Rich B
Regular Member
Here it is, in all of its glory: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/s/pdf/2013SB-01160-R00-SB.pdf
Here it is, in all of its glory: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/s/pdf/2013SB-01160-R00-SB.pdf
If the courts don't overturn this, it will stand. Ugly, obnoxious but truth.
The bill results in a cost to the state of approximately $200,000 - $300,000 in FY 13, $8. 6 million - $9. 6 million in FY 14, and $7. 3 million in FY 15.
but so far it looks as if they will confiscate any "assault weapons (by the new definition within the bill)" that were LEGALLY purchased after January 1st 2013 [page 46, lines 1393-1406, specifically lines 1401-1404], no matter what, because according to the wording you cannot apply for a certificate of possession for an assault weapon that was purchased after January 1st 2013, thus making it immediately illegal (felony) no matter how legal the purchase was.
Are you referring to the language at lines 1401-1404? It states there:
"(2) The person lawfully possessed the assault weapon on the date 1401 immediately preceding the effective date of this section, under the 1402 provisions of sections 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, in effect on January 1403 1, 2013; and"
That means that if, as of April 2, 2013, you possessed the AWB in accordance with the law at that time (because this law repeals the old law and replaces it), then you can continue to possess it with restrictions (e.g. registration). So it does not make illegal the possession of a firearm now declared to be an AW that was lawfully purchased between Jan. 1, 2013 and April 2, 2013.
where do you see the open carry rule I haven't been able to find it. This in effect makes it illegal to open carry? unless you want to be stopped by every cop and have your Mag checked??
specifically lines 1692-1694: "the judge may consider other factors including, but not limited to (A) the reckless use, display or brandishing of a firearm by such person".
I believe you are simply quoting the risk warrant statute which is already law. And that is not at all what it means.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap529.htm#Sec29-38c.htm
I also just realized another thing: shotguns with more than a 5 round magazine are now classified as "assault weapons". but they do nothing to actually define this. for example: a relative of mine recently purchased a standard Remington 870 chambered for 3" and 2 3/4" shells. just a normal pump shotgun, normal shotgun stock and all...
BUT: the mag tube only holds 5 rounds of 3" shells. which according to this bill is NOT an AW, and is fully legal. BUT if you load it with 2 3/4" shells it will hold 6 shells in the mag tube, making it classified as an AW. so this gun is essentially two completely different guns strictly according to what ammunition you feel like loading it with that day.
This is no different than with a rifle really. A 30 round AR-15 magazine can hold 30 .223 rounds or 10 .458 SOCOM rounds.
also notice that as expected, the new restrictions added to the AWB are ALL 100% COSMETIC (they removed the bayonet lug from the list).
I also just realized another thing: shotguns with more than a 5 round magazine are now classified as "assault weapons". but they do nothing to actually define this. for example: a relative of mine recently purchased a standard Remington 870 chambered for 3" and 2 3/4" shells. just a normal pump shotgun, normal shotgun stock and all...
BUT: the mag tube only holds 5 rounds of 3" shells. which according to this bill is NOT an AW, and is fully legal. BUT if you load it with 2 3/4" shells it will hold 6 shells in the mag tube, making it classified as an AW. so this gun is essentially two completely different guns strictly according to what ammunition you feel like loading it with that day.
Then how would such a shotgun be determined? or a 30rd AR mag?
Who knows? That will be decided through case law.