“Neighborhoods where poverty is most concentrated bear the largest brunt of gun homicides, crime, and associated trauma,” Gilchrest wrote in a Facebook post Tuesday. “While we work to address Connecticut’s extreme economic disparity, we must provide immediate relief to prevent gun violence, which has only worsened during the pandemic. Connecticut has evidence-based programs … we just need to fund them.”

Her latest proposal has already won praise from gun violence prevention groups including the Connecticut chapters of Moms Demand Action and Students Demand Action, part of the group Everytown for Gun Safety.

“Community-led intervention groups have saved lives in Connecticut for years, and this new legislation would ensure they can continue that work for years to come,” said Stacey Mayer, a volunteer with the Connecticut chapter of Moms Demand Action. “We’re grateful to Rep. Gilchrest for reintroducing this legislation, especially after a violent year for so many of our cities. We look forward to supporting this legislation every step of the way.”

If “evidence-based programs” need to be funded, why should gun owners alone be the ones to do it? After all, the vast majority of gun owners will never commit a violent crime of any kind, so why does Gilchrist believe that they’re the ones who should be funding the types of programs that she says works to reduce violence?

Gilchrist also says that the state needs to address economic disparity, yet her bill would add to it. Any new tax on the sale of ammunition is still going to hit lower-income residents in Hartford harder than it will wealthy gun owners in Greenwich. I believe the tax is a bad idea for all involved, but it’s ridiculous for Gilchrist to claim she’s bothered by economic inequality while contributing to it.

Of course the gun ban moms are all in favor of Gilchrist’s proposal, even though the representative’s claimed motivation has shifted from trying to reduce the number of guns sold to using gun owners as a cash cow to fund anti-violence initiatives. As long Gilchrist’s attention is still aimed at legal gun owners instead of violent criminals there’s no reason for Moms Demand Action to be opposed to her efforts.

Violent crime did go up in Connecticut last year, despite the sweeping gun control laws that were imposed on the state’s gun owners less than a decade ago. Restricting the rights of Connecticut residents hasn’t made the state any safer, and taxing their right to bear arms isn’t the answer.

If Gilchrist truly believes that these programs need more state funding, then she should come up with an equitable way for every Connecticut taxpayer to do their share and not try to impose a financial burden on the backs of gun owners in the name of fighting violent crime.

Editor’s Note: Want to support Bearing Arms so we can tell the truth about Joe Biden and the Left’s radical gun control agenda? Join Bearing Arms VIP. Use the promo code GUNRIGHTS to get 25% off your membership.