Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Proposed bill requiring microstamping of Semiauto pistols

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Plymouth, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    241

    Post imported post





    General Assembly



    Proposed Bill No. 353




    January Session, 2009



    LCO No. 1672






    Referred to Committee on Judiciary




    Introduced by:




    SEN. LOONEY, 11th Dist.


    AN ACT CONCERNING THE MICROSTAMPING OF SEMIAUTOMATIC PISTOLS.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

    That the general statutes be amended to prohibit the retail sale of any semiautomatic pistol, on and after January 1, 2011, that is not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters that identify the make, model and serial number of the pistol in two or more places on the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the pistol is fired.

    Statement of Purpose:

    To facilitate the linking of used cartridge cases to the firearm that fired them by requiring the microstamping of semiautomatic pistols.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Here's one of the Brady bunch's stooges that needs to get dropped like a hot rock at the next election.

    Do these twits really think that any kind of microstamping is going to work? even after hundreds of rounds have gone through and especially after some rigorous cleaning afterwards.

    Why not take the weapons out of the hands of the criminals? Oh wait there are laws on the books about that... err why not enforce them? oh because unlike the law-abiding citizens the criminals fight back and are not likely to just give up their weapons.

    Where is this loony from? an appropriate name really.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Plymouth, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    241

    Post imported post

    His district is Hamden

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Ok, so close to New Haven, which is a real friend to the 2nd Amendment.. (NOT)

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Plymouth, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    241

    Post imported post

    What do you mean? A self proclaimed safe haven city for illegal aliens is opposed to the Constitution of the State and Federal Government? Cant be.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Exactly! What a lot of people don't have figured out is when this depression kicks into overdrive and social services start getting cut due to no funds the huge illegal population is going to become way more visible and I don't mean in a good way.

    I'm wondering if some of the increase in pistol permit applications isn't the civil unrest writing on the wall and some are figuring it's only going to increase in the Obamanation.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Griswold CT, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    196

    Post imported post

    I'd strongly suggest the good folks here contact their local representatives to fight silly proposals like this.

    If you don't know where/how to contact your reps, start with the link below.

    http://www.cga.ct.gov/maps/townlist.asp

    Lets stand our groundandput up a fight! Get vocal!

    Cheers,



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •