Skip to comments.Connecticut statutes - it was ALREADY BANNED!!
Posted on 12/17/2012 2:11:58 PM PST by djf
I just checked on what Connecticut law says about firearms. Now, I don't agree with the law particularly. But I did find this:
CHAPTER 943 OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE AND SAFETY
Sec. 53-202a. Assault weapons: Definition.
(1) Any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the user or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms: Algimec Agmi; Armalite AR-180; Australian Automatic Arms SAP Pistol; Auto-Ordnance Thompson type; Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type; Barrett Light-Fifty model 82A1; Beretta AR-70; Bushmaster Auto Rifle and Auto Pistol; Calico models M-900, M-950 and 100-P; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; ...
Sec. 53-202b. Sale or transfer of assault weapon prohibited. Class C felony.
(a)(1) Any person who, within this state, distributes, transports or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives any assault weapon, except as provided by sections 29-37j and 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, and subsection (h) of section 53a-46a, shall be guilty of a class C felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of which two years may not be suspended or reduced.
Am I reading this wrong? If it was already banned, why is this fact not being discussed by the media?
Does not prohibit possession only sale or transfer.
Because that does not fit their agenda.
Anyone who brings it up will be suppressed.
New Jersey also is very strict on guns, we are talking two blue liberal states.
Has it been revealed how the son gained access to the guns? He had obvious mental problems, I’m guessing he took the mother’s guns.
I certainly am in favor of keeping guns away from the dangerously mentally ill.
All of this is a red herring anyway since only 2 pistols were used at the school shooting, why the hell are we even discussing assault rifles?
They will blame states where the laws are not nearly as regressive, and use it as a crux to contend that California styled fascism needs to be implemented nationwide. Good luck(not really) confiscating the thousands upon thousands of units and the BILLIONS of rounds of ammo that exist out here in the fruited plain.
Sale or transfer prohibited only it looks like...
... because the left sees this as a wonderful opportunity to get the people to forget about Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the appointment of John Kerry, the forthcoming tax increases, and to enact a nationwide ban on as many types of guns as they can get.
Incorrect. Medical examiner reports all wounds were .223
Of course, the story changes every five minutes or so...
Those are the fully automatic variants with a select fire feature; not the semi-auto models that were used by the shooter.
Actually, I suspect that the gun the shooter used had a “post-ban” configuration. In other words, it had its evil features (bayonet lug, collapsible stock and flash hider) removed. If so, it wasn’t really an “assault rifle” as defined by state law. Oh, and by the way, it would have been perfectly legal under the old U.S. assault weapons ban as well. This case proves what gun people have known all along. The AWB did nothing. All it did was affect some of the cosmetics of these firearms.
Let me say this again: Reinstate the federal assault weapons bill and the shooter’s gun would still be perfectly legal and NOT an “assault weapon” under the definition of the law.
Any selective fire... OR any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms...
Like I said I don’t agree with it or advocate it, that’s up to the people of the state of Connecticut.
I’m just pointing out the sheer idiocy of calling for a ban if IT WAS ALREADY BANNED!
And NO ONE seems to want to talk about that little glitch!
All of the guns used were “banned” guns. The 20 year old owned nothing. He killed the owner of the guns and then took them on a shooting rampage. I’m pretty sure they were all technicaly illegal as hell at that point!
The Bushmaster .223 is not even on the current catalog. that gun was a wood stock hunting rifle with a scope. This gun probably is ten years old.
Oh are they now saying that............. bleh, by the end of this they will be saying the suspect was a Christian card carrying member of the Tea Party and NRA............
Didn’t see a date on the law. She could have already had that gun when the law was passed and was grandfathered by that law.
Banned is an odd word.
Basically, they will run up legislation which says assault weapons are federally banned. But it’ll mean that you just can’t sell or transfer them. So the millions of such weapons will remain in private hands....for decades.
You can figure that drugs are banned too....but your local drug dealer will sell you any type of illegal drug you desire....and it’ll be the same way with assault weapons. They will import them from Mexico, and life will go on.
Heck, they could ban sugar, x-rated videos, booze, and Shake-and-Bake.....and we’d have it on the streets within hours.
There were TWO rifles. He left ONE in the car. The other one plus two handguns he took in the school. The medical examiner said all were killed with the rifle, then he shot himself in the head with one of the handguns. The other rifle was still in the car.
My understanding (and I could certainly be wrong), is that even after the sunset of the Federal Assault Weapons Bill, Connecticut kept the restrictions in place. Apparently, the shooter’s mom’s rifle was those that had been grandfathered and was duly registered with the state in compliance with its laws.
As mentioned abover, the left wants ALL firearms confiscated, period.
Remember 3 years ago when Pelosi said, “If it were up to me, it would be Turn in your guns” or something to that effect.
How about just enforcing current laws. Why was this mental case not arrested when he tried to buy a gun a month earlier?
(1) Any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the user or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms: Algimec Agmi; Armalite AR-180; Australian Automatic Arms SAP Pistol; Auto-Ordnance Thompson type; Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type; Barrett Light-Fifty model 82A1; Beretta AR-70; Bushmaster Auto Rifle and Auto Pistol; Calico models M-900, M-950 and 100-P; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max-1 and Max-2; Encom MK-IV, MP-9 and MP-45; Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FN/FNC; FAMAS MAS 223; Feather AT-9 and Mini-AT; Federal XC-900 and XC-450; Franchi SPAS-12 and LAW-12; Galil AR and ARM; Goncz High-Tech Carbine and High-Tech Long Pistol; Heckler & Koch HK-91, HK-93, HK-94 and SP-89; Holmes MP-83; MAC-10, MAC-11 and MAC-11 Carbine type; Intratec TEC-9 and Scorpion; Iver Johnson Enforcer model 3000; Ruger Mini-14/5F folding stock model only; Scarab Skorpion; SIG 57 AMT and 500 series; Spectre Auto Carbine and Auto Pistol; Springfield Armory BM59, SAR-48 and G-3; Sterling MK-6 and MK-7; Steyr AUG; Street Sweeper and Striker 12 revolving cylinder shotguns; USAS-12; UZI Carbine, Mini-Carbine and Pistol; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson "Linda" Pistol;
What a bizarre list! I wonder how many of those (highly specific) make/model are still in production.
Oh, wait! There's always the EEEVUL FEETCHER LIST:
(3) Any semiautomatic firearm not listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection that meets the following criteria:
(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following:
(i) A folding or telescoping stock;
(ii) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii) A bayonet mount;
(iv) A flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) A grenade launcher; or Looks like they ban ANY standard sport-utility rifle.
Correct, “select fire” on Line 1, second and third words.
Words mean things.
That does not describe any of the firearms in question. They were all, including the long gun, semi automatic. "Fully automatic" was not user selectable, as is the true definition of an "assault weapon."
“All of this is a red herring anyway since only 2 pistols were used at the school shooting, why the hell are we even discussing assault rifles?
You need to catch up with events before you post bo.
The Bushmaster was his main weapon.
There’s a lot of BS still surrounding the events but this is pretty conclusive.
Thanks to mediaots who mistook the cops finding the shotgun in the trunk, presuming it was an “assault rifle”.
Jeesh... read the next eight words already...
or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms...
Nope, just two semi-auto handguns....
In the presser last night, the top cop said that the children were shot with an AR-15, multiple times each. He said he used a handgun to shoot himself. I thought he also said that the AR-15 was found in the car. That makes no sense unless he ran out to his car after shooting the kids. Did anyone else hear this?
Yeah, didn’t read far enough through the source link. Looks like the Clinton ban criteria and they just kept it. Only one exception which is a ban version purchased before 1993 and registered before 1994. Great find! Will be interesting to learn if it was properly configured and registered.
The Medical Examiner said the bodies of the 7 or 8 children that he perfomed the autopsies on were killed with the .223 rounds, he said he couldn’t speak about the other that he did not examine.
Yeah that was what I heard too, but hell I guess whatever version garners the most support from the left for stricter gun control will be “the official story”
From the very beginning, they were issuing bogus reports.
The first one I heard was that he had been found with two handguns, and there were .223 shell casings nearby.
That one made me go “Huh???”
Then they reported the gun in the trunk.
Next it was reported he had a rifle inside with him.
I even heard a report that there were TWO MORE RIFLES AND A 12 GAUGE found somewhere in the vicinity...
Incompetent police work?
It’s already gotten to the point we will NEVER know for sure.
That part makes me darn suspicious...
Especially, AFAIK, there are no actual surviving witnesses to the shootings.
Can't you see where they're going to go with this? They'll argue this is all the more reason we need a federal AWB.
If it comes to light that she bought this rifle in a "gun friendly" state (under the table at a gun show perhaps) and transported it back home in violation of Connecticut law, gun-grabbers are going to have a field day with this information!
Not a good thing.
The video of the cops in the trunk show this weapon was clearly not an AR-15. Looks like a semi-auto shotgun of some sort.
I think from the ME's statements and the number of rounds fired, it's pretty obvious he used the Bushmaster during his rampage. And, in a sick, twisted way, it makes sense. If you were to go on a killing spree, would you leave your most effective weapon behind?
What do the cops who arrived on the scene say? I mean, there is quite a difference between a .223 casing and a 9mm casing, and casings from whatever weapon was used must have been littering the place if the reports are anywhere near accurate about the number of rounds fired.
But, then again, one would think that the ME must necessarily retain as forensic evidence the bullets removed from the bodies, and anyone with even a half-trained eye should be able to tell the difference between a .223 slug and a 9mm.
I think we’ll have to wait awhile before we get any real substantive facts about this heinous crime.
Yeah, to be honest I have 5 children aged 13 and younger this news story has not been on our televisions, the only info I collected was the few bits and pieces skipping through the channels and what I could web surfing from work on Friday. I hope I didn’t offend you in my initial post, the “we” I was referring to was the population in general and not “we” as in here at Free Republic.
The Bushmaster used in the massacre is probably not an assault weapon as defined under the 1994 ban -- but it looks like one to the uninformed. The problem with THAT is it's impossible to write a statute that outlaws black ugly guns as black ugly guns and so who knows what features they'll include. Letting politicians loose on a subject they're clueless about never has a good outcome. We may be back to shooting flintlock muskets before this is over.
They don't want to bring back the '94 Assault Weapons Ban. No, what they have in mind this time makes that look tame by comparison. Just as with the Health care Reform issue, they've had "think tanks" brewing this up for a decade now. And if passed, there will be no "sunset".
No problem, no offense taken.
Emotions are on overload for everybody.
My only two questions are “Are we getting the truth?”
The next obvious question is “If not, why not?”
The only answer to the second question is somebody is covering something up.
How about the conflicting reports on how he got inside the school? First, we hear that someone buzzed the shooter in. Later, the story is that he broke in.
Although the latter is more likely, I can see the story being massaged to prevent the school from seeming extremely negligent.
At the very least, the cops there did a lousy job of staying in control of the information flow.
The information behind the following might be interesting, if you haven’t already seen it.
Meant to say tyrants.