Posted: 8/23/2013 5:15:47 AM EDT
| Would a registered (of course) select fire machine gun be legal in CT now do to Section 11 of PA 13-220? All registered machine guns would be pre 1994 since the cut off was 1986. |
|
Quoted:
No, the amendment allows pre-94 firearms that are not select-fire weapons or banned by name, but exceed the feature count. Select-fire is still a no-go. maybe, just maybe, a newly registered host gun would be legally allowed to have select fire, as you cant make an AW any more assaultier yes? no? you couldnt bring a MG into CT after 94 with select fire as it would be deemed an AW, but all of our toys are now deemed AWs, so why not.....? |
|
Quoted:
maybe, just maybe, a newly registered host gun would be legally allowed to have select fire, as you cant make an AW any more assaultier yes? no? you couldnt bring a MG into CT after 94 with select fire as it would be deemed an AW, but all of our toys are now deemed AWs, so why not.....? Quoted:
Quoted:
No, the amendment allows pre-94 firearms that are not select-fire weapons or banned by name, but exceed the feature count. Select-fire is still a no-go. maybe, just maybe, a newly registered host gun would be legally allowed to have select fire, as you cant make an AW any more assaultier yes? no? you couldnt bring a MG into CT after 94 with select fire as it would be deemed an AW, but all of our toys are now deemed AWs, so why not.....? Yes you could do it that way. A few people I know that have registered AW (from the first ban) have obtained registered drop-in auto-sears/lightning links and used them in conjunction with a select-fire kit in their registered AW. You would not be able to bring a new "select fire" weapon into the state, it would have to be converted to remove the "semi-auto" ability. |
|
Quoted:
Yes you could do it that way. A few people I know that have registered AW (from the first ban) have obtained registered drop-in auto-sears/lightning links and used them in conjunction with a select-fire kit in their registered AW. You would not be able to bring a new "select fire" weapon into the state, it would have to be converted to remove the "semi-auto" ability. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, the amendment allows pre-94 firearms that are not select-fire weapons or banned by name, but exceed the feature count. Select-fire is still a no-go. maybe, just maybe, a newly registered host gun would be legally allowed to have select fire, as you cant make an AW any more assaultier yes? no? you couldnt bring a MG into CT after 94 with select fire as it would be deemed an AW, but all of our toys are now deemed AWs, so why not.....? Yes you could do it that way. A few people I know that have registered AW (from the first ban) have obtained registered drop-in auto-sears/lightning links and used them in conjunction with a select-fire kit in their registered AW. You would not be able to bring a new "select fire" weapon into the state, it would have to be converted to remove the "semi-auto" ability. ya, i knew that but its nice to know that our generous state govt officials have allowed us to have select fire weapons via registration 
|
|
Thanks guys I was looking at this section.
Sec. 11. Section 53-202m of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage): Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, as amended by this act, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Doesn't 53-202a have the select fire wording? Way to confusing! |
|
Quoted:
Thanks guys I was looking at this section. Sec. 11. Section 53-202m of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage): Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, as amended by this act, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Doesn't 53-202a have the select fire wording? Way to confusing! Yes, 53-202a(1) has the select fire wording. The grandfather clause (53-202m) specifically addresses sections 53-202a(3) and 53-202a(4), and therefore does not grandfather or permit transfers of "preban" select fire weapons from section 53-202a(1). |
|
Quoted:
Yes, 53-202a(1) has the select fire wording. The grandfather clause (53-202m) specifically addresses sections 53-202a(3) and 53-202a(4), and therefore does not grandfather or permit transfers of "preban" select fire weapons from section 53-202a(1). Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks guys I was looking at this section. Sec. 11. Section 53-202m of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage): Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202l, inclusive, as amended by this act, shall not be construed to limit the transfer or require the registration of an assault weapon as defined in subdivision (3) or (4) of subsection (a) of section 53-202a of the general statutes, revision of 1958, revised to January 1, 2013, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Doesn't 53-202a have the select fire wording? Way to confusing! Yes, 53-202a(1) has the select fire wording. The grandfather clause (53-202m) specifically addresses sections 53-202a(3) and 53-202a(4), and therefore does not grandfather or permit transfers of "preban" select fire weapons from section 53-202a(1). Thank You! |