From the Middletown Police
--------------------
Today just before eleven o’clock this morning the Middletown Police Department received
a call from City Hall stating that there was a citizen with a pistol in city hall.
Middletown Police Officers arrived on scene with weapons drawn and surrounded the citizen. After an investigation, the citizen was identified and it was determined that he had a valid Connecticut Pistol Permit. The citizen did not violate a Connecticut General Statute and was in compliance with his Connecticut Pistol Permit which allows him to carry a pistol. The citizen was allowed to continue with his business at City Hall without further incident.
Why does one need to carry a concealed pistol into Middletown City Hall, regardless of what the inane CGS allow? Public buildings should be safe places where people do not carry objects whose sole purpose is to kill people.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous, if they ban concealed weapons in public buildings the only ones that will be armed are those who intend to kill people.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous, If concealed pistols are banned in public buildings the only people with a weapon will be the ones who intend to kill others. Then what? Run? Sit back and watch the show? Not me pal.
ReplyDeleteIf the pistol was concealed - it should not even have been seen. Why all the fuss? Could it have been to move the "full-time-police-presence-in the-town-hall" agenda forward???
ReplyDeleteIn any case, there should be a means for municipal workers to communicate with others in the building to warn them of "dangers". A phone intercom system added to the existing phone system should be an affordable means to accomplish this end.
"...the only ones that will be armed are those who intend to kill people." As opposed to the people who are armed who don't intend to kill people? Isn't that the point to being armed? To kill someone?
ReplyDeleteSounds to me like Fixit is right. Definitely an agent provocateur. Good call.
ReplyDeleteThe point of being armed is to have the ability to defend yourself if the need should arise. If guns are not allowed in public buildings the only person with one will most likely have an agenda and is not gonna check his weapon at the door.
ReplyDeleteAnn, with all due respect, I completely disagree with you. Just because you have a permit to carry a gun does not mean you are equipped to deal with a hostile situation. No guns should be allowed in public buildings with the exception of police officers, period. I don't care if you have a permit. Anyone can have a gun permit. Time and time again it has been tragically proven that the most unstable shooters were "legal" including the latest nut job in Arizona. Frankly, when I see a civilian in public with a gun strapped to their hip I get queasy and walk away. I say this as a witness to the psychological trauma my mother suffered at the hands of Matthew Beck during the lottery massacre in 1998. Believe me, when you are in that situation, I don't care if you have your very own AK47, most people will panic, pee themselves and duck. All the Clint Eastwood fantasies in their heads are forgotten in a split second.
ReplyDeleteJennifer Peifer
To Jennifer, sorry you feel that way. To ban guns in public buildings would be like locking the dog in the house and giving the fox a key to the chicken coop. Wait a few years when their will be very few police officers left because the dangers out weight the compensation and pay rate. I'll continue to care for my family and belongings like I always have. Armed and ready for the worst.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, according to the Courant and Middletown Press the person carrying the pistol in city hall was either an off-duty or retired state trooper.
ReplyDeleteAs Mr. Fixit points out, it appears that the "concealed" weapon was not truly concealed. Currently there is some debate over whether or not "open carry" is legal in Connecticut. The State police have proposed a bill to the legislature again this year that would specifically outlaw open carry except for on duty law enforcement, etc. I have strong doubts that the bill will pass.
It is worth noting that although the U.S. Supreme Court has recently called into doubt the constitutionality of many gun laws, they did state that certain restrictions are presumptively lawful and included in the (short) list of such lawful restrictions was the prohibition of carrying firearms in sensitive locations such as schools and government buildings. I'll leave it to others to debate whether or not that is a good idea, but it is something that can be done.
I concur with Mr. Fixit that this incident does demonstrate the need for some kind of plan for an emergency. It would be unfortunate if this was used as a justification for the fortification of city hall.