Conn. needs to keep track of its guns

The danger of such rhetoric is that everyone can walk away from the table. These discussions are supposed to be difficult, and it’s the responsibility of elected officials not to balk at the hard work.

Nothing about updating laws involving guns — both illegal and legal — is ever simple.

The very act of urban mayors in Connecticut working together to get illegal guns off their streets feels like progress. The mayors are focusing on disarming repeat offenders they believe are responsible for most of the state’s gun violence. Resistance is always expected when it comes to changing gun laws. In this case, the loudest blowback came from a fellow Democrat, state Sen. Gary Winfield, during a 12hour hearing Monday.

The approach taken by the mayors of Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford and Waterbury seems practical. Far too often, those repeat offenders are committing crimes with guns while out on probation or bail. The mayors’ objective is to increase the penalties in such circumstances.

Winfield essentially told the mayors to take a reality check about their own cities. He argued that many people carry illegal firearms for protection, and would suffer legal consequences from a law that is too broadly written.

The danger of such rhetoric is that everyone can walk away from the table. These discussions are supposed to be difficult, and it’s the responsibility of elected officials not to balk at the hard work.

But it’s not just the illegal guns that have muddied the discourse. Elsewhere in Connecticut, leaders at domestic violence agencies are trying to ensure people under restraining orders don’t have easy access to guns.

Under existing laws, alleged abusers are supposed to sell firearms or surrender them to police while under a restraining order. But there doesn’t appear to be a system for tracking those weapons. At a time when every detail of our lives seems to be tracked whether we like it or not, this gap appears to exist for a lack of effort.

Advocates say two Connecticut women — Traci-Marie Jones of Bethel, and Julie Minogue of Milford — were recently killed by guns that should have been taken away from their killers.

Illegal guns in inner cities and murders in the suburbs represent two sides of Connecticut’s criminal identity. Crimes involving domestic violence consume one-third of the state’s judicial caseload.

The latter types of crimes have motivated a different alliance, the Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence, to propose that a single body be formed to focus on refining the state’s laws on such matters.

Victims in Connecticut are served by the state’s 18 domestic violence agencies, with two state councils. The proposed Domestic Violence Criminal Justice Response and Enhancement Advisory Council would be a proactive agency combining the missions of the councils, and would examine existing policies for gaps.

Somewhere at the top of that list are gun issues. It can’t simply be left to a document informing someone hit with a restraining order that they need to surrender their weapon.

The formation of the new coalition is in the initial stages, but offers the promise of tracking cases from beginning to end. In any eventual form, it would likely take over the role of making recommendations to the Judiciary Committee.

Judiciary is one place where all gun legislation eventually meets. One of the co-chairs is Winfield, who challenged the mayors on illegal guns.

Everyone involved with trying to initiate change deserves credit for the effort. Eventually, though, Connecticut needs to figure out how to do a better job of knowing where its guns are.