Connecticut Preparedness Community Forums

Here are the first 2 state bills posted today. Both were already expected:

http://ccdl.us/blog/2013/01/09/here-com ... ate-bills/

I actually don't have a problem with the ammo bill. If that appeases them, so be it.

Make that FOUR bills.

MessEleven wrote:I actually don't have a problem with the ammo bill. If that appeases them, so be it.

You might want to rethink that. How do you think they are going to be able to enforce that? The only way a store will know if you are a felon or not is to run a background check.
Imagine having to go through the same background check for a pistolpurchase every time you buy ammo? It's going to take 30 minutes to buy a box. You think Walmart will bother selling ammo? Do you think the local guys wont have to raise prices?
Even if they don't require a background check, and just take it on faith you arent a felon (yea right), there are still other issues. I remember last time this came up, a contractor who hires guys trying to get their lives back in order brought up that he would no longer be able to give those guys a job because his nailguns use .22 blanks to "shoot" nails.

It sounds like an add-on charge for felons found to be in possession of ammo upon arrest, not a background check at Wal Mart. I actually wouldn't mind having to flash a permit or hunting license when purchasing ammo. That proves you're not a felon. Both are revoked upon felony arrest. As easy and painless as showing ID at a package store. That is one step that could actually have an impact on gun violence. If ammo was harder to come by for them gang-bangers may actually reconsider before shooting at each other.
I know, I know, the ones without records yet will simply do the buying and sell it to the others. I'm just saying, this gun control attack is unbelievably huge, this is one I wouldn't fight.

AGust82 wrote:It sounds like an add-on charge for felons found to be in possession of ammo upon arrest, not a background check at Wal Mart. I actually wouldn't mind having to flash a permit or hunting license when purchasing ammo. That proves you're not a felon. Both are revoked upon felony arrest. As easy and painless as showing ID at a package store. That is one step that could actually have an impact on gun violence. If ammo was harder to come by for them gang-bangers may actually reconsider before shooting at each other.
I know, I know, the ones without records yet will simply do the buying and sell it to the others. I'm just saying, this gun control attack is unbelievably huge, this is one I wouldn't fight.

And people who are under 21 or who don't have a pistol permit (dont need one for rifle or shotgun, probably 3/4 the gunowners in the state dont have a pistol permit) will never be able to buy ammo again?

It's a slippery slope. If you are OK with needing a permit to buy ammo, you should be ok with registering that ammo, no? Already gave the the permit, what's the big deal?

Ya know, we're gonna lose ALL of this, because gun owners don't stick together. The pistol guys don't care if suddenly shotguns and rifles need to be registered, or you need a permit for ammo, because they already have the permit. The shotgun guys are going to toss the pistol and black rifle guys under the bus because they dont care about mag restrictions. They hunters will toss ya all under the bus they dont care about mag limits either, and one box of ammo lasts for years.

While this appears to be common sense to most of us, it would cause issues for people without a permit or hunting license. You don't need to own a hunting license or permit to buy a long gun so how would that work?

Honestly I would prefer if they spent the time to examine the problem rather than jump to conclusions.

Mopar wrote: And people who are under 21 or who don't have a pistol permit (dont need one for rifle or shotgun, probably 3/4 the gunowners in the state dont have a pistol permit) will never be able to buy ammo again?

It's a slippery slope. If you are OK with needing a permit to buy ammo, you should be ok with registering that ammo, no? Already gave the the permit, what's the big deal?

Ya know, we're gonna lose ALL of this, because gun owners don't stick together. The pistol guys don't care if suddenly shotguns and rifles need to be registered, or you need a permit for ammo, because they already have the permit. The shotgun guys are going to toss the pistol and black rifle guys under the bus because they dont care about mag restrictions. They hunters will toss ya all under the bus they dont care about mag limits either, and one box of ammo lasts for years.

You're right it is a slippery slope, but in the final analysis we'll have to choose our battles...and be realistic when choosing them. This is a completely different world for all of us, created in the past month.

I'm not suggesting we don't put up a fight for all gun owners. But if we have to give on bills like this and some silly memorial to victims to retain most of our freedoms, then I'm for it. We're going to lose on high-cap mags. We're going to lose on "assault weapons." The rest of the country will lose on background checks. But we don't have to lose everything. That's all I'm saying.

Sounds pretty "progressive," that mindset. A "yeah, sure...that's ok" today will be a "wait, what? No, don't!" tomorrow...and it'll be too late.

Balls to the wall, boys.

It's nice we can have these debates but let's face facts. Our opinions don't matter anyway. We live in one of the bluest states around and any gun control law that skirts the Constitution will get passed with very little opposition. We can write our Reps and Senators until our fingers bleed. Enjoy your automated responses. Those jerks just don't give a shit about us. Towing the party line is too important. How would it look when they are running for another seat someday and it gets brought up that they voted against gun control in the wake of Sandy Hook? Try voting them out, that's a lost cause too. We are way outnumbered by sheepish fools.

If everyone has that attitude you will be correct. However, just 2 years ago, this same ammunition bill was defeated. The magazine bill was defeated.

I'm seeing FAR more interest in fighting these this time around then 2yrs ago.
Tuesday night CCDL had to move their monthly meeting into a banquet hall (which they filled) because there were so many people. You would have thought it was a gunshow with a line of people around the building waiting to get in.

Mopar wrote:If everyone has that attitude you will be correct. However, just 2 years ago, this same ammunition bill was defeated. The magazine bill was defeated.

I'm seeing FAR more interest in fighting these this time around then 2yrs ago.
Tuesday night CCDL had to move their monthly meeting into a banquet hall (which they filled) because there were so many people. You would have thought it was a gunshow with a line of people around the building waiting to get in.

I hope so, this new wave by the antis will have a lot more weight behind it than ever before. I am not in favor of giving an inch. Appeasement does not work, it only gives the opponents more of a foot hold.

I hope we can hold this back but I am not so sure. I have written my reps several times and have received nothing back. Very unusual since I have met both and they know me.

This is a battle we cannot lose.

For those who were ok with the ammo bill, here ya go:
http://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/ammuni ... ct-of-2013

If Senator Dick has his way, every time you buy ammo you will have to go through the exact same procedure as buying a handgun. If you buy over 1000 rounds (2 bricks of .22) you will be also added to a "special" database.
Mail order ammo will have to go through a FFL, just like a gun.

Last time I bought a handgun, I had to wait 45 minutes on the background check. Ya think walmart is going to deal with that for a box of ammo they probably make 50 cents on? What about your little local shop? How much will he have to raise his prices to cover all that time and paperwork for every little box of ammo sold? How much will our taxes go up to cover all that?

Our leaders are out to screw us, without the KY !!!!

And here are today's bills: http://ccdl.us/blog/2013/01/10/ct-today ... gun-bills/

Two are noteworthy.
H.B. No. 5176 is Rob Sampson's. It forces towns to adhere to the state law for permit applications. This bill was submitted last year as well, and passed the house unanimously, but died in senate.

S.B. 122 by Senator Ed Meyer of the 12th district (Branford, Durham, Guilford, Killingworth, Madison & North Branford).
This one is so far out it's amazing he had the balls to submit it. This would basically outlaw any gun, magazine, or clip that can accept more then one bullet. Police are exempt, of course.

EDIT: I forgot H.B. 5165 which is also by Rob Sampson. This is to strengthen castle doctrine. SUPPORT!