effective
deterrent to crime and terrorism.
Ever since the tragedy at Sandy Hook,
I have advocated for constructive and non-partisan solutions to reduce the
potential for similar events. Connecticut reacted
after that terrible act by passing the strictest gun control laws in the
country, including bans on "assault rifles", restrictions on magazine capacity,
and universal background checks. Irrespective
of any other value those policies may have, none of those things have made us
even the least bit safer.
We need to look in other places so I offer this list of
recommendations to address the issue of protecting our school students and
their teachers from the threat of violence.
Common sense dictates that prevention should be paramount in
cases of public safety. My proposals are
focused in this area.
1)
Starting
in the late 1950s in California,
there has been a concerted effort by states to move away from
institutionalizing
individuals with chronic mental health issues to
community-based facilities or group homes.
This only accelerated after the repeal of the federal Mental Health
Systems Act in 1981, essentially removing federal funding for community mental
health support systems. It would be
wrong and unnecessary to stigmatize any group of people, least of all those
struggling with brain health. However,
there is a small portion of society that would benefit greatly from
supervision. Connecticut is one of the few states that
has no Assisted Outpatient Commitment program for those with a history of
repeated hospitalizations and arrests.
Essentially, this is a way for society to keep track of and monitor
those that need it, both for their benefit and ours. Consider the Florida case and the repeated interactions
the shooter had with law enforcement.
Such a policy, if properly followed, might have been the missing
ingredient in prevention. We should implement an Assisted Outpatient Commitment
policy immediately.
2)
We
need to establish a trigger for action
when someone publicly (as in a social media post) threatens violence against
others. Like our risk warrant
statute, this would require probable cause and would lead to detaining the
person and submitting them to a mental health review. The goal is early identification of potential
threats and to intervene before something happens.
3)
Place school resource
officers in all our public schools. Our
society has chosen to place armed security in almost every public place: government buildings, sporting events, even
museums. Why are we not protecting our
children the same way? Where this policy
is in place, the on-site officer typically becomes a role model to students and
a deterrent to all kinds of negative behavior (e.g., illegal drug use).
4)
Allow properly licensed
and trained permit holders to carry firearms in schools, subject to policy set
by a local boards of education. This
does not mean arming every teacher or
placing guns in the hands of untrained people.
Just getting rid of the restrictions on where licensed permit holders
can carry would increase public safety.
The mere presence of resistance prevents crime, and the ability to have
someone armed and capable on site in the case of a crazed attacker simply makes
sense.
It’s understandable why it’s standard in political spin to
blame certain types of firearms when tragedies occur – it’s easy. However, it makes no sense to shift the
blame for a person’s criminal behavior on to an object or worse, a group of
people that are not involved whatsoever.
I call upon Governor Malloy and others who continue to push
for more bans on guns, even after enacting the most far-reaching gun control in
the whole country just a few years ago, to stop playing politics and instead
work constructively to minimize the potential for further tragedies.
There are countless factors behind such events, and I am
realistic enough to know that we may never be able to prevent similar tragedies
from happening in the future. However,
we can see that the constant and repeated attacks on the rights of law abiding
gun owners have little to no effect.
Some of these recommendations are already being utilized to varying
degrees in our state and across the country.
My hope is that this is the direction we take, along with the vigorous
prosecution of existing laws for the illegal use and possession of
firearms. By concentrating on prevention
and intervention, we can make a difference.
Rob
Sampson
State
Representative
Conservative
Caucus Chairman
No comments:
Post a Comment
The South Central Bulldog reserves the right to reject any comment for any reason, without explanation.