CT Bill to Ban Large Cap Magazines March 2011
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: CT Bill to Ban Large Cap Magazines March 2011

  1. #1

    Exclamation CT Bill to Ban Large Cap Magazines March 2011

    Sate of Connecticut General Assembly - Raised Bill No. 1094
    January Session, 2011
    LCO No. 3773
    *03773_______JUD*
    Referred to Committee on Judiciary
    Introduced by: They don't say. I wonder why?

    AN ACT BANNING LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES.

    Hearing held March 23, 2011

    From the Connecticut Defense League alert:

    ANTI-GUN Bill SB1094

    This bill will ban the possession of ANY magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

    If this bill passes, law-abiding gun owners will have to begin SURRENDERING their magazines by July, or face CONFISCATION by the state police and a FELONY CHARGE.

    This proposal not only bans the sale of these magazines, but would make possession of one a FELONY.

    Own a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, TURN IT IN or BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY!

    Yes, you read that correctly

    The bill is found here:
    AN ACT BANNING LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES.

    I will emphasize that this proposed bill would make possession after July 1,2011 a felony regardless of when the magazine was purchased.

    The Constitution clearly prohibits laws being enacted that would make a citizen guilty of a crime retroactively that was previously not a crime. It seems to me this is the governments favorite rule to break.

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,668
    Section 9 of Article III of the Constitution prohibits Congress from doing it.
    No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
    Section 10 of Article 1 prohibits states from doing so.
    No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
    Some lawyer in your state can make some big money on this one if it gets thru.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Creswell, Oregon
    Posts
    3,865
    Next we will only be able to buy medications one pill at a time. We must do something to stop people from overdosing.
    "You can get a lot accomplished if you don't care who gets the credit" - Ronald Reagan

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,668
    Quote Originally Posted by fuhr52 View Post
    Next we will only be able to buy medications one pill at a time. We must do something to stop people from overdosing.
    Hey now, no messing with my guns or pills.

  6. #5
    What do they do for an encore? Ban mags of 8? 6? (All revolvers?) (Bye the bye, does this proposed "ban" include rifle mags?)

    I have an idea..... any supposed "Legislator" that proposes any legal machinations that flies in the face of the Bill of Rights are subject to instant, automatic recall, without recourse or ex post facto "benefits" (such as "pension").

    Since the Bill of Rights are essentially "Citizen's Rights", said recall hearings will be conducted by Citizen's Courts, chosen by random from voting lists. No "judge", only a jury of 13, majority carries and "lisence to operate" limited to Bill of Rights violations only.

    Us citizens gotta protect ourselves somehow, eh? Seems we can no longer expect our "representatives" to follow our lead or represent our interests vis-a-vis "BIG GOVERNMENT".

    GG
    Fanatics of any sort are dangerous! -GG-
    Which part of "... shall NOT be infringed..." confuses you?
    Well now, aren't WE a pair, Raggedy Man? (Thunderdome)

  7. #6
    handgonnetoter Guest
    Oooohh Poo, here we go againnnnnn.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993
    Technicly, this would not be an Ex Post Facto Law. An Ex Post Facto Law would be if you sold your high-cap mags now, then the law went into effect and they tried you for possessing them in the past. Passing a law which bans the possession by the general public of any physical object is idiotic on its face, but there's nothing in the Constitution that explicitly prohibits it, except the 2nd Amendment, ironicly.
    When they "Nudge. Shove. Shoot.",
    Don't retreat. Just reload.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by CathyInBlue View Post
    Technicly, this would not be an Ex Post Facto Law. An Ex Post Facto Law would be if you sold your high-cap mags now, then the law went into effect and they tried you for possessing them in the past. Passing a law which bans the possession by the general public of any physical object is idiotic on its face, but there's nothing in the Constitution that explicitly prohibits it, except the 2nd Amendment, ironicly.
    Mere possession of a 10+ round magazine will be retroactively illegal upon the date prescribed in the law regardless of purchase date.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    My God, they're turning into NY.

    Gun laws need to be made by those who shoot. Through years of experience, law abiding shooters can reload in a split second. It's the perp who they need to worry about and he's not abiding by the law anyway.
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  11. #10
    It's an epidemic of NE U.S. Liberalization disease! (I KNEW it would prove to be catching!) LOL!

    GG
    Fanatics of any sort are dangerous! -GG-
    Which part of "... shall NOT be infringed..." confuses you?
    Well now, aren't WE a pair, Raggedy Man? (Thunderdome)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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