Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 12/19/2006 2:22:36 PM EDT
I heard from a state police officer that CT legislation may be repealling the AWB. There would, however, be a tradeoff. Mandatory registration of firearms. I don't have any specifics this is what was given to me. The police officer with this info was not part of the firearms unit, but said he got the info from someone who was. Anyone else hear about this???
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 2:31:53 PM EDT
Wonder if its true
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 3:06:21 PM EDT
Not sure it's worth the trade.

Link Posted: 12/20/2006 3:14:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RealFastV6:
Not sure it's worth the trade.



First, is it true?? If true, would it be registration of all firearms or just "assault rifles"?? It's a tough call. I don't know if I want the gov't knowing what I own. Maybe they already do. Who knows.
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 6:36:30 PM EDT
Hmm. Govt " Sort " of knows what you own, since there are those copies of the transfer sent to local PD and State.

On other hand, there are several sweet rifles id like to own, namely HK's, that I cant because of the ban.
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 6:42:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mountain6288:
Hmm. Govt " Sort " of knows what you own, since there are those copies of the transfer sent to local PD and State.

On other hand, there are several sweet rifles id like to own, namely HK's, that I cant because of the ban.


Please elaborate, never heard of forms being sent to local .gov?  I know forms/records go ATF upon surrender of the FFL (I thought).
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 6:48:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/20/2006 6:49:23 PM EDT by racer934]

Originally Posted By MouseBoy:
Please elaborate, never heard of forms being sent to local .gov?  I know forms/records go ATF upon surrender of the FFL (I thought).


When transferring a firearm from an FFL or a handgun from a private individual, 4 copies of the DPS-3-C is filled out:

Seller retains a copy;
Buyer retains a copy;
Seller sends buyer's home PD a copy and;
The final copy is sent to the Commissioner of Public Safety c/o DPS SLFU.

Looks like a registration scheme, to me.

DPS SLFU
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 6:54:02 PM EDT
I doubt this would ever go through, given the make-up of tge state lagislature. However, it might be nice to not need to worry about models, features, and in some instances what maker is stamped on the side of the weapon.

To an extent, the DPS and CLEO already now what we have/ acquire- they each get a copy of the DPS-3. However, if there was a registration system  that came to be, I bet rifle and shotgun private sales would either end up requiring paperwork, like pistols, or private sales may be eliminated altogether requiring a dealer as in California.


Please elaborate, never heard of forms being sent to local .gov? I know forms/records go ATF upon surrender of the FFL (I thought).

The DPS-3 (the 1/2 page State Police form that you fill out in quadruplicate) contains the buyer and seller's and gun's info and 1 copy goes to each of the following: DPS, CLEO of the buyer's hometown, seller, buyer.
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 6:58:08 PM EDT
I'm a C&R.  There is NO paper trail for me and most of my stuff.  

I doubt if the "super Blue" legislature would be willing to remove anything, especially the AWB.  They might, however, be cocky enough to try to pass registration.  That, my friends, would be final nail in the coffin here in the Nutmeg State.

This state doesn't have the money to run a registration properly.

This state has antiquated computers and software.  ( I know!)

This state doesn't have the manpower to run a proper registration.  

Nope, they won'd do it nor will they relinquish the AWB.  

Rome
Link Posted: 12/20/2006 7:10:52 PM EDT
never purchased a gun in CT.  Sounds like de facto registration already is in place to me
Link Posted: 12/21/2006 3:19:10 AM EDT
when you buy class 3 youy are registering and yes they have all the info anyway.  Im all for it. This has  come up before though, people fought it because they didn't like the register aspect, instead we got what we have now.  Id rather be able to have whatever I want and stop paying people better than new prices for their used lowers.
Link Posted: 12/21/2006 5:26:52 AM EDT
Everyone here is missing the most salient point: firearm owners in Connecticut have no power to stop anything that the legislature decides to pass.  They are a super Blue majority and the governor has no veto power any longer.  If tomorrow they voted for 100% confiscation, there is literally no way to stop it from being put into immediate effect.  It's already been proven that the courts here could care less about us as demonstrated by the AK47 debacle that wasn't even passed in the legislature but on an "opinion".   So, all it's going to take is someone from New Haven or Hartford or New Britain or some town with lots of gun crime (druggies and gangs) to "clean up the state" by simply making all firearms illegal, period, end of story.  It won't be any different that Washington DC, the murder capitol of the world.

Think about it.  The Democrats have got two years ahead of them and nothing to stand in their way from passing any damned piece of legislation they want.  We no longer have a representative democracy but an autocracy being run by one party rule with no check or balance.  This is different than one party having a simple majority like we have in the Federal Government. They may scream at each other but at least they have to work together to pass legislation.  In Connecticut (and in Massachusetts, too!) there is no balance of power, no checks and balance.  There is only Democrats ruling on a whim.  

And, just becuase Class III registration is Federally mandated does not mean that we should bend over and give up our rights to some bureaucrat who has nothing better to do than invade our rights on their whim.  People, this is not a good thing.  

I'm not going to worry about what might happen tomorrow, however.  I'm going to enjoy what I have as long as I have it.  I'm tired of worrying about stuff that has not happened yet. I'm not ignorant, however, and will be keeping a weather eye on the horizon.

There's an old joke that goes, " why do the English oil their gardens.  It's because that's where their rifles are."  

Rome

Link Posted: 12/21/2006 6:09:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cabinetman:
This state doesn't have the money to run a registration properly.

This state has antiquated computers and software.  ( I know!)

This state doesn't have the manpower to run a proper registration.  

Rome


None of those things stopped Canada from doing it.
Link Posted: 12/21/2006 7:22:14 AM EDT
You're 100%, absolutely correct!

Rome
Link Posted: 12/23/2006 12:13:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/23/2006 12:14:25 PM EDT by steveinct]
I wouldn't put much stock in "I heard a rumor from..." (especially from a cop - they're some of the WORST informed people on firearms laws I've ever met)

A few years ago I was shooting at a local club with a naked barrel post ban Colt Match Target and an off duty cop from some town walks up and argues with me "Hey, you can't have that - them are banned" (yes, you read correctly : "Them are banned"- really intelligent speaking) Luckily for me another cop who was an actual shooter- not just an off duty using our range for his own practice, was there and set him straight

I wrote a rebuttal to a local paper once because they called an SKS an "assault weapon" and the editor rebutted my rebuttal stating they copied the words verbatim from a police report.


The CT post recently ran an article about a former millionaire who owed the city of Bridgeport millions and disappeared. They confiscated his property and had a welder torch open his gun safes. The first thing pulled out was a high end air gun like an RWS Diana or something similar - with a scope on it and the Post wrote, "a black and brown shiny assault rifle" was pulled from the vault.

I don't doubt for a moment that long guns will be treated the same as handguns going forward for transfer and private sale. I DO doubt the AW ban will be repealed. Even though some in the State Police don't want it, it's too much of a hot potato politically to reverse it.

Link Posted: 12/29/2006 9:21:16 PM EDT
I heard this same exact thing about a year ago from a local FFL.

I was transferring my second preban bushy and he said that in a year or so the state is going to allow AW's as long as they are registered.

I'll believe it when I see it.

I am sure that people on this board (ie, Steveinct) would keep us CT'ers up to date on any changes to the local AWB.

Link Posted: 12/30/2006 8:55:50 AM EDT
I can't believe what I'm reading.  Where is the OUTRAGE??

The AWB is definately NOT the issue.  Given the choice, I'd gladly make the AWB permanent (it already is) an forego ANY aspect of registration.

Come on, boys and girls!  The fact that anyone is even talking about registration is extremely bad.  That's because the AWB will NOT go away!  Why should it! Nope, we're going to be living with both the AWB and full registration.  We will be one of the most regulated states in the country when it comes, too.

The reason is perfectly simple.  

We no longer have a "representative government" as we have had in the past.  Need I remind anyone here that the Democrats have a SUPER MAJORITY in BOTH HOUSES.  Even if we could count on 100% of the Republicans vote and the Governor's veto, they  will be like a worn speedbump in a super highway.  Whatever the Democrats want, the Democrats will get.  There is absolutely nothing that can stop them.  Even the courts will side with them should the State be sued.  The AK47 issue was the perfect example of that and, if you remember, that issue wasn't even a law that was passed but an "interpretation" of just one person and the courts wouldn't even entertain an appeal.  Imagine what the courts will do for us should be try to sue to have a rull "registration" repealed.  We won't even get through the front door.

The bottom line is that as of the November election, I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop.  The first piece of new gun legislation sounds like it will be a full registration of everything you own.  And I mean everything including those nice pistols your Dad or GrandDad passed on to you without going through an FFL for transfer.  Don't register it and you'll be an instant criminal.  

So, talking about removing anything regarding gun regulations is a red herring.  What these guys and girls will be doing to you is making you disclose everything you own and making you decide just how honest you will be with the State government.  

We will NEVER see an AWB repeal but we WILL see a full registration.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is dreaming.

And I'm Mr. Positive normally.  I'm always trying to see the bright side of things and have worked for change by calling, writing, visiting and voting for the "right" people.  But, for the next two years, we've been totally neutered.   To even be talking about the "benefits" of removing the AWB in lieu of a registration should be making us all ill.  Ugh!  

Rome
Link Posted: 12/30/2006 1:52:51 PM EDT
Cabinetman has posted very wise words!

Registration has always been the precursor to confiscation!
Link Posted: 1/2/2007 12:39:20 PM EDT
You do realize that handguns are already registered in the state, don't you?  It is illegal to sell a handgun without the authorization of the state police.  They have on record every gun that you own.

Plus, if you buy a long gun from an ffl, the state has that purchase on file as well.  Yes, you can re-sell a long gun without authorization, but until then, they know you have it.
Link Posted: 1/2/2007 2:11:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By harlenm:
You do realize that handguns are already registered in the state, don't you?  It is illegal to sell a handgun without the authorization of the state police.  They have on record every gun that you own.

Plus, if you buy a long gun from an ffl, the state has that purchase on file as well.  Yes, you can re-sell a long gun without authorization, but until then, they know you have it.


I thought there was a Federal law that limited the amount of time that  those records can be kept?
Link Posted: 1/2/2007 6:02:58 PM EDT
Blaster, you're correct.  It's assumed by most everyone here, however, that the State simply "forgot" to destroy the records.   I'm sure they're sitting in a big pile of cardboard boxes in someone's office.  

Rome
Top Top