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; Originally Posted by Guantes Unless I misread, tubular .22lr magazines are exempted. As usual you are correct and I misread it....
ETA - Just read post 29 - Great news. Maybe Colt will get some of my $$$ after all. :)
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.
I was at a legislative hearing about a year ago during the microstamping attempt.
Colt's chief counsel was very effective. He told the committee that if they did this, Colt was going to stop selling guns in CT...and likely stop buying from local suppliers due to lack of demand.
He said the number of jobs effected would be "Significant".
Colt rocks...unless you are comparing them to Glock. They they are merely OK.
Anyone hear how it went today ?.
I saw in another post on another forum that this bill would be unconstitional according to Article 1 Section 9 that states that "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed".
#1 It is not an ex-post facto law. People aught to learn what terms actually mean instead of pretending to understand them.
Internet constitutionalists should have their hamstrings cut, shoulders pulled out of joint, impaled and eaten by the crows.
#2 The bill was raised, but not submitted to go forward into the legislative process. It's an idea, not a fetus of a law marching toward birth.
Is this "idea" being brought up something we may have to worry about in the future?
Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.
Thank God!!! I dont know if its just me but that last part sounds a little threatening It is not wise to unnecessarily upset the Senate Majority Leader. I think it not be wise to upset the American people or the people of you whom you govern. I understand that this bill might not have been taken into serious consideration, but if he was sick and tired of being bothered with it he should have made that announcement personally. Once the first 100 angry CT residents complained he should have eased our minds. We were initially pissed because someone who is supposed to be protecting the constitution state from unconstitutional laws allowed a law like this to even be considered . I know it would make no sense to take away guns or high cap mags from law abiding citizens. When what really should be happening is criminal possession of a firearm for people who are not fit to carry or own should be tightened. A criminal gets caught with a gun and gets 6mos. probation and another felony on there record. No biggie to them. But a church going hard working father/mother of two and a pillar to the community gets his/her guns or mags taken that they have invested there hard earned money in is just wrong.. Take away the guns from the law abiding american so the only people who have them are the criminals.. Smart. On the other hand I am grateful that this law is benign to our future and Im happy that a lot of us are doing our job as American citizens and CT residents and letting it be known of how we feel and what we think. Also letting it be known that we pay very close attention to our laws and what goes on in politics in this state. I hope we keep up the good work and let our opinions be know at all times regardless of what someone says in a email about not upsetting someone. We understand he has to do his job and he has to understand that we have to do our job..