Connecticutt to make having magazines illegal and a felony

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...

Badger Johnson said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

JTHunter said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

MKEgal said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

The lawmakers in Connecticut can have my magazines. I switched from paper waste to the Internet years ago. :lol:

I've got a couple of boxes of old National Geographic magazines I'm sure they'd find interesting. About 1 in 10 have pictures of...