davidmcbeth
Banned
As I have stated numerous times, 29-38 prohibits transportation of handguns w/o a permit. Hence one cannot either take them on a move to another residence nor transport the gun to a range for practice.
There has been many arguments concerning my interpretation of 29-38 ...
In a recent case, opinion rendered public today,
http://jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR315/315CR113.pdf
The Conn. supreme court reversed a guy's conviction under 29-38 when he was moving his knife and baton to an new dwelling. The court recognized first that the knife and baton were covered by the 2nd amendment and then ruled that 29-38 was unconstitutional when applied to him moving from one dwelling to another.
A chink in 29-38 was created here and I think that now, there is no question that 29-38 would be ruled unconstitutional for people who want to go to a range with their handgun w/o a permit; however, the law currently is that you must have a permit.
Low-lying fruit here.
Even in commie CT.
There has been many arguments concerning my interpretation of 29-38 ...
In a recent case, opinion rendered public today,
http://jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR315/315CR113.pdf
The Conn. supreme court reversed a guy's conviction under 29-38 when he was moving his knife and baton to an new dwelling. The court recognized first that the knife and baton were covered by the 2nd amendment and then ruled that 29-38 was unconstitutional when applied to him moving from one dwelling to another.
A chink in 29-38 was created here and I think that now, there is no question that 29-38 would be ruled unconstitutional for people who want to go to a range with their handgun w/o a permit; however, the law currently is that you must have a permit.
Low-lying fruit here.
Even in commie CT.