Keystone Cop Confusion in Connecticut

Although I just wrote Thursday about the proposed law in Connecticut that could turn victims of crime into criminals (felons, no less), and at risk of once again exposing my ignorance (as if that has ever stopped me), this article compels me to revisit the issue. While Connecticut legislators push for demands for accountability on the part of gun owners, the police of the state’s capital city are apparently incapable of coming close to meeting the standards that would be imposed on private gun owners.

The Hartford Police Department has widespread problems keeping track of equipment, and the situation reached a critical point last December when it couldn’t account for all its firearms during a city audit.

The department’s procedures for keeping track of firearms and controlling access to them were so lax, the city’s chief internal auditor said, that the officer in charge of the department’s arsenal could not account for all its nearly 900 handguns, shotguns, assault rifles and other firearms.

And we are to believe that reporting gun thefts to these paragons of law enforcement is necessary for the safety of the state?

Several of the people in charge of equipment and supplies, the report said, were unable to find weapons inventory reports; didn’t know how many people had keys to areas where weapons and other assault equipment are stored; and allowed some officers to check out weapons such as sniper rifles without signing for them.

“Didn’t know how many people had keys to areas where weapons” were stored? Keep in mind, Senate Bill 903, in addition to requiring prompt reporting of the loss or theft of firearms, also bestows on police investigating the case the power to charge the gun owner for storing the firearms in a manner they deem “reckless and irresponsible” (without any written definition of what constitutes “reckless and irresponsible” storage). I would be willing to wager that not knowing how many people have keys to one’s gun safe would be enough to get one charged with “reckless and irresponsible” storage–any takers on that bet? And, “allowed some officers to check out weapons such as sniper rifles without signing for them”? Did the officers just have some unofficial sniping to do?

In fact, the report said, there was no written record of how many sniper rifles the department had, and most of its handguns are outdated.

Hmm–I wonder how many sniper rifles the Hartford Connecticut PD needs. As for “outdated” handguns, call me a traditionalist, but I think one would be hard pressed to find a better fighting handgun than John Moses Browning’s masterpiece, adopted by the Army in 1911.

It sounds as if the Connecticut legislators are worried about the wrong guns, and the wrong gun owners. “Only Ones” material, perhaps, David?