Bye, Representative Godfrey to Introduce Package of Firearms, Ammunition Laws

[Sky]

http://senatedems.ct.gov/pr/bye-121220.php?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

In the wake of the tragic December 14 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton which killed 20 children and six adults, state Senator Beth Bye (D-West Hartford) and state Rep. Bob Godfrey (D-Danbury) said today that they will introduce in the upcoming 2013 legislative session a comprehensive series of proposals focused on limiting access in Connecticut to high-capacity weapons, assault weapons and ammunition.

Sen. Bye and Rep. Godfrey‘s proposals—which will be packaged as one bill—will seek to:

Prohibit the sale and possession of any rifle, shotgun or pistol magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds;

Expand the definition of an ‘assault weapon’ under current Connecticut state law to apply to firearms which exhibit just one particular physical trait, as opposed to two (i.e., the presence of a pistol grip beneath the action of the weapon);

Require the registration with state law enforcement officials—and the biennial registration renewal—of all firearms by model and serial number;

Institute a 50-percent sales tax on the sale of ammunition and firearms magazines;

Require a permit to purchase ammunition;

Prohibit the online purchase of ammunition;

Prohibit the purchase of ammunition in Connecticut by anyone who is not legally authorized to possess a firearm in Connecticut;

Prohibit the storage of firearms and ammunition in a manner that allows access by persons under age 18.

Many of the proposals in this document have been discussed here at THR

Still has to pass and be signed into law etc etc but it would not surprise me if some form of this bill or worse is presented at a federal level. Maybe I am just pessimistic?

 

[mg.mikael]

Require the registration with state law enforcement officials—and the biennial registration renewal—of all firearms by model and serial number;

Hah! Now why would anyone comply with that.....

Seems every politician is a comedian now.

 

[LiveLife]

Time to further support the NRA and write/email/call your lawmakers.

In my city with rising rate of crime and home invasions, my focus/concern is what are lawmakers doing to protect my life/my family's lives and my right to defend against intruders/robbers when the police chief/sheriff publicly stated they cannot provide proper police protection and suggested home owners arm themselves. More gun restrictions is not going to enhance protection for me or my family.

 

[Sky]

You are being pessimistic. These legislators are from Connecticut,plying on the raw emotions of the moment. I doubt that these Draconian proposals will go very far in the Nutmeg state,much less at the Federal level.

Johnny I did not say it would be passed or signed into law; but I did say some such bill (s) will be proposed..

Still has to pass and be signed into law etc etc but it would not surprise me if some form of this bill or worse is presented at a federal level. Maybe I am just pessimistic?

My writing skills may not be up to par, or the intent of their content self evident ... but I know what I meant to say; or thought I did.....

 

[glove]

Sen. Bye and Rep. Godfrey‘s

When it's time to vote, Vote them out. And support the NRA.

 

[bergmen]

Sen. Bye and Rep. Godfrey‘s proposals—which will be packaged as one bill—will seek to:

> Prohibit the sale and possession of any rifle, shotgun or pistol magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds;
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Expand the definition of an ‘assault weapon’ under current Connecticut state law to apply to firearms which exhibit just one particular physical trait, as opposed to two (i.e., the presence of a pistol grip beneath the action of the weapon);
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Require the registration with state law enforcement officials—and the biennial registration renewal—of all firearms by model and serial number;
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Institute a 50-percent sales tax on the sale of ammunition and firearms magazines;
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Require a permit to purchase ammunition;
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Prohibit the online purchase of ammunition;
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Prohibit the purchase of ammunition in Connecticut by anyone who is not legally authorized to possess a firearm in Connecticut;
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.
> Prohibit the storage of firearms and ammunition in a manner that allows access by persons under age 18.
Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.

Nor will any of these prevent any future disastrous shooting crime.

This is what needs to be sent to Bye and Godfrey by a Connecticut resident.

Dan

 

[Bubba613]

Expand the definition of an ‘assault weapon’ under current Connecticut state law to apply to firearms which exhibit just one particular physical trait, as opposed to two (i.e., the presence of a pistol grip beneath the action of the weapon);

Maybe it's just me. But every handgun has a pistol grip under the action of the weapon. Do they really want to outlaw every handgun?

This looks like grandstanding to the anti gun crowd rather than any serious attempt to do something constructive.

 

[jason41987]

theres a reason his name is bye.. right?.. vote him out, say bye to this moron and get someone better in office

 

[chris in va]

Do they really want to outlaw every handgun?

Unofficially? Yes.

 

[bikerdoc]

Would not have prevented the disaster at Sandy Hook.

Nor will any of these prevent any future disastrous shooting crime.

There it is.

Nothing there addresses the root cause.

 

[Dr_B]

It seems to me that many people think this sort of legislation would never pass at the state level, or federal level. If you think that, you are foolish. The package of proposed laws listed by the OP is exactly what I expect to be propose congress next month. Gun registration, higher taxes, perhaps even an attempt at confiscation.

Even with congress being majority Republican, these things just might slip through given the irrational an emotional climate we are in. We must be vigilant. Contact your representatives and outline logical reasons for them to oppose gun control. Do this even if they are Democrats.

 

[MachIVshooter]

They might be able to push that through in their own uber-liberal and very rich state that has long harbored an overall anti-gun sentiment, but I just don't see such a violating bill standing up to constitutional scrutiny at the federal level.

 

[HorseSoldier]

Ironically, it sounds like at least some politicians in New England would possibly prefer reunification with old England to continued membership in the US and abiding by its Constitution.

 

[Hacker15E]

Personally, I like the fact that politicians are over-reaching with the current proposals, especially with proposals like this one which would ban handguns (and thus clearly be unconstitutional).

Their hubris during a time of emotion (and post-election feeling of invincibility) will be their undoing politically.

 

[gpjoe]

Prohibit the purchase of ammunition in Connecticut by anyone who is not legally authorized to possess a firearm in Connecticut;

Huh? What good is ammo with no weapon?...or is this an admission that gun laws don't work? IE: Why worry about ammo in the hands of someone "not legally authorized to possess a firearm"?..unless you are admitting that the person may still possess the weapon illegally.

Likely aimed at access to another owner's gun, I suppose.

 

[CTPhil]

Personally, I like the fact that politicians are over-reaching with the current proposals, especially with proposals like this one which would ban handguns (and thus clearly be unconstitutional).

Their hubris during a time of emotion (and post-election feeling of invincibility) will be their undoing politically.

This is exactly right. They may have had a shot with something like a mag cap limit, but they've rolled so many issues into one proposal, nobody's going to like it. A legislator who is a gun owner may be persuaded by a cap limit for political reasons, but a 50% tax on ammo? Registration of all guns? You can't be serious.

 

[littlebluevette]

Seems like politicians some how always use a moment as an opportunity to line their pockets.

"Institute a 50-percent sales tax on the sale of ammunition and firearms magazines;"

 

[CTPhil]

All that bill does is expose how clueless those two legislators are. Not only about gun ownership, but about the make up of their own legislative body. There are a lot of gun owners in CT, including liberals.

 

[Devonai]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all firearms already registered on the state level here in CT? All of those DPS-3-C forms filled out at the time of a purchase or transfer aren't being chucked in the trash as soon as they get to Middletown, right?

http://www.ct.gov/despp/lib/despp/slfu/firearms/dps-3-c.pdf

So why in the world would we need to re-register firearms every two years???

 

[mberoose]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all firearms already registered on the state level here in CT? All of those DPS-3-C forms filled out at the time of a purchase or transfer aren't being chucked in the trash as soon as they get to Middletown, right?

Private sales of long guns/shotguns do not require registration or an authorization number from DPS.

These measures would be absolutely crippling to the gun owners of CT.

 

[Steve CT]

Expand the definition of an ‘assault weapon’ under current Connecticut state law to apply to firearms which exhibit just one particular physical trait, as opposed to two (i.e., the presence of a pistol grip beneath the action of the weapon);

This would be pretty much a death sentence for AR's in CT unless it has a thumbhole stock (anyone ever use one?). At the same time, it leaves the Mini 14, capable of putting out the identical rate of fire, also in .223, untouched.

 

[gbw]

They might be able to push that through in their own uber-liberal and very rich state that has long harbored an overall anti-gun sentiment, but I just don't see such a violating bill standing up to constitutional scrutiny at the federal level.

Are you kidding? The Washington D.C. laws were far more restrictive and failed constitutional scrutiny by one vote in the Supreme Court.

If any of the Heller 5 die or retire the Conneticut laws would sail through. This point was not made well by Romney et al. in the election. And the Heller 5 may not be solid even now - I wouldn't bet on Roberts.