Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
Posted: 5/30/2001 7:19:50 PM EDT
[url]http://www.cga.state.ct.us/2001/amd/s/2001SB-01402-R00HA-AMD.htm[/url] A last minute compromise was worked out, and it looks like we won. I don't see much in this new bill that was not in the 1993 AW ban except .50 armor piercing rounds. I haven't had time to digest the other mumbo jumbo about pistol permits and such. At least we're better off than CA. [:)]
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:26:42 PM EDT
If they do sneak something in, I know that you and others would be welcome out west where there is for now a different attitude. Best of luck to you all.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:42:03 PM EDT
Sneaky.. (3) Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection that meets the following criteria:....... (v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:43:13 PM EDT
Not much of a victory if it parrots the 94 AW ban that will (hopefully) sunset in 2004. Now you are stuck with it forever, or until it gets repealed = FOREVER.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:44:51 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:46:28 PM EDT
Just skimmed that pile of horeshit! Man, the entire US Constitution is shorter than that one stupid CT law. We are doomed.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:54:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By garden weasel: Sneaky.. (3) Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection that meets the following criteria:....... (v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;
View Quote
That's under the pistol heading: (B) A semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following: (i) An ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (ii) A threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip or silencer; (iii) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned; (iv) A manufactured weight of fifty ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and (v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; or
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 7:56:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By trickshot: Not much of a victory if it parrots the 94 AW ban that will (hopefully) sunset in 2004. Now you are stuck with it forever, or until it gets repealed = FOREVER.
View Quote
I'm only stuck with it til my daughter graduates high school (divorced, shared custody) and then I get to high tail it out to Idaho, to live in the land of the free! [:)]
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 8:00:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By garden weasel: Sneaky.. (3) Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection that meets the following criteria:....... (v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm;
View Quote
Also, that is from the text of the original AW ban. If you look at the new text, the entire begining, right up to the mention of the .50 caliber ap rounds, is the existing law.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 8:05:40 PM EDT
New York State just did the same thing, almost verbatim. Is it supposed to be somehow comforting that they got away with just mirroring the federal law? My question is, why exactly are they going to all the trouble of having two redudant laws that say exactly the same thing? One is enforceable by the ATF, the other is enforced by state police.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 8:09:22 PM EDT
3) Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection that meets the following criteria:....... They should have left it out.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 8:35:48 PM EDT
The thing that pisses me off the most, is the fact that an iffy federal prosecution just turned into DEFINATE state prosecution. The Gestapo...er, I mean the CT State Police will just love to pinch somebody on this one. And one of these Blumenthal wannabes will prosecute it to the fullest extent. Be careful guys. In case you haven't noticed, shortly after any wacky legislation gets passed, the Staties make a bust with the news cameras rolling to show the sheeple- "Look how good this new law is! You're safer already!"
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 9:47:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By critter_FR: A last minute compromise was worked out, and it looks like we won. [:)]
View Quote
IMO this was neither a compromise nor a win, as you gained NOTHING in the end.
Link Posted: 5/30/2001 9:50:58 PM EDT
i think its time for you CT guys to MOVE, and hope that the Chi-Coms nuke that freakin place
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 3:37:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2001 3:40:43 AM EDT by critter_FR]
I so sick and tired of people saying that this was a loss. If you were here, and knew what we were up against, you'd say it was a win. So if I have to fight the antis, and argue with you folks about it afterward, it just ain't worth it. I'm a pretty hard line guy, but I know when to be thankful for what didn't happen. What didn't happen is my AR15 clones did not get added to the list, my LEGP will still be legal to own, my mini 14 is still legal as well as my SKS. That was the absolute best that was going to come of this. Jepsen lost. I am happy. But, if I have to fight my own side on issues like this, I'm just going to shut my mouth, and walk away from the game altogether. Screw it. Let em ban them all. Adios.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 4:02:29 AM EDT
Man oh man, how sad that I read the news about our commie legislature this morning and was relieved that we "only" gave up .50 cal AP and incendiary ammo. There was a time when Connecticut had some of the loosest gun control laws in the country. I have a 1950's Stoeger's gun catalog from my granddad that lists most of the gun laws by state. CT was a real freedom-loving place then. Connecticut patriots were leading the charge of freedom during the revolution. Today's politicians remember names like Nathan Hale yet forget their ideals. Sickening. Our state Constitution has gun rights provisions that are much more clear than the US Constitution: "Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state." (Art.1, Sec. 15) Go figure. I guess I can fill in that hole in the backyard until next year at least! Matt
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 4:10:25 AM EDT
I would keep that hole just the way it is. cuz thewre are a lot of folks that are sick and tired of carrying the fight for the rest of the crew only to be criticized in the end. I'm one of them. I'm finished.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 4:17:32 AM EDT
Critter, I've been there. I'm sure you did the best you could with what you had to work with. Most people don't understand that when it comes down to it with this legislative stuff, you can only accomplish what you have the power to accomplish. That is why I get so mad at the anti-NRA crowd. Like you, the NRA does all it has the power to do. Membership and money will get us what we want. If the NRA had had 20 million members, the CT thing would have turned out differently. Take a break, people appreciate what you did.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 4:34:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Matt-CT: . I have a 1950's Stoeger's gun catalog from my granddad that lists most of the gun laws by state. CT was a real freedom-loving place then. Connecticut patriots were leading the charge of freedom during the revolution. Today's politicians remember names like Nathan Hale yet forget their ideals. Sickening. Our state Constitution has gun rights provisions that are much more clear than the US Constitution: Matt
View Quote
Connecticut....The Constitution State. Now THERES a joke. garandman a CT political exile
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 6:01:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2001 6:03:00 AM EDT by critter_FR]
Originally Posted By garandman: Connecticut....The Constitution State. Now THERES a joke. garandman a CT political exile
View Quote
One of my signs yesterday said this: [center][blue]Connecticut SB-1402 Communist The [s]Constitution[/s] State[/blue][/center] in honor of our license plate. [:)] edited to say that this post looked better before I posted it. I can't get the text to align. But now it's fixed and looks much better.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 6:18:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2001 6:18:05 AM EDT by critter_FR]
Alright, for all of the morons who are bitching that this is a loss, it appears that the registration and ban of transfer of the rifles listed in the original ban has been repealed by this new bill. I am waiting confirmation from Rep San Angelo, but it does appear that we got something back. It looks like anyone who owned one of the listed arms before the original ban, may now transfer them within the state of CT, and the new onwer is not required to register it. Up to this point, in CT, you had to register the gun and could not transfer it in this state. Here's the section in question: Sec. 3. (NEW) Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes, sections 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, of the general statutes, as amended by this act, and section 2 of 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, as amended by this act, provided such firearm was legally manufactured prior to September 13, 1994. Any sharp legal minds on here? What do you think?
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 6:52:23 AM EDT
Maybe we shouldn't mention this publicly until the Governor signs it into law. I'm surprised the gun grabbers went for it, quite honestly. The state senate still has to vote on the compromise bill. I have to dig out a copy of the old 53-202 bill to make sure on this. I thought I had it memorized.[:)] It does look "good" though, all things considered. Matt
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 9:06:45 AM EDT
Critter, Don't get so wound up about what a few confused people are questioning about this BILL. This entire BILL is very confusing and suspect to many interpretations, many not entirely accurate. You know your fight is for the right reason and that should be all that counts. It's A very sad state when we have to fight so hard to keep the RIGHTS that our founding fathers sacrificed for.As Jimmy V. said " don't give up, don't ever give up!"
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 9:30:38 AM EDT
Originally Posted By critter_FR: I so sick and tired of people saying that this was a loss. If you were here, and knew what we were up against, you'd say it was a win. So if I have to fight the antis, and argue with you folks about it afterward, it just ain't worth it. I'm a pretty hard line guy, but I know when to be thankful for what didn't happen. What didn't happen is my AR15 clones did not get added to the list, my LEGP will still be legal to own, my mini 14 is still legal as well as my SKS. That was the absolute best that was going to come of this. Jepsen lost. I am happy. But, if I have to fight my own side on issues like this, I'm just going to shut my mouth, and walk away from the game altogether. Screw it. Let em ban them all. Adios.
View Quote
critter_FR, I don't believe you. I don't know you, but from your previous posts I really don't get the impression that you will quit trying, it's not your style. Now you know how discouraging and frustrating it can be to be abandoned. Welcome to the PRK.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 9:50:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By critter_FR: But, if I have to fight my own side on issues like this, I'm just going to shut my mouth, and walk away from the game altogether. Screw it. Let em ban them all. Adios.
View Quote
Welcome to the club.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 9:54:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2001 9:53:29 AM EDT by critter_FR]
I only quit for a few hours at a time. Just like how I quit smoking. [:)] edited because "at" has a "t" in it.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 9:55:04 AM EDT
Dont you see.If the federal law sunsets and thats a bif if,the state still stands.Why do you think the antis are working so hard at the state level now. I didnt read all of the posts if someone mentioned it
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 10:07:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ARMALITE FAN: Dont you see.If the federal law sunsets and thats a bif if,the state still stands.Why do you think the antis are working so hard at the state level now. I didnt read all of the posts if someone mentioned it
View Quote
We already had worse. It doesn't matter if the federal law sunsets. We were already worse off than we are now. And if the commie version had passed, anything that Atty General Blumenthal decided was evil could be added to the ban at his will and pleasure. No thank you. And quit F'in trying to make us look like losers, ok? I'm really getting pissed![:)]
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 11:43:52 AM EDT
Too many people giving up! I'm sure critter tried the best he could. And I'm sure he didn't have nearly as much help as he should have. But what really bothers me is people giving up hope. That is not wise. I will die trying, I will die a lonely man (politically), but I will die knowing I did all in my power to fight the tide of evil. And this is not a flame on Imbrog. Imbrog, I'm sure you've been doing the best you can over the 13 years you mention, but the fact of giving up discredits those 13 years. Hope, people. It still exists.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 12:25:35 PM EDT
The problem I have seen is that gun control is ACCELERATING and the more it does, the more people are willing to "compromise" (appease) with the anti-gun weenies. How many times have you seen the socialists introduce some draconian gun bill and the republicans response isn't "HELL NO!" but a watered down version of the same bill? Then after the committees get together and "compromise" the GOP proclaims victory. Just like in the 1994 "assault weapon" ban that only affected "19 guns". HA! That is like the British saying they won the revolutionary war because Cornwallis was able force Washington to negotiate a ceasefire in a humanitarian effort to avoid anymore colonist casualties. If this continues at it's current pace, within a few years the only pro-gun "victories" there will be is a passage of a "compromise" bill only banning bolt action rifles with over 4 round mags. All the while there are NO attempts at repealing the laws, except from Ron Paul and most other reps avoid his bills like the plague.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 1:54:47 PM EDT
Public opinion is turning around though. It was evidenced here. Their bill should have been a shoe in based on their majorities in both houses, and Rowland was expected by most to sign whatever was sent his way. But low and behold, the people got angry, and called their reps in record numbers, showed up at rallies, and hearings, and really made a stink. Last year, I think that bill would have passed. It's a win, so bite me! [:)]
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 1:56:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By stubbs: Too many people giving up! I'm sure critter tried the best he could. And I'm sure he didn't have nearly as much help as he should have. But what really bothers me is people giving up hope. That is not wise. I will die trying, I will die a lonely man (politically), but I will die knowing I did all in my power to fight the tide of evil. And this is not a flame on Imbrog. Imbrog, I'm sure you've been doing the best you can over the 13 years you mention, but the fact of giving up discredits those 13 years. Hope, people. It still exists.
View Quote
Just for the record, a lot of people worked their tails off, not only me.
Link Posted: 5/31/2001 3:14:48 PM EDT
Well, the one good thing that came about from this, is that I found this site.
Top Top