Connecticut to Ban Possession of All Magazines Over 10 Rounds

Connecticut Bill Introduced to Ban Possession of All Magazines Over 10 Rounds
Bill would make felons of law abiding gun owners that do not surrender magazines.

Possession of any 11 Round and larger Gun Magazines would make felons of law abiding gun owners.

National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn --(Ammoland.com)- A bill raised in the Connecticut General Assembly ( Bill Number 1094) would ban the possession of any magazine (rifle, pistol or shotgun) capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

Despite earlier rumors, there is no sponsor of the bill. It was raised by the Judiciary Committee.

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.

Again, this proposal would not only ban the sale of these magazines, but would make simple possession a felony. Any gun owner found in possession of any magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds will be in violation of this proposed law, regardless of whether it was legally purchased.

This draconian measure will also affect non-gun owners as all Connecticut tax payers will be forced to foot the bill for the extraordinary process of having police confiscate — from law-abiding citizens — the millions of magazines already in the state.

Making matters worse, manufacturers including Colt, C Products, Mec-Gar, OKAY Industries and Metalform will be directly affected by this legislation. That means a loss of jobs and tax revenue to the state.

Arbitrarily limiting magazine capacity and threatening law-abiding gun owners with confiscation and felony charges is beyond the pale.

These magazines are utilized every day for home defense and the shooting sports. As part of the 1994 “Assault Weapons” ban, the production of higher capacity magazines was halted. This gun-control strategy soon proved to be a failure. A comprehensive study by the Centers for Disease Control — hardly a pro-gun entity — looked at the full panoply of gun-control measures, including this ban, and concluded that none could be proven to reduce crime. Another study, commissioned by Congress, found that bans were not effective since “the banned weapons and magazines were never used in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders.”

NSSF is encouraging all gun owners, sportsmen and hunters to contact their state representative, senator and all members of the Judiciary Committee immediately and urge them to oppose this magazine ban.

To find your legislator, click here.
To contact the Joint Committee on the Judiciary, click here.

About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

Recent Comments

Bradley: Im curious any one own one of these? How’s it function and does if feel solid in the hands?
CatButt: I like how the Judge or a man with a twisted version of “can and cannot” are. We can own guns....
TCMSOLS: What was it going to take for it to stop gunwalker no one cares about 50,000 Mexicans. “Pedro says...
TCMSOLS: The rurmours start comparing it to Iran Contra and the CIA was behind it the fast and the furious. See if it...
James Monroe: Lets keep fighting to retain our Bill of Rights, and specifically the 2nd Amendment.

[...] it a judiciary committee to come up with this in Connecticut. The outright magazine ban bill has no sponsors but it’s a dream for gun ban proponents. If a ban like this were to be passed [...]

Comment link | Crazy Connecticut Bill to Ban Magazines | Gunalizer | March 7th, 2011 at 9:44 PM

IT IS YOUR FAULT.
YOU voted for them.
You voted for their friends.
This last election was THEIR victory.
YOU kissed the ass of your enemies.
VOTE THEM OUT.
Ever one of them.
Local, state, private club and stop giving money to groups like NEA, Public TV or Public Radio or the AARP.
Teachers, dog catchers, every one them, get rid of them if they are anti-second amendment in any form.
If your church does not support the Constitution, ALL of it not just the parts that serves them, leave and find a church that does. That goes for clubs, groups or lodges also.
I found out that many of the officers in my gun club voted for Obama, I won’t be with them after this membership.
That’s right, the leaders of a gun club voted for the enemies of their rights. The stupid ……… .

Comment link | Me | March 8th, 2011 at 10:35 AM

…but of course police will be exempt, correct? We can’t have the cities and towns spending thousands of dollars buying new magazines that comply. The burden will be on the legal gun owner who will be transubstantiated into a felon if they don’t comply.

What nut was the first person to come with this magical 10-round limit (actually 11)? I know it was in the 1994 “assault weapons” ban.

Dumb question, aren’t there many pistols which take magazines of more than 10 rounds for which there are no 10-round magazine replacements?

I know of one sure way to reduce crime. Restict all of our public officials to one term and one term only, the ultimate in term limits. When they limit their terms then let’s talk about limiting magazines.

Comment link | bandofotters | March 8th, 2011 at 11:48 AM

Why shouldn’t the police be exempt? They are not citizens.
Just buy 2-3 magazines that hold 9 rounds, jeese.

Comment link | dala | March 22nd, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Better yet buy 2-3 magazines that hold 50+

Comment link | AmmoLand | March 22nd, 2011 at 11:17 AM