|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 2, 2011, 12:51 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 10, 2008
Location: Live Free or Die state
Posts: 259
|
Connecticut is at it again!
SB 1094 was introduced yesterday, proposing to make possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds a felony. Yep, a felony. The bill specifically calls for a brief period when owners can turn them in, after that you're a criminal. Without doing a single thing, without committing a single crime, BAM! you're a felon.
No sooner do we draw a breath, thinking the Mandatory Registration has been quashed, than another lunatic fringe bill is introduced. I emailed every single member of the Judiciary Committee this morning with a host of reasons to kill the bill, hoping only that since this isn't really an issue split on party lines, maybe common sense will prevail. I gotta get out of this state before it becomes just like NY and MA.
__________________
"To my mind it is wholly irresponsible to go into the world incapable of preventing violence, injury, crime, and death. How feeble is the mindset to accept defenselessness... How pathetic." - - Ted Nugent "Cogito, Ergo Armitum Sum" - (I Think, Therefore I Am Armed)- - anon. |
March 3, 2011, 02:34 AM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: January 27, 2011
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 70
|
That's pretty serious - atleast the California Philosopher-Kings only made it illegal to sell/transfer them, allowing owners of hi-caps to grandfather in.
|
March 3, 2011, 08:58 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Swamp dweller
Posts: 6,187
|
And this is one of the reasons I moved from the North East having lived in N.Y. N.Y. and Taxachussets.
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer, ICORE Range Officer, ,MAG 40 Graduate As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be. |
March 3, 2011, 07:27 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Posts: 17
|
So that effectively turns anyone that owns most 9mm handguns into a felon. Hope it gets voted down.
|
March 5, 2011, 03:13 AM | #5 | |
Member
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Middletown, Connecticut
Posts: 28
|
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/TOB/S/201...094-R00-SB.htm
here is the proposed bill, I cant see it going through like this, but im sure they will get something in to tighten the already tight laws Quote:
__________________
Greg Emergency Dispatcher Police/Fire/EMS EMT Emergency Medical Tech State of Connecticut Carry Permit |
|
March 5, 2011, 08:08 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 2, 2005
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 3,943
|
hopefully it will fail....
as for Ct's laws.... actually I don't find them that bad... much better than S.C.s
I carried for a week in Hartford in Feb. and did not have to worry about stepping into the wrong place and breaking the law. |
March 5, 2011, 08:40 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
I know nothing about CT politics, but this bill seems so draconian that it strikes me as political posturing- i.e. propose an over-the-top ban that has no realistic chance of passing, wait until the next election cycle, and accuse your opponents of blocking "common-sense gun restrictions that would have prevented events like the AZ tragedy."
Does it have co-sponsors? Are any of the sponsors on influential committees with business relating to this legislation?
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
March 5, 2011, 12:59 PM | #8 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
I've had a Connecticut permit for several years, and I didn't know that. Now I've been obsessing over whether I might have traversed New Britain while traveling around Connecticut. I have not been to New London for many years so I'm pretty sure I never transgressed there, but New Britain? Next door to West Hartford where the Colt factory is, and home to several gun and magazine manufacturers? I may very well have been an inadvertent scofflaw, and that's not a comfortable thing to find out. |
|
March 5, 2011, 01:55 PM | #9 |
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
Are you kidding? How can they get around the state preemption? At least in Rhode Island, I have been told that municipalities can't write a law that contradicts state law. If the state allows you to carry throughout the state, the town cannot limit that right.
|
March 5, 2011, 04:08 PM | #10 |
Member in memoriam
Join Date: April 9, 2009
Location: Blue River Wisconsin, in
Posts: 3,144
|
Friend of mine in CT just got her carry permit a few months ago and sh just narrowly lost an election against her Democrat incumbent opponent. I have a feeling a she is already on this. I almost feel sorry for state Sen. Martin Looney. If he thought high capacity magazines were dangerous wait till he has to meet and explain to the CT Tea Baggers. The fun is just starting.
__________________
Good intentions will always be pleaded for any assumption of power. The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern will, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. --Daniel Webster-- |
March 5, 2011, 04:15 PM | #11 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
|
|
March 5, 2011, 04:23 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
There is no town law that can prevent you from carrying a firearm if you have a permit. I have friends who live in New Britain, carry guns on permits every day. All the town code does is make reference to the state law (53-206) that covers weapons offenses. The town law does not make it a crime to carry a handgun with a state permit.
|
March 5, 2011, 06:01 PM | #13 | ||
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
It appears as though New Britain is very, very confused.
From their town ordinances: Quote:
Quote:
|
||
March 5, 2011, 06:26 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 6, 2009
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 761
|
I agree with carguychris, I believe this bill was written to fail for political posturing. I have even talked to some mildly anti-gun people who thought the bill was draconian. These anti-gun folks said they would only support magazine restrictions if there was grandfathering in it.
__________________
"I assert that nothing ever comes to pass without a cause." Jonathan Edwards |
March 5, 2011, 09:45 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
If you read the whole statute it says to reference the state law, which allows carry with a permit.
|
March 5, 2011, 10:27 PM | #16 | |
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
What is says, verbatim, is:
Quote:
I've written a few town ordinances in my time and cleaned up a good number of others. This is sloppy and lazy. Last edited by SwampYankee; March 5, 2011 at 10:36 PM. |
|
March 5, 2011, 11:02 PM | #17 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
|
|
March 5, 2011, 11:10 PM | #18 |
Junior member
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Location: NC Foothills
Posts: 1,150
|
There's been talk of these types of legislation coming from all over the country. Next is lead ammo causing second-hand exposure. After that...?
Be ever vigilant, and send NRA-ILA an extra sawbuck or two. -7- |
March 6, 2011, 01:03 AM | #19 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/TOB/H/201...377-R00-HB.htm |
|
March 6, 2011, 09:17 AM | #20 |
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
Well, there you go! Aguila, does it look like it is going to pass, state preemptions, that is?
|
March 6, 2011, 09:21 AM | #21 |
Registration in progress
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Location: I can be found on a number of other forums.
Posts: 1,333
|
Another question: I'm in Rhode Island, I have a CT nonresident permit. If I travel to Milford, thus passing through New London, do I thus have to stop the car on the Groton side of the bridge, lock my gun in the trunk and then take it out once I've hit Niantic?
|
March 6, 2011, 12:50 PM | #22 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
Quote:
Dumb, isn't it? I have no idea if the preemption law has a chance of passing. Maybe forum member Daugherty can comment on that. I hope so, because the existing situation is unworkable. In addition to New Britain and New London, I discovered recently that the Connecticut town I grew up in also has a town ordinance that prohibits carry on any town-owned property. That would include not only the town hall, but also the athletic facilities, the extensive town-owned open space trail system, even the transfer station (which was always a Saturday ritual, to catch up on local gossip from the attendants). I shudder to think how many times in the past I might have violated that ordinance. The history is a bit unclear because it has been amended two or three times and there isn't a clear path to what the original version said, but the ordinance number dates to 1947! I'm sure there are other towns in Connecticut that have similar little legalistic land mines in their ordinances. I hope my brother's town doesn't -- I usually carry when I visit him, but I don't advertise because my sister-in-law would have a stroke. I can't trust my brother to check for me, because he's not good at reading and understanding laws. Last edited by Aguila Blanca; March 6, 2011 at 12:58 PM. |
|
March 6, 2011, 08:00 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
Aguila, I have looked into this in the past and the law is not enforceable and references state law that requires a permit. I know of several people that live in New Britain and carry every day, on a state permit. My gunsmiths used to operate out of New Britain before they moved and everybody coming in there carried guns on them. The law may still be on the books, it is not enforceable and is never enforced.
|
March 7, 2011, 04:50 AM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 16, 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 269
|
Luckily, I have an out-of-state location where I can store anything they ban as some knee-jerk response to a nonexistent problem. The fact that said law won't do a thing to stop what they perceive is some type of problem doesn't seem to have stopped them in the past.
I shouldn't have to do that but I realize this state is out-of-touch with concepts of basic freedom. And in 42 months, my state pension and I are leaving for a place with a better clime and better laws. And lower taxes... Also within a month of moving, all of my weapons that have certain items which are missing as prescribed by the CT law will be configured back to their original design. I am glad to see the proposed registration law is seemingly halted because had that passed, I would have moved weapons out-of-state and it would have had a negative impact on my shooting hobby for the next 3 1/2 years. I am sick of this state. |
March 7, 2011, 08:38 AM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 530
|
I did some research this morning, and I was wrong. The law still exists. I spoke to my buddy who is a Lt. in New Britain PD and he said the law is there, just never enforced. He searched in the in-house report system back to 1994, and there was no arrest for this. He has been there since 1989 and can't remember anybody ever being arrested for it. So, take that for what it's worth, it's still on the books and illegal, just never enforced.
I have no idea about New London, that's the other end of the world from me. I don't see the mag ban going anywhere, the state is way too busy with the budget to even discuss anything else. This will probably go nowhere, I hope so at least, the law does nothing. I also can't see how a law will pass taking your property but not compensating you for it. Even when the assault weapons ban came in (another waste of time), it didn't make anyone surrender the weapons, you just couldn't sell them. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|