Redding Mother: Majority Wants Gun Control

Lestina Trainor, a mother of three, waited until 3 a.m. Tuesday morning to make sure her thoughts regarding gun control were heard in Hartford.


After spending the day in Hartford, one Redding mother waited until 3 a.m. Tuesday to advise governments officials that a majority of Connecticut residents are in favor of stricter gun laws.

Lestina Trainor, a mother of three school-age children, was one of the last to address the Bipartisan Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention and Children's Safety, which held a public hearing beginning at 10 a.m. Monday and lasting into the wee hours Tuesday morning.

"The majority of people in Connecticut want common sense gun laws," Trainor said. "I speak for the majority, not the fringe."

Trainor suggested a gun registry become the norm in the Nutmeg State, similar to the way the Department of Motor Vehicles requires drivers to register their automobiles. Those who have a problem with being on record owning a weapon shouldn't be allowed to possess one, she said.

"We are disgusted that it is so easy for anyone to just get their hands on an assault weapon, often without any background check or even record of sale," Trainor said.

Trainor said she was "shocked" that gun owners were defensive during the hearing.

"You can have your guns," she said. "Just not any gun, without a background check, [with] unlimited ammunition."  

Like other amendments, Trainor said, the right to bear arms comes with limitations.

"Why is that so difficult to understand?" she said. "Why are the gun owners so insulted and indignant when somebody suggests that they may not need certain types of weapons or ammunition in the pursuit of normal civilian lives?"

Trainor said Connecticut residents need to feel safe going to the mall, going to school or going to places of worship.

"More guns equals more violence," she said, a notion which is "just common sense."

Some of those defending gun rights in Hartford that day, Trainor said, have no faith in police and distrust the government.

"I am so sorry that you have to live with so much fear and mistrust," she said. "It must be exhausting to carry that around."

No right, Trainor said, is more important than the public's right to life. 

Akeelah January 31, 2013 at 01:22 AM
A guy who can't spell is now a Constitutional scholar? I just can't buy that.
Concerned Parent & Gun Owner January 31, 2013 at 12:04 PM
Susan, Please look up the shooting last April at Oikos University in California. Under the exact laws being supported by you and others, a disgruntled student was able to kill seven fellow students and would three others. He was armed with a legal pistol and was carrying four ban-compliant 10-round magazines. The carnage could have been worse but the fled when he realized what he had done (he was gunning for a particular administrator but when he couldn't find her, he went to the newest classroom instead). At Columbine, the final forensic report showed the most devastating weapons were a double barrelled shotgun and a carbine limited to 10 round mags and many reloads. I am a father of four school aged children and I WANT our kids safer. However, as a gun owner and someone who has done much research, I know what is being proposed will never stop the determined criminally insane person. Further, contrary to what is said by those advocating magazine limits, such limits will do nothing to lessen the carnage of a rampage shooting if the shooter is not engaged by armed resistance. Gabby Giffords shooter was not tackled because he had to swap out an empty magazine alone, he jammed the magazine when he was extracting it (a problem with extended magazines) offering the adults close to him to subdue him. Rifle bans and mag limits do not prevent mass shootings. But, they do interfere with law-abiding citizens' rights and ability to adequately defend themselves.
Concerned Parent & Gun Owner January 31, 2013 at 12:06 PM
Since some of you feel a woman's words are powerful, I recommend you listen to this woman who also gave testimony on Monday. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbJmlz40su4
Justin Hurgin January 31, 2013 at 01:07 PM
Unfortunately, going back and forth isn't going to solve anything. The basis of safer gun laws and the fact that the right to own one is not in jeopardy is being carelessly overlooked. I, Justin Hurgin of Bethel, Ct have no problem fully supporting a national registry, universal background checks and licensing for all firearms. An item that is designed solely to kill deserves at least that Much respect. I commend all that choose to speak up and to Mrs. Trainor for voicing her opinion as well.
Allen Gregory January 31, 2013 at 10:45 PM
Concerned Parent and Gun owner- Thank you you've said all that needed saying.
Andrew P February 01, 2013 at 02:37 AM
Thank you, Lestina for your words, your time, your passion and your continuing efforts in this battle! I look forward to supporting you in Hartford on February 14th. Andrew (A Weston, CT Dad of a 6 year-old boy and 3 year-old girl.)
Defender of Freedom February 01, 2013 at 02:46 AM
OK class, let's see if we can pick up on any discernible patterns here: 1. The Cheshire, CT Petit murders by Hayes and Komisarjevsky - Satanists, "Komisarjevsky's mother testifies he came under 'satanic' influences in Cheshire." (NH Register, Oct 28, 2011) 2. Columbine, CO High School murders – "Trench coat Mafia" Satanists, violent video gamers 3. Aurora, CO theater "Batman" shooter (Holmes)– Satanist;, worked enthusiastically in Obama's 2008 campaign - registered Democrat 4. Congresswoman Giffords shooting, Jared Loughner – Satanist, death cultist, registered independent grew up as a Democrat. 5. Adam Lanza – Newtown – Satanism dabbler, violent video gamer, Democrat. From his murdered mother's blog: " In addition to worshiping Steve Jobs, my son is an Obama-loving Democrat. All day long I have to listen to him go on and on about how President Obama and Steve Jobs have made the earth a paradise..." Trainor stayed up past her bedtime to go to Hartford, and then pretends to speak for a "majority." Sounds like just a whole lot of self-important self-promotion. If Trainor is truly concerned about "fringe" elements that threaten peaceful society, maybe she and everyone else should instead be focusing on locking up Satanists who are mentally addled registered Democrats
rebel patriot February 01, 2013 at 02:55 PM
To those that say the government is not going to take our guns, you're right. I will not register or turn in my guns. And if any law enforcement agents come to my house to get them or arrest me there will be a firefight. I don't intend to outlive the Constitution. Why put law enforcement agents at risk? (Sorry guys, nothing personnel).
Defender of Freedom February 01, 2013 at 09:02 PM
Excellent video statement, there, Concerned Parent and Gun Owner . One wonders why Justin Reynolds carelessly and selectively chose only to focus on the words of a clearly mis-guided gun grabber and chose not to fairly balance the writing of his article. Since there are posters have tried to add to the presumed relevance of their posts (that can't otherwise seem to stand on their own) by telling everyone how many of their babies they happen to have in the local schools, let me just say that my wife and I are proud parents of 4 children, all who came up through the Redding, CT public schools, and two of them who recently happened to complete their 4-years service with the US Marine Corps. Man up, baby daddies. Grow up, baby mommas. "Gun Free Zones" only means that it's your babies who are going to be target of the next mentally deranged Adam Lanza, and that the liberal politicians in this state and at the Federal level are hell-bent on making sure you and they have no right to defend yourselves.
Allen Gregory February 01, 2013 at 09:54 PM
defender of freedom, Adam Lanza may or may not have been an Obama supporter, he was not registered as either Dem or Repub (Ct Post). Does it really matter?
Defender of Freedom February 01, 2013 at 10:57 PM
Lanza's mother's blog says he as much as worshipped Obama. I quoted directly from it, but I'll let you take that issue up with his mother. Oh, gee, I guess you can't. Why is that? The CT Post is a rag and if you can't figure out on your own that Obama worshippers are not Republicans without first consulting that fish wrap for their take on the matter, then you are beyond hope of having anything substantive to add to this conversation. "Does it really matter..." My gosh, man, you sound just like Hillary making excuses for her abject failure in the Benghazi murders. Clue to you: what matters is that liberal Democrats are the thieves of liberty and gun grabbers, not conservative Republicans. What matters is what stands between tyranny and your liberty may someday soon come down to a gun -- and in their wisdom our Founders saw to establishing a Constitutional right to personal protection with firearms. Obama is not particularly fond of the US Constitution, because it restrains what government can do. And in case you hadn't noticed Obama is a Democrat. How much more do you need to know on this topic or won't you believe it until you read it the CT Post? No one says you must own a gun yourself, and you are welcome to leave your personal security up to Newtown's finest late-comers with a badge, but some of us actually trust ourselves more to assure our own well-being than we do the local constabulary, who have no legal obligation to come to our assistance.
Frank Egan February 02, 2013 at 12:39 AM
Pretty bleak view of the world you've got there "Defender of Freedom". You sound a little like Mel Gibson in that movie Conspiracy Theory. Take a deep breath.
Defender of Freedom February 02, 2013 at 04:26 AM
And how stunningly uninformed an appreciation of history you have, which gives rise to a perfectly naïve view of the real world, "FoF." Clearly you take the sacrifices made by our Founders for the safety and freedom you enjoy today completely for granted. You should probably spend less time consulting "Entertainment Tonight " for your reference materials, and actually make a concerted effort to study the history of the founding of our Nation. To do so, however, it will likely require that you develop a longer attention span, but that's just a choice you'll have to make. If you absolutely must watch a Mel Gibson movie which gives readers any level of confidence that you are capable of staying on topic, try "Patriot."
Thomas Paine February 02, 2013 at 04:40 AM
FoF - Do you actually know what is being proposed by CT Against Gun Violence, the top gun control effort in CT? Their current proposal calls for making possession all "assault weapons" and 10+ round magazines a felony, no grandfathering. So an existing owner would have to surrender, sell, destroy or face confiscation of such items. Sorry, but that means they are taking away my arms. Put differently, the CT state constitution (A1,S15) provides for a right to bear arms for defense of self and state. My preferred self-defense firearms is a Sig P229 in 9mm which has a standard capacity of 15 rounds in the magazine. A law forcing me to 10 rounds is neutering my preferred self-defense weapon which was chosen for its capacity, accuracy, dependability and ergonomics. So a law mandating a 10-round limit interferes with my ability to express my right to self-defense as I see it.
Welcome to Reality February 02, 2013 at 05:14 AM
Defender of Freedom, You are so wrong. You should apologize to Patch readers and edit your post. You said: "5. Adam Lanza – Newtown – Satanism dabbler, violent video gamer, Democrat. From his murdered mother's blog: " In addition to worshiping Steve Jobs, my son is an Obama-loving Democrat. All day long I have to listen to him go on and on about how President Obama and Steve Jobs have made the earth a paradise..." That wasn't said by Adam Lanza's mother. It comes from the blog of the Liza Long, the woman who wrote the viral post “I Am Adam Lanza’s Mother”. Google it for god's sakes. Jeesh, any more misinformation you want to put out there? For me it takes away all your credibility if you don't edit your post and apologize for the the misinformation.
Johnny Walker February 02, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Adam Lanza didn't purchase any guns and therefore a background check would not and stopped him. As a matter of fact Mrs Lanza purchased the guns after extensive background checks and waiting periods. You can't legislate violent mentally ill people out of existence. The danger here is to impose a new set of laws that endanger respso single gun owners and their families while doing NOTHING to stop the next Adam Lanza. Killers and the violent mentally ill typically don't care nor do they adhere to laws. I am from Newtown and and devastated by the events, but we haven't even seen the final report on the circumstances of the crime and the state is trying to impose new restrictions on our freedoms. I want to wait until we know what caused this tragedy before we start writing laws that may make thighs worse.
Johnny Walker February 02, 2013 at 01:05 PM
What do you propose the government do with the already 300 million guns and millions of assault rifles already owned by American citizens? Restricting them in the future doesn't stop these sort of crimes since there are already available. This is not a solution at all. If the guns were banned on Dec 13 the day before Sandy Hook would that have stopped Adam Lanza? The gun was already purchased. People need to slow down wait for the final report on the details of what exactly Adam Lanza did prior to this horrendous event and the circumstances surrounding the crime. When that is available citizens can make informed choices and recommendations.
Johnny Walker February 02, 2013 at 01:23 PM
The events I experienced in in my lifetime where the police were unable to respond and serve and protect the population: 1977 New York City black out. 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in San Fransico, LA Riots 1992, Hurricane Katrina aftermath New Orleans, Hurricane Sandy aftermath. The police response AFTER a crime happens. You can't rely on the police for protection. With all their millions on training and their fancy assault rifles and armored cars and mobile response centers, they couldn't save the 26 innocent people in Newtown from a violence motivated 20 year old. If there were armed citizens or at least access to a weapon things may have turned out different. We can't disarm the public and expect the police to protect us.
Marty Busdodger February 03, 2013 at 12:34 AM
Hi concerned, Sounds like you have suggested a referendum. We will be happy to do so. You will lose ... Badly. (Sorry ... It was your idea)
Marty Busdodger February 03, 2013 at 12:46 AM
Between "concerned parent and gun owner" and "Thomas Paine" there is only one vote. That is why a referendum is necessary. Too many people have multiple personalities in cyberspace. Let's have a national discussion and state referenda. Quoting Thomas Jefferson and the Constitution/1792 Bill of Rights ? Just let people read about the right to "life liberty and pursuit of happiness" When your "right to bear arms" interferes with others' "rights to live and pursue happiness" then there is a need to reconcile these rights. Does anyone have an idea which one(s) of our founding fathers really conceived of a time when a single person could deprive 26 others of their rights to live within the space of a couple minutes.
Marty Busdodger February 03, 2013 at 01:01 AM
WOW! A "Defender of Freedom" ... Probably just another NRA stooge being paid $50 a day (plus all the bullets he wants to shoot) so he can post BS on the nation's blogs. What a low-life. Patch ought to retire his number. But then he will just spring forth as another lyin' SOB ... Oh well there is a lesson here ... Thanks to Concerned for suggesting a referendum.
Thomas Paine February 03, 2013 at 01:29 AM
Marty - First, I did nothing to hide my dual presences here as evidence by the fact that a lightweight like you found out so readily. When I set up the blog, the folks at Patch told me I had to use a "proper" name, hence the pseudonym. Did you fail basic Civics in school? Since when do we live in a democracy? This is a representative republic where we vote in representatives and they are supposed to represent us. One man, one vote is a recipe for anarchy. Study your history. Referendums of the type you are talking about lead to the rule of the mob. You want to "lynch" gun owners? As for who will win or lose, that depends on how the question is posed, no? I was in Hartford on Monday where gun owners and gun-rights voters outnumbered the gun control folks by 10:1 (not the 100:1 that the March for Change ladies would like you to believe). People that have something to lose are willing to fight for it much more enthusiastically than those who are demanding for something that they know will not make a difference, deep down inside. (continued)
Thomas Paine February 03, 2013 at 01:39 AM
(continued) So bring it Marty. Let both sides have a chance to talk to "the people" about a choice between the tyranny of the state or the independence of the people. Let the people chose between turning the entire state of Connecticut into a "gun free zone" and the status quo and what do you think they will choose? Every sentient person who is not wedded to a stubborn ideology knows that GFZs protect no one but criminals and crazed gunmen. You want a referendum, then let's open up the debate so the people can hear our voices in the same forum. Remove the Media filter and allow us to examine openly the efficacy of rifle bans and mag limits. Let any handgun owner show the average gun-ignorant person just how quickly a magazine can be changed, rendering mag limits useless. Let's ask the inner city people whether they want to pass laws solely to make suburban moms and dads feel "safer" even though it will make NO difference to the supply of guns or violence on their streets. Let's give them a choice between Hartford spending tax funds chasing down law-abiding white men with some modern sporting rifles or using those funds to support the police pulling illegal guns off the city streets. Yes Marty, please please bring on such a real discussion. But no, we wont get that with the Democratic super-majority in Hartford rushing their omnibus bill through using "emergency certification" because they know, the longer the people have to think, the weaker support gets.
Thomas Paine February 03, 2013 at 01:44 AM
Marty - The real Thomas Paine said: “A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.” Yes, bring on that referendum so that the tumult can subside and time converts more of those who are thinking and persuadable.
Thomas Paine February 03, 2013 at 01:53 AM
Folks, Marty it a troll, my advice is to cease to engage him. starve him of attention. nothing a troll hates more than irrelevance.
Concerned February 04, 2013 at 02:49 PM
Marty, I'm not sure how you think I will lose if there is a referendum. I do believe we all will lose if our rights are taken away. Also, you seem to have misunderstood my comment. Lestina made statements in Hartford that were heartfelt, and I admire her for that. I do not necessarily agree with what she said, however my issue was simply that she claimed to speak for the majority, and my point was (and still is) that without taking a poll, she doesn't really know what the people want. She only knows what the most vocal people want. These people, understandably, are reacting to a tragedy. Unfortunately, I do think it is a knee jerk reaction. Among other things, I believe the call for a gun registry is a huge mistake. Study up on your history and you will find instances that prove my point. In high school, I had the opportunity to travel to Switzerland and live with a family for several months. In their downstairs closet was a fully automatic machine gun. When I asked about it, I was told that all men between the ages of 18 and 50ish were members of the military, and all had these rifles in their homes. Have you heard about any mass murders in Switzerland? I do believe there is less gun crime when everyone is armed.
Concerned February 04, 2013 at 04:08 PM
Marty, Though he may be more passionate than most, and he may not say what you want to hear, Defender of Freedom does have the right to say what he likes, just as you do. Many men and women have died fighting for that right and many other rights we have here in the United States.
Justin Hurgin February 05, 2013 at 11:22 AM
I suggest Anyone in support of safer gun laws simply state your stance and leave it at that. This article is about voicing your opinion to state legislature, not about arguing with someone that can't do a single thing to help your case. The back and forth is solving nothing except fulfilling a personal need to prove a point and in the case of firearms, most people's views are already set in stone. So I ask once more, please put your efforts toward supporting the cause, not proving the other side wrong.
Thomas Paine February 05, 2013 at 12:08 PM
Justin, Whatever your intentions when you penned this particular piece, it was not "about voicing your opinion to the state legislature" it was about voicing a PARTICULAR opinion. YOU chose to highlight a single perspective in this piece, one where the speaker involved presumptively "speaks" for the "majority" of those in the state. Justin, you chose an agenda piece and now seem to be complaining that you have drawn dozens of comments from people who feel passionately about this issue. Your contribution provided no balance. You filed to mention that turnout among the ~1,5000 citizens at the hearings were at least 10:1 in favor of gun rights, many working man and women who sacrificed a day's work to be there. I was there for nearly 15 hours and I can tell you that Ms. Trainer's views were in the minority of those articulated by citizens. This, when you choose her testimony and offer it without such context, you are pushing an agenda, not "reporting" about giving testimony. You also betray yourself in your comment about "sides" being "set in stone" and your suggestions to go out and support "the cause". Which "cause" would that be Justin? Both gun rights and gun control, or just the latter? My goal here Justin is to try to find those whose views are not cast in stone & attempt to show them that gun bans and magazine limits will not protect our kids. That they have failed in the past & that we need 21sr century solutions, not warmed over ideas from the 1980s.
Thomas Paine February 05, 2013 at 01:12 PM
Apologies, that should read ~1,500 not ~1,5000


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something