Connecticut: High Capacity Mag Ban

This is a discussion on Connecticut: High Capacity Mag Ban within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; This better not happen. I think all but two of my mags exceed 10 rounds, and it would be such a pain to have to ...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 67
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Connecticut: High Capacity Mag Ban

  1. #16
    Member Array roalho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    241
    This better not happen. I think all but two of my mags exceed 10 rounds, and it would be such a pain to have to buy them all over again.
    I'll ship them to Idaho to await my inevitable return before I turn them in, or dispose of them or whatever.

    This is just plain stupid, especially considering a (slow) tactical reload takes about 3 seconds, and a (slow) speed reload takes about 1. Freakin' boneheads!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,237
    Quote Originally Posted by ssmtbracer View Post
    Yeah but what are you gonna do with a 15 round glock 19 or 17 round glock if you have no mags for it. It's useless.
    You will need to go here:
    Low Capacity Glock Factory Magazines - GlockStore.com

  4. #18
    Distinguished Member
    Array fastk9dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Location: Location:
    Posts
    1,553
    Quote Originally Posted by ssmtbracer View Post
    Yeah but what are you gonna do with a 15 round glock 19 or 17 round glock if you have no mags for it. It's useless.
    Only if you are buying a bigger gun strictly for capacity.
    "I got a lot of problems with you people!" - Frank Costanza

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,237
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    No one would be instantly a criminal because there is a 90 day window to get rid of what is proposed to be outlawed.

    This of course would force many otherwise legal gun owners to dispose of what they currently own. It is wrongheaded to do that to people, for reasons which have nothing to do with guns. Its about in the same category as telling folks with carpeting in their home that they must change to wood floors in 90 days or else. There is an element of confiscation involved.
    Add to that the fact that such a law most likely has no measurable effect on public safety and it all seems like much aggravation for naught.

  6. #20
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,663
    I was toying with the idea to purchase a Colt this year. I will keep my eyes on this law. If it passes, I will inform Colt that the new law is the reason I will not be purchasing a firearm from them. I see no reason to support tyrannical regimes with tax dollars from my purchase. Colt makes a nice gun, but it is by no means the only fish in that pond.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  7. #21
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    FWIW, I wrote the CT legislator who represents the district where I have some property. Of course, I don't vote there so probably my message won't get much attention--but, we'll see. I stressed the need for grandfathering.

    For those in CT, who actually vote there, you need to be contacting your CT legislators (not the ones in Congress, the ones in Hartford).

    There needs to be some sort of grandfathering. The ban on tube magazines for 22 lr is just plain silly. The proposal is wrong even from the viewpoint of those who might want to ban high capacity mags. It is wrong because of the way it has only a 90 day window in which folks would have to dispose of otherwise perfectly good items which have been legal without any form of compensation. Yes, as MattInFla wrote in post 13, "unconstitutional to me."

    I'm no fan of high capacity stuff and I don't own any, but right is right and wrong is wrong, and the proposal falls far short of being right. Attempting to make felons out of folks who should be grandfathered is idiotic quite apart from any discussion one might have on the reasonableness or lack thereof of high cap. magazines.

    Yikes.

  8. #22
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,158
    Quote Originally Posted by ksholder View Post
    I was toying with the idea to purchase a Colt this year. I will keep my eyes on this law. If it passes, I will inform Colt that the new law is the reason I will not be purchasing a firearm from them. I see no reason to support tyrannical regimes with tax dollars from my purchase. Colt makes a nice gun, but it is by no means the only fish in that pond.
    Don't punish Colt over something that isn't in their control. Stuff like this proposal gets pushed by the big city boys who have never gotten either powder on their hands or mud on their boots. It gets pushed by folks who have never had the opportunity to go out into a field and plink with a 22 lever action.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard
    The ban on tube magazines for 22 lr is just plain silly.
    Unless I misread, tubular .22lr magazines are exempted.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  10. #24
    Member Array chivvalry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    454
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    FWIW, I wrote the CT legislator who represents the district where I have some property. Of course, I don't vote there so probably my message won't get much attention--but, we'll see. I stressed the need for grandfathering.

    For those in CT, who actually vote there, you need to be contacting your CT legislators (not the ones in Congress, the ones in Hartford).

    There needs to be some sort of grandfathering. The ban on tube magazines for 22 lr is just plain silly. The proposal is wrong even from the viewpoint of those who might want to ban high capacity mags. It is wrong because of the way it has only a 90 day window in which folks would have to dispose of otherwise perfectly good items which have been legal without any form of compensation. Yes, as MattInFla wrote in post 13, "unconstitutional to me."

    I'm no fan of high capacity stuff and I don't own any, but right is right and wrong is wrong, and the proposal falls far short of being right. Attempting to make felons out of folks who should be grandfathered is idiotic quite apart from any discussion one might have on the reasonableness or lack thereof of high cap. magazines.

    Yikes.
    You don't have any magazines that hold over 10 rounds? Almost everything I have other than my PM9 and P3AT holds over 10 rounds!!
    "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
    You are not paranoid if They are actually out to get you, however, They probably are not and you probably are.

  11. #25
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Looks like some cheap hicap mags will be on gunbroker for the taking for people in free America

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array joker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,987
    Grandfathering will not help them accomplish their ban. Those that are already possesed will still be out there and can easily change hands and everyone will drain their kids' college funds to buy as many as they can before the law goes into effect. Don't get me wrong I'm against this law on so many levels. It's just wrong.

    As far as Colt goes I think the poster is prodding Colt to move out of a soon to be anti state. I know it's a lot to ask a manufacturing company to uproot and move for this kind of a reason, especially considering their most famous firearm only has a 7 round magazine capacity. It does baffle me how some of the most famous firearm manufacturers are based in blatantly anti states, you'd think they would get in on some of the government influenced by big business that we're always hearing about. Springfield in IL, Kimber in NY, Colt in CT-now possibly becoming more anti 2nd amendment.
    NRA Life Member


    With great power comes great responsibility.-Stan Lee

  13. #27
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    Firearm manufacturers dont care about all that stuff, they care about tax breaks and profit margin.

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array joker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,987
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    Firearm manufacturers dont care about all that stuff, they care about tax breaks and profit margin.
    Sad but true for most of them.
    NRA Life Member


    With great power comes great responsibility.-Stan Lee

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array MitchellCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    I don't post here anymore...Sorry
    Posts
    2,333
    False alarm...

    From: Robert Crook <info@ctsportsmen.com>
    To: ME
    Sent: Thu, Mar 3, 2011 1:16 am
    Subject: 10 Round Magazines; NEW Bills

    10 Round Magazines: S.B. No. 1094 (RAISED) JUDICIARY. 'AN ACT BANNING LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES', to prohibit the possession of certain ammunition feeding devices that accept more than ten rounds. REF. JUDICIARY. OPPOSE. COMMUNICATE WITH JUDICIARY COMM MEMBERS BELOW. NOW!!

    There has been some confusion as to the originator of this bill. I had a meeting with Sen. Looney’s Legal Advisor today and was assured he was not the sponsor. With his name in the electronic media and messages from other groups naming him as sponsor, he is receiving massive amounts of phone calls/e-mail.

    It was admitted they did address the prospect of submitting this bill, but felt it was not appropriate. The bill was not a Proposed bill but was Raised by Judiciary Committee. It was admitted they did address the prospect of submitting this bill, but felt it was not appropriate. The bill was not a Proposed bill but was Raised by Judiciary Committee. Note that CCS directed all communications to the Judiciary Comm, NOT to Sen. Looney. STOP communications on this issue with Sen. Looney NOW unless he is YOUR State Senator. It is not wise to unnecessarily upset the Senate Majority Leader.

  16. #30
    VIP Member Array joker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,987
    Well that's good, hopefuly he/they get the hint of what kind of fudgestorm this fudge can stir up.
    NRA Life Member


    With great power comes great responsibility.-Stan Lee

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. High Capacity Sub-Compact 9mm >>>>
    By VBVAGUY in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2011, 12:37 PM
  2. high capacity plinker (not a 10/22)
    By Thanis in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 16th, 2010, 11:31 AM
  3. BPS High Capacity vs Mossburg 590
    By GHFLRLTD in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: November 6th, 2009, 12:04 AM
  4. Need high capacity mag info.
    By automatic slim in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 5th, 2008, 11:55 AM
  5. High capacity 45?
    By Yddnac in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: October 13th, 2006, 08:03 PM

Search tags for this page

connecticut high capacity magazine ban

,
connecticut magazine ban
,
connecticut magazine capacity
,

connecticut magazine capacity laws

,

connecticut magazine capacity limit

,

connecticut magazine limit

,

ct gun laws magazine capacity

,

ct high capacity magazine ban

,
ct high capacity magazine bill
,

ct magazine ban

,

ct magazine capacity law

,
ct magazine limit
Click on a term to search for related topics.