Connecticut bill to confiscate mags
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Connecticut bill to confiscate mags

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-03-2011, 10:37 PM   #1
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1305 Times on 664 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default Connecticut bill to confiscate mags

Connecticut Bill Would Confiscate All Magazines In The State Holding More Than 10 Rounds

There is a bill in the Connecticut legislature that would not only ban ownership and possession of firearm magazines with a capacity of over ten rounds, but it also requires confiscation of them within 90 days of the bill becoming law. There will be no grandfathering of ownership of these magazines. Possession of them after the 90 day period is a class D Felony, with prison time of one to five years, a $5,000.00 fine. In addition, the newly minted Felon loses the right of firearms and ammunition ownership for life. We know how well the turn in ratio of "assault rifles" turn in worked when they were banned in New Jersey.


General Assembly
Raised Bill No. 1094
January Session, 2011
LCO No. 3773

*03773_______JUD*
Referred to Committee on Judiciary

Introduced by:

(JUD)

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 act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:

Section 1 July 1, 2011 New section

Statement of Purpose:
To prohibit the possession of certain ammunition feeding devices that accept more than ten rounds.

__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 03-03-2011, 10:59 PM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 2,978
Liked 2612 Times on 1179 Posts
Likes Given: 2531

Default

Another feel good gun law that is totally unenforcable. Hell you can't get the police to your house in less than 20 minutes for an emergency. How are they going to know who has one or doesn't unless they do a house by house search. I know there are some cops on this forum would any of you participate in an arrest of this nature? Or would you say I've had enough let the politicians do their own dirty work? Do cops take an oath to protect the constitution like the military does?

__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:15 PM   #3
Supporting Member
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Sniper03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,255
Liked 2602 Times on 1270 Posts
Likes Given: 1299

Default

All of our friends from Connecticut should stand up and cause a Fire-Storm in their State. And tell the liberal AHs to go to H---! And we will keep our mags despite the liberals stupidity. Guess they would have one Hell of a time finding our magazines and if we even had any! I think I speak for most Americans. And we are really getting fed up with the cr-- going on! It is time we take a stand instead of cowering down!
God Bless America and we True Americans!

03

__________________
Sniper03 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:17 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 2,978
Liked 2612 Times on 1179 Posts
Likes Given: 2531

Default

amen sniper

__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:22 PM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
Posts: 1,657
Liked 29 Times on 23 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjd3282 View Post
How are they going to know who has one or doesn't unless they do a house by house search.
Unless Connecticut has some kind "registration" list concerning magazine purchases, this law is about a viable as tits on a boar hog.
__________________
AcidFlashGordon is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:24 PM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,900
Liked 2058 Times on 827 Posts
Likes Given: 2706

Default

The gun owners in Connecticut have a few choices if this bill passes and is signed into law.

1. they can bow down to their masters and turn them in.

2. they can just blow the government dictaters off.

3. they can move out of that state.

4. they can go to war.

I think most will do #1

__________________
opaww is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:26 PM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: I see you, and you will not know when I will strike
Posts: 24,301
Liked 3479 Times on 1609 Posts
Likes Given: 3590

Default

Good luck enforcing that one. I don't see this gaining any traction, even in a place as Kommie Kontrolled as Konnecticut.

*knock, knock, knock* "Good evening sir, please hand over any of your hi capacity magaizines under the new law"

"Good evening officer - I don't have them anymore. I sold them all to Gary."

"I see, do you have a receipt for this *sale*"??

"Didn't know I needed one at the time sir, perhaps you can show me in the new law that says I have use of a time machine to get myself out of this pickle"?

C'mon. Who is going to turn their mags in first off, and then who is going to arrest, let alone, FILE charges on someone for being a law abiding citizen and owning something that was just recently made illegal??

Quickest way out of office if you are a D/A in my mind is to start locking up tax paying citizens with BS charges while criminals are still a clear and present danger.

Just sayin'.....

JD

__________________
Dillinger is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:35 PM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
dnthmn2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Do you see what happens,Larry?!
Posts: 3,317
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts

Default

Maybe Mass law has been leaking down the Connecticut River...

Welcome to the kommie land brothers.

__________________
AMAT VICTORIA CURAM

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
dnthmn2004 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:36 PM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
556plinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Columbia, MO,Missouri
Posts: 338
Default

I like d (2) protecting the entities that manufacture for subdivision 1....l/e military etc......COLT is based based right in the heart of the capital where all this nonsense is taking place. Its amazing how owning something legally today could put you behind bars tomorrow! Possession of a benign object will get you more time in the slammer than an oz. of cocaine. Sure got their priorities in line out there.

__________________

NRA Member
Sustaining Member Southern Poverty Law Center
"Lighten Up Francis"
Semper gero sub gero

556plinker is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 11:41 PM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 78
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

The same nonsense was included in the NJ AWB. Any mag over 15 rounds had to be destroyed or sold out of state. Compliance with the NJ AWB in general is thought to be in the vicinity of 4/10 of 1%. House to house searches? Good luck with probable cause on that one.

__________________
NickySantoro is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Oath keepers prove some troops refused to confiscate guns during katrina KalashnikovJosh Politics, Religion and Controversy 0 05-17-2010 11:50 PM
Government to confiscate guns in Iowa? MrKimber Politics, Religion and Controversy 20 03-06-2009 01:13 AM