Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Connecticutt to make having magazines illegal and a felony

  1. #1
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217

    Connecticutt to make having magazines illegal and a felony

    Newer issue of Guns and Ammo - after a certain date, if it passes, having a10+ mag is a felony and citizens must turn them in.

    If there's interest I'll go pull the issue and quote it and the HR number.

    This is frightening. A couple of my HGs don't have low cap mags. Many people have got $500 worth of mags, or double that. I don't know of even well-off people who can just give up $1000 worth of gear.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    23
    Sounds Gestapo-esh, this law that you speak of.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    http://www.nssfblog.com/connecticut-...ers-criminals/

    HB1094 if it passes...
    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. Again, this proposal would not only ban the sale of these magazines, but would make simple possession a felony. Any gun owner (including off-duty police officers) found in possession of any magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds will be in violation of this proposed law, regardless of whether it was legally purchased.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    23
    Didn't they read the current FBI stats on high capacity mags and how there is no effect either way, good or bad to have such magazines?

    Or is this some propaganda perpetrated by those who want to get rid of all firearms and live in a utopia that only exists in their delusional minds?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Lakeland, Florida, United States
    Posts
    4
    I'm confused.. what if a gun only has 10+ mags.

    Does that mean something like the Beretta PX4 Storm 9mm Full Size High Capacity Pistol or the MAB Modele PA-15 High Capacity 9mm Pistol is now illegal? Or do guns like that allow lower capacity mags?

    Yes, I am new to firearms.
    Last edited by Mjodr; 05-29-2011 at 04:07 AM.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjodr View Post
    I'm confused.. what if a gun only has 10+ mags.

    Does that mean something like the Beretta PX4 Storm 9mm Full Size High Capacity Pistol or the MAB Modele PA-15 High Capacity 9mm Pistol is now illegal? Or do guns like that allow lower capacity mags?

    Yes, I am new to firearms.
    Many popular guns have 10-round magazines available, due to California's 10-round magazine limit. You can check the CA DOJ Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale to get an idea what's legal for sale in California. Anything on that list has been submitted by the manufacturer, so pretty much everything on that list has OEM-supplied 10-round (or less) mags.

    It's worth noting that even California didn't go this far; in CA, it remains legal to possess standard-capacity magazines. It simply became illegal to sell or transfer magazines of greater than 10 rounds after a certain date.

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Swanzey,NH, ,
    Posts
    218
    Hey, Isn't there something in the Constitution about being deprived of property without due process and compensation? So the State of Conn. would be obligated to pay for those magazines at fair market value.

  8. #8
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Rattrapper View Post
    Hey, Isn't there something in the Constitution about being deprived of property without due process and compensation? So the State of Conn. would be obligated to pay for those magazines at fair market value.
    Tell that to the folks in New London, Connecticut. The supreme court really screwed this up and only served to prove what Jefferson worried so much about. That the real means to do evil would rest in that court.

    Ya' think one of our most cherished Founders was on to something?
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Tell that to the folks in New London, Connecticut. The supreme court really screwed this up and only served to prove what Jefferson worried so much about. That the real means to do evil would rest in that court.

    Ya' think one of our most cherished Founders was on to something?
    IIRC, that ruling had to do with the authority to take, not compensation for it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Though in different parts of the country, the ruling that police can enter your homes, you can't resist and they can take your property without compensation, extended into the future depicts a scenario that is far worse than any 1984 vision that George Orwell gave us, or anything that Minority Report (Tom Cruise/Thought crimes/Philip K. Dick) shows.

    We are doomed.

    PS - who wants to go out in a blaze of glory?

    COMMENT FROM ADMINISTRATOR: I know this was in jest but ... NO ONE on OpenCarry.org should want to go out in a blaze of glory. What WE want is to pass on countless legislative and judicial victories to our children and grandchildren while living long and free lives. Anyone who doesn't want this has found the wrong forum!
    Last edited by Badger Johnson; 05-29-2011 at 09:27 AM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    We are doomed.

    PS - who wants to go out in a blaze of glory?
    Thats pretty negative, I am planing on winning the battle, who wants to win?

  12. #12
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    IIRC, that ruling had to do with the authority to take, not compensation for it.
    Yep, and my point exactly as it pertains to the Bill of Rights and the supreme court, specifically the Fifth Amendment for this discussion. Over the years we have seen what perversions have emanated from that bench in all manner of decisions involving our civil rights. New London was a horrible perversion of the Fifth Amendment as would the confiscation of any property from individuals without due process or just compensation.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 06-13-2011 at 06:02 PM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  13. #13
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    This sounds in violation of AT LEAST 2nd and 4th amendments, and would be wholly unenforcable, legally. Any attempt to enforce should be destroyed in court.
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by ~*'Phoenix'*~ View Post
    This sounds in violation of AT LEAST 2nd and 4th amendments, and would be wholly unenforcable, legally. Any attempt to enforce should be destroyed in court.
    I would hope there are enough grass-roots clubs and organizations that someone would do a test case and pay lawyers and win big settlements and get stuff like that struck. It's such a slippery slope that it just can't stand. Even antis might get behind it if they are helped to understand the erosion it would cause and how cops and politicians could exploit it to create a two-tiered system where only rich people can bear arms, hire body guards and defend themselves. It's like Soylent Green, almost, in its oppressiveness.
    Last edited by Badger Johnson; 05-30-2011 at 04:21 AM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Norwich, CT
    Posts
    34

    never made it through

    Hey guys- this proposal never even made it to vote in the judiciary committee. I believve it died apr 15. Tons of us emailed our reps in ct telling them this would not save lives and would only be followed by law abiding citizens. Over 200 showed up to testifyy against it and I believe about 5 people testified for it.. it would have been horrible if it passed. We just hope they are smart enough not to try this again.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Yep, and my point exactly as it pertains to the Bill of Rights and the supreme court, specifically the Fifth Amendment for this discussion. Over the years we have seen what perversions have emanated from that bench in all manner of decisions involving our civil rights. New London was a horrible perversion of the Fifth Amendment as would the confiscation of any property from individuals without due cause or just compensation.
    And the New London decision, as much as you don't like it, has nothing really to do with this case. You are better than some of the harpers here, who have pet issues and try to tie them to every post, no matter how unrelated.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    And the New London decision, as much as you don't like it, has nothing really to do with this case. You are better than some of the harpers here, who have pet issues and try to tie them to every post, no matter how unrelated.
    Actually, you should (not) talk. People with pet issues can be trolled - you've done that, right?

    People with pet issues that involve anger management, impulse control and wish to harm others in pursuit of their happiness (anti-cyclists), 'fake' LEOs posting crap...they all help one exercise one's sleuthing skills and their debating skills. I can see why some people fail the 'internal logic' test. I can see why some OC-ers get arrested/detained more than others (though 90% of the time it's a testosterone poisoned LEO that starts it).

    Me, I prefer to be honest and open, and maybe, sometimes I talk a lot.

    You can't even get your gripe right - 'you're (NO) better than...'.

    Sheesh. At least add something that isn't hypocritical and that is instructive like you used to do.
    Last edited by Badger Johnson; 05-30-2011 at 04:26 AM.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    I said he is "better than...," and I meant precisely that. Please do not assume that I mean anything other than exactly what I post.

    If you wonder if I meant something different than plain reading renders, feel free to ask what I meant. That would "be honest and open." 999 times out of a 1000, I will tell you that I meant what I posted. Typos that change meaning by 180 degrees are rare.

    If you claim to "prefer to be honest and open," please post in such a manner. Thank you.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by abechira View Post
    Didn't they read the current FBI stats on high capacity mags and how there is no effect either way, good or bad to have such magazines?
    Idiots who propose laws like this are either illiterate or unable to make sense of reality such as found in FBI stats.

    Or is this some propaganda perpetrated by those who want to get rid of all firearms and live in a utopia that only exists in their delusional minds?
    Let's see... I mentioned "idiotic" and "illiterate." Thanks for reminding me of the third leg of the triad supporting these lotus blossom politics.


    Quote Originally Posted by hobie16 View Post
    Hey guys- this proposal never even made it to vote in the judiciary committee. ... Over 200 showed up to testifyy against it and I believe about 5 people testified for it.
    That's the way to do it! Hooray for the 200!
    Last edited by since9; 06-13-2011 at 01:01 AM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  20. #20
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson
    Even antis might get behind it if they are helped to understand the erosion it would cause
    But they think it won't happen to them.
    They think that only guns are evil, so of course the gov't has cause to control their use.
    (And by regulating them, that will stop criminals from having or using them.)
    Why would anyone want to control someone's speech, or the content of a newspaper?
    Or put obstacles in the way of someone voting?
    And of course gov't agents will always have a warrant before entering your home, won't they?
    So they see no slippery slope w/ potential erosion of other rights.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    If this law passes, I hope the USPSA and IDPA stop publishing their match results on their websites in CT, because THOSE lists would be a practical "shopping list" for the local DAs to get a boatload of felony convictions...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Spfld, Mo.
    Posts
    430
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    Newer issue of Guns and Ammo - after a certain date, if it passes, having a10+ mag is a felony and citizens must turn them in.

    If there's interest I'll go pull the issue and quote it and the HR number.

    This is frightening. A couple of my HGs don't have low cap mags. Many people have got $500 worth of mags, or double that. I don't know of even well-off people who can just give up $1000 worth of gear.

    Ex Post Facto protection would make this impossible, or at least it should. Those in possession prior to the enactment should be protected, but they could certainly make it so that if you use said magazine after enactment that you could be charged.

    That's where the citizenry needs to tell the politicians where to get off and force it to apply to EVERYONE, including their LEOs. They'll quickly see that criminals will be capable of outgunning the LEO and the LAC.

    Gun control does nothing more than protect the criminal. The politicians know this all too well.

  23. #23
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by JTHunter View Post
    While SouthernBoy's comment wasn't "directly" related to the OP of this thread, it IS useful to point out how activist courts play fast & loose with the Bill of Rights. If the OP's worries of this pending legislation would have been further examples of things the court system should NOT be doing.
    Your comments are correct about my prior posting. I did go off target from the OP's topic but not to that of the member who brought up the issue of Fifth Amendment infringements and the perversion of our courts, up to and including the US supreme court. Rattrapper was taking things to a logical conclusion in the extreme of an evil civil rights transgression supported by the courts. The issue at hand here in the OP's topic not in that subject area but rather in the perversion of finding ways to virtually emasculate the Second Amendment.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 06-13-2011 at 06:11 PM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  24. #24
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    But they think it won't happen to them.
    They think that only guns are evil, so of course the gov't has cause to control their use.
    (And by regulating them, that will stop criminals from having or using them.)
    Why would anyone want to control someone's speech, or the content of a newspaper?
    Or put obstacles in the way of someone voting?
    And of course gov't agents will always have a warrant before entering your home, won't they?
    So they see no slippery slope w/ potential erosion of other rights.
    It is the concept of, "If I'm not doing anything wrong, what do I have to worry about?". People who think like this are willing victims of that which will come to pass until they have no more rights. They are what Lenin referred to as "useful idiots". This mindset is analogous to that depicted in this famous little piece of prose from WWII;

    First they came for the Jews,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the communists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

    Then they came for me
    and there was no one left to speak out for me.


    Mind you, I'm no fan of communists and believe the only good ones are the ones that lay on the ground and don't breathe. But this little ditty came out of Nazi Germany so we can see the what and how of it.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 06-13-2011 at 06:18 PM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Then they came for the communists,
    and I didn't speak out because I'm no fan of communists and believe the only good ones are the ones that lay on the ground and don't breathe.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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