Dems reject GOP plan to make CT gun-violence panel ‘all violence’

Majority Democrats on the General Assembly’s Public Health Committee on Wednesday first deleted language that would have declared gun violence a public health crisis, then defeated an attempt by suburban Republicans to add other types of weapons, including knives and baseball bats, as part of the focus of a proposed firearms task force.

In the end, after a nearly two-hour debate, in which Democrats led by Sen. Marilyn Moore of Bridgeport stressed the multi-generational scourge of armed urban attacks that are killing and traumatizing primarily Black residents of the state, the committee overwhelmingly approved the firearms legislation, which next heads to the Senate.

In likely its final meeting before the committee’s Friday deadline, the panel killed a related bill, which would have proclaimed the public-health crisis.

But for lawmakers such as Moore, Sen. Saud Awar, D-South Windsor and

Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, the main goal is to study, fund and implement wide-ranging, evidence-based solutions to cut down on homicides that are daily occurrences in the cities.

“Evaluation is very important to me,” said

Moore, noting that the proposed Commission on Gun Violence Intervention and Prevention, with a

$2.5 million budget, would technically replace another panel that has been inactive in recent years. “We pay for this gun violence over and over again. We pay for it in health care. We pay for it in trauma.”

At the start of the committee debate, state Rep. Lezlye Zupkus, R-Prospect, proposed an amendment that would expand the scope of the legislation to address a variety of other kinds of violence, from domestic and child abuse, to elder and animal abuse, which has been found to be linked in children to eventual violent criminal acts against people.

“It’s really violence that is the crisis,” Zupkus said. “There is such a much bigger crisis than just guns. Every life is important. I do feel and hope and pray that somehow all of this violence would come to an end in the city. But I don’t have the answer on how to stop blunt-force trauma. I don’t know how to stop somebody from picking up a hammer or a knife or whatever it may be, to do that. Possibly we need to change the name of the bill to gun violence in inner cities. That’s what we’re striving to do here.”

“This argument sounds very much like ‘all violence matters,’ just because we are talking about gun violence,” said Anwar, a physician who is cochairman of the committee with Steinberg. “It’s almost like ‘all lives matter’ when we’re trying to address the lives of certain communities that have been affected the most.”

He noted a 556-page report that came out at the end of December from the Gun Violence Intervention and Prevention Advisory Committee, which was created by legislation proposed last year by Moore. It estimated that gun violence costs state taxpayers at least $90 million a year. Anwar warned that Zupkus’s proposal would “create chaos by legislation.”

“I think by broadening you are belittling a specific incidence of gun violence that is taking place in our communities,” Moore replied to Zupkus. “We are trying to address a problem in the urban centers that we’re facing right now. Your recommendation is so broad, I don’t know how we’d begin to address those issues.”

“I’m just confused why it is so important to blur the distinction between gun violence and other violence,” Steinberg said. “I don’t think anyone here is suggesting there needs to be a hierarchy of badness, of problems with violence. I think we’re all in agreement that we should be combating every aspect of violence in our communities. But this bill is about gun violence and it is not by any means intended to denigrate, minimize or ignore other forms of violence, which should be addressed through appropriate, targeted legislation.”

“If you get punched in the head, it’s a little bit different from taking a gunshot in the head,” said Rep. Phil Young, D-Stratford. “A gunshot in the head puts it in a different category. I believe it has its own category and that’s why I really think that legislation like this is a good idea. We don’t need to dilute it down to talk about just violence.”

Zupkus’s proposal was defended by committee members including Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, a top Republican member of the panel; Rep. Nicole Klarides-Dirtria of Seymour and Rep. Whit Betts of Bristol.

“I have not heard any comment from anybody saying that we should not include other forms that are identified or related to violence,” said the sixthterm Betts. “At the very least I think we owe that to victims whether they got killed by a baseball bat; whether they got killed in any number of different ways. At least we’re passing a law that says all violence is wrong.”

“I don’t think that anybody is saying that any form of murder or assault is not important,” Steinberg responded. “I will just say it emphatically, because you said no one has said it before: This bill is about gun violence.”

Zupkus’ amendment was defeated 19-9, with Republicans including Klarides-Ditria and Rep. Kathy Kennedy of Milford on the losing side. After another 20 minutes of debate, the legislation was overwhelming approved, including support from Klarides-Ditria and Kennedy.