Connecticut- Magazine Ban Proposed

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by K75RT, Mar 6, 2011.

  1. K75RT

    K75RT New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Location:
    Litchfield County, CT
    SB 1094

    This bill is proposed by senator Martin Looney, his real name, and can not be allowed to pass if you live in Connecticut contact your state rep and senator by going to www.gca.ct.gov and look up to see who your reps are; send letters, call and ask for a promise that they will not vote for it. Also tell them if they do you will do everything to make sure they are defeated in the next election....
    AN ACT BANNING LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:
    Section 1. (NEW) (Effective July 1, 2011) (a) As used in this section, "large capacity magazine" means any detachable ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition, but does not include: (1) A feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten rounds, (2) a .22 caliber tube ammunition feeding device, or (3) a tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.
    (b) Any person who possesses a large capacity magazine shall be guilty of a class D felony.
    (c) Any person who (1) prior to the effective date of this section, lawfully possessed a large capacity magazine, and (2) not later than ninety days after the effective date of this section, removes such magazine from this state or surrenders such magazine to an organized local police department or the Department of Public Safety for destruction, shall not be subject to prosecution for a violation of subsection (b) of this section.
    (d) The provisions of subsection (b) of this section shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity magazine by:
    (1) Members or employees of organized local police departments, the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Correction or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties;
    (2) A person, corporation or other entity that manufactures large capacity magazines for persons specified in subdivision (1) of this subsection or for export in accordance with federal regulations;
    (3) Any person engaged in the business of selling or transferring large capacity magazines in accordance with state and federal regulations who possesses such magazines solely for the purpose of such sale or transfer; or
    (4) A gunsmith who possesses such large capacity magazine for the purpose of maintenance, repair or modification

    This was taken fromLegislative Alert

    Featured Sponsor:

    Shop CCDL Merchandise:


    Connect with us:

    Share this email:


    Raised Bill SB1094

    Yesterday was a very busy day for gun owners in Connecticut. ANTI-GUN Sen. Martin Looney introduced Bill SB1094.
    This bill will ban the possession of ANY magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds.
    If this bill passes, law-abiding gun owners will have to begin SURRENDERING their magazines by July, or face CONFISCATION by the state police and a FELONY CHARGE.

    This proposal not only bans the sale of these magazines, but would make possession of one a FELONY.

    Own a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, TURN IT IN or BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY!
    Yes, you read that correctly!

    link to bill: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/TOB/S/2011SB-01094-R00-SB.htm

    A hearing date and time has not been scheduled yet, as soon as we receive this information we will get the word out.
    We will need everyone to get on board to defeat this!

    the Connecticut Citizens Defence League...
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  2. K75RT

    K75RT New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Location:
    Litchfield County, CT
    Please email this group of Judicial Members:Eric.Coleman@cga.ct.gov; Beth.Bye@senatedems.ct.gov; Doyle@senatedems.ct.gov; Gomes@senatedems.ct.gov; Meyer@senatedems.ct.gov, John.A.Kissel@cga.ct.gov; Michael.McLachlan@cga.ct.gov; Andrew.Roraback@cga.ct.gov; Jason.Welch@cga.ct.gov; Gerald.Fox@cga.ct.gov; David.Baram@cga.ct.gov; Jeffrey.Berger@cga.ct.gov; Charles.Clemons@cga.ct.gov; Patricia.Dillon@cga.ct.gov; Mae.Flexer@cga.ct.gov; Mary.Fritz@cga.ct.gov; Bob.Godfrey@cga.ct.gov; Minnie.Gonzalez@cga.ct.gov; Auden.Grogins@cga.ct.gov; Gail.Hamm@cga.ct.gov; Ernest.Hewett@cga.ct.gov; Bruce.Morris@cga.ct.gov; Melissa.Olson@cga.ct.gov; Kelvin.Roldan@cga.ct.gov; Joseph.Serra@cga.ct.gov; Joseph.Taborsak@cga.ct.gov; William.Tong@cga.ct.gov; Toni.Walker@cga.ct.gov; Gary.Holder-Winfield@cga.ct.gov; Elissa.Wright@cga.ct.gov; John.Hetherington@housegop.ct.gov; al.adinolfi@housegop.ct.gov; christie.carpino@housegop.ct.gov; DebraLee.Hovey@housegop.ct.gov; Themis.Klarides@housegop.ct.gov; David.Labriola@housegop.ct.gov; Arthur.ONeill@housegop.ct.gov; rob.sampson@housegop.ct.gov; john.shaban@housegop.ct.gov; bill.simanski@housegop.ct.gov; richard.smith@housegop.ct.gov; TR.Rowe@housegop.ct.gov
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2011
  3. BETH

    BETH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    6,887
    Location:
    naugatuck,Ct.
    your right if u look at CCDL website they are trying to push a lot of bills thru i am emailing my head off
  4. BETH

    BETH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    6,887
    Location:
    naugatuck,Ct.
    come on people in Ct. start emailing before we lose our rights
  5. shorter260513

    shorter260513 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Messages:
    262
    Location:
    Tennessee
    dont live in CT. but do have a problem with banning anything larger than 10 rnds but a huge problem with the whole surrender your mags or felony charge what is this supposed to prevent
  6. BETH

    BETH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    6,887
    Location:
    naugatuck,Ct.
    i guess u can only gun someone down with more than 10 rnds?
  7. rentalguy1

    rentalguy1 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    The mountains of NE TN.
    This reminds me why I love living in TN, or the south in general, for that matter. Good luck on this.
  8. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,125
    Is law enforcement included in the law too? Oh, I guess they are above the law again as usual.

    This, just, is unacceptable. I'm sorry for anybody who lives in Connecticut. You deserve better.
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2011
  9. Millwright

    Millwright Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,754
    Legislation right out of the pages of Ayn Rand's playbook !! The real "objective" IMNSHO, is to catch/prosecute a lot CT gun owners with "possession"; i.e. creation of a new 'criminal class' of otherwise lawabiding citizens........

    Also notice no mention of restitution for owners of these suddenly verboten maganzines is incorporated in bill. IOW, a "seizure" of property without compensation........Which means the perps'll hide behind the included "disposal" clause......

    That none of this impacts CT's criminal elements and, defacto, targets legal gun owners will be ignored by the MSM. >MW
  10. BETH

    BETH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2009
    Messages:
    6,887
    Location:
    naugatuck,Ct.
    its all bull and if people don't speak up it will go thru
  11. K75RT

    K75RT New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Location:
    Litchfield County, CT
    Here is todays letter that I sent to the Connecticut General Assembly. Judicial Committee....

    Yesterday, I sent a letter explaining my opposition to the proposed bill SB 1094 based on its misguided application againsts law abiding gun-owners...Today, I'd like to ask some questions of the Committee, some questions are rhetorical and some are not. During the Prohibition of the early 20th Century alcohol was prohibited, it led to rampant lawlessness and profiteering by criminal enterprises. The so-called War on Drugs has cost the US billions of dollars and untold numbers of victims... drugs are brought into the US by criminal enterprises..if we can't stop the drugs how do you think that another law targeting the legal gun-owner will stop the flow of illegal gun activity? Can anyone please tell me how banning my magazine that hold 12-rounds for my CZ-82 semiautomatic pistol will make the state of Connecticut safer? Can anyone tell me how my 10-round magazine for my CZ-82 semiautomatic pistol will make the state of Connecticut less of a risk to....what? Two rounds, two rounds could essentially make me a felon if this bill is allowed to become law...why?
    When the so called assault weapon ban was instituted in Connecticut I complied with the law, I still own the firearm and the magazines that came with the arm. Can anyone tell me how many legally owned registered "assault weapons" have been used in criminal activity in Connecticut? The fact is; legal gun owners are some of the most law abiding folks in society. Please do some research on legal owners of machineguns; since 1934 when the NFA was enacted( National Firearms Act), almost no one has used an NFA registered arm in the commision of a crime. There was perhaps ONE right here in the state of CT but it was not an act of violence.... A criminal is just that....he/she has disregard for the law and societies rules and regulations, the legal gun-owner is an individual who takes his/her and their family's safety seriously and abides by the laws.

    I'd like to ask how the state will enforce this bill if enacted? Will they be knocking on legal gun owners doors based on the information provided on the state registration and federal 4473 forms? When a firearm is purchased from a dealer the purchaser fills out two state forms and one federal form.. is the registration for CONFISCATION ?

    The Constitution of the USA sets limits on government; the Bill of Rights guarantees the rights to the People... the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right of the People to keep and bear arms...the 4th Amendment is the limitation of illegal search and siezure, have we as law abiding gun owners been reduced to criminal status because we own firearms? Will the forms that we have filled out to meet state and federal laws be used against us; while the criminal buys his/hers arms illegally with no oversight? Will the 5th Amendment be slaughtered with this bill? All legal gun owners have filled out the federal and state forms to purchase arms, you have to have a permit to carry pistols and revolvers to purchase a handgun/revolver...will our acceptance of law be used against us as the state knows who has purchased arms legally? If the bill were to pass will we be compensated? What is the agenda of the committee? Do you want to regulate law abiding gun owners? You already have! We are the ones with the permits and the gun rights groups! Do you want to stop gun CRIME? Go after the criminals... Please do not make a group of Connecticut Gun Owners criminals by passing SB 1094. We as gun owners are you neighbors, your brothers and sisters as well as some of you.... I look foward to hearing from any members of the Committee, Kindest Regards,
  12. K75RT

    K75RT New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Location:
    Litchfield County, CT
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum magazine ban Feb 27, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum A Magazine Ban Will Kill You! Feb 17, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum New York-Style Gun & Magazine Ban Comes to New Mexico! Feb 7, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Magazine ban bill Jan 23, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Illinois committee passes magazine ban Jan 3, 2013