Legislation aimed at protecting election workers from threats, harassment and violence led to a half-hour debate on the rights of gun owners Friday, before the Democratic majority on a key legislative committee used their numbers to defeat a Republican amendment that would have deleted penalties for possessing firearms within 250 feet of polling places.

Republican lawmakers led by Sen. Rob Sampson of Wolcott warned that if the legislation reaches the floor of the House and Senate, it will likely spark a lengthy debate as the General Assembly closes in on its May 8 adjournment.

"The effort of this bill is to disarm people," said Sampson, a top GOP lawmaker on the panel, who offered an amendment that would have erased a section creating a felony charge for carrying guns or deadly weapons near the polls. An original form of the bill would have made it a crime to possess firearms within 1,000 feet, but the legislation was redrafted, said Rep. Matt Blumenthal, D-Stamford and co-chairman of the Government Administration & Elections Committee.

"This, to me, is an over-reach," Sampson said. "My concern really has to do with the fact that people that are going to vote or even participate in the process by standing at the polls, and even candidates who are at some risk, are being denied the ability to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry a firearm for self-defense when they are near the polls and engaged in the process of campaigning and doing politics in Connecticut."

He said that so-called soft targets are sought out by violent people who want to create mass casualty events. "Gun-free zones, I think the data will show very clearly that they are most often the target for these mass shootings," he said. "The best solution is that we don't deny honest, law-abiding people their right to defend themselves. Look, the fact of the matter is that anyone who is going to commit some violent act, is not going to care about this bill. It's not going to change their mind."

Sampson said he had no problem with portions of the bill that allow election workers to shield personal address information from state public disclosure rules for 90 days before and after elections; and create a criminal offense for the leaking of personal information of election workers in an attempt to cause harassment over the internet.

"The people that will pay attention to this law are honest, law-abiding citizens," Sampson said. "By virtue of this law they will be defenseless against someone who simply does not care."

Rep. Gale Mastrofrancesco of Wolcott, a ranking Republican on the committee, asked Blumenthal if there was a particular incident that spurred the weapons portion of the bill. "People today are fearful of everything," he added.

"As we know it has certainly happened elsewhere in the country, and poll workers and election workers have communicated to us that it's something that they are very concerned about," Blumenthal said. "I am aware of incidents where people have been threatened or felt threatened or there was a confrontation in a polling place unrelated to a firearm, to anyone's knowledge, being present. Lots of polling places are at schools where currently firearms and other deadly weapons are prohibited, and this is an attempt to close a loophole for the 60 or 70 polling places in the state that are not in a school. I believe that everyone who's at an election site should have a right to be confident that nobody there is in possession of a deadly weapon."

Democrats outnumber Republicans on the committee by 13-6.

After his amendment failed, Sampson said "I just see this as potentially deadly. There is nothing stopping people from committing harm if they are truly intent on it. All they're doing is prohibiting good and decent, honest people from being able to defend themselves. You create victims when you disarm people." He said the gun-related part of the bill could provoke a long discussion when it gets introduced for floor debates.

"I certainly know that I'm going to debate this bill at length if it comes before me in the Senate, and I'm confident that there is going to be a whole bunch of my colleagues who are willing to stand up and defend the Second Amendment, in both chambers, on this bill," Sampson said. "As a result, I think its likelihood of passage is greatly diminished."