Connecticut Alert: Magazine Ban and Castle Doctrine

High Capacity Magazine Ban

High Capacity Magazine Ban

Please note this magazine ban has no provision for grandfathering.  You would be required to destroy or turn in standard capacity magazines or face felony charges.  From the NRA:

On March 23, the Connecticut Joint Committee on Judiciary held a public hearing on two bills of interest to law-abiding gun owners in Connecticut: Senate Bill 1094 and Senate Bill 1210.

Anti-gun bill, SB 1094 is a bill in search of a problem, despite the recent media attention given to “large capacity” magazines, no correlation exists between the size or arbitrary capacity of a detachable magazine and violent crime. Owners of “large capacity” magazines are not criminals or individuals intent on committing atrocious acts; they are sportsmen or firearm enthusiasts who own the magazines for a variety of lawful reasons, including sport, competition or self-defense.

SB 1094 would prohibit the possession of firearm magazines that accept more than ten rounds of ammunition.  If passed and signed into law, any person in possession of any magazine greater than ten rounds, who has not already surrendered the magazine prior to enactment or within ninety days after enactment, will be guilty of a class D felony. See full bill below.

Self-defense bill, SB 1210 would create a presumption under Connecticut law that it is reasonable to believe that deadly physical force is necessary to defend oneself from a person who has unlawfully entered a dwelling.

The Joint Committee on Judiciary has until April 15 to take action on these bills, so in the meantime, please continue to contact members of the Joint Committee on Judiciary here and respectfully urge them to support SB 1210 and to oppose SB 1094 and any legislation that forces law-abiding citizens to surrender their property. See full bill below.

Connecticut SB1094

Connecticut SB 1210

Source: NRA-ILA

, ,

  • GWB

    How about we ban criminals from using high capacity magazines first.

  • Anonymous

    Conneticism?

  • Midcenturyman

    Time to move to Texas. This is ridiculous. Here’s a question: What if someone has a Glcok 17 that comes with a 17 round clip, I beleive so?  What do they do? Do they sell that gun??  This government is foolish to think that passing this will drop crime. It will not.

  • Midcenturyman

    Its time we hold our “representatives” accountable. I will bet you that the Governor, senators, reps, etc. own firearms for protection and/or their security has guns with ample magazine capacity.

    Write everyone that has anything to do with this and tell them to leave law abiding citizens alone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • R6pilot

    All this would do is push up the black market price of stolen guns with hi cap magazines. You know, the ones stolen from law abiding citizens who were at work when some dirt ball broke into their house. Our government sucks. I have an idea, if the State granted you a permit and you shoot some dirt ball who is about to commit a crime . . . . They use their legal progress to defend your actions rather than initiate prosicution of your actions. After protecting yourself, you have to cash in your home and retirement accounts to defend your actions. It makes you think twice about helping someone else in a bad situation….probably get sued by the victim for saving their life?

Quantcast
[index]
[index]