We’re experimenting with audio to make good quality recording, but lower the bit rate. This episode is 1/3 the last episodes file size for a similar amount of time. Comment below and let us know how it works out for you.
So, I sat at the legislature as our fate and rights were being whittled away in Hartford. I was actually reading the new bill and saw all the “new” items that will end up being called “assault weapons”. I got to thinking, I haven’t requested my inventory/registry record in some time, I should check. Sure enough, there are discrepancies. Then, I talk to a few others who decided to do the same and yep, even more errors.
My argument for getting your records checked is based on media reports over the last few weeks. A few times, people have had firearms temporarily confiscated by the state only to have some end up “missing” upon return. Come to find out, they are told they are “assault weapons” and can’t be returned. That, is a whole ‘nother discussion. That being said, I want to make sure my neck isn’t “in the noose” for something someone else does with a firearm I used to own. The chances of that are VERY rare. However, if I sold a firearm, I don’t want my doors getting kicked in after something else happens “down the road”.
I had called the state in the past for a copy of my inventory. They used to mail it to the address on record. They will not do this any longer. The “Special Licensing Firearms Unit” require a notarized request. I developed a letter to help everyone get copies of their inventory/registry. I’m more concerned with what I no longer have, than what I do have.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation today filed suit in federal court for the District of Connecticut alleging that Gov. Dannel Malloy and the leadership of the Connecticut General Assembly misused the so-called “emergency certification” exception to circumvent the safeguards of the normal legislative process and in violation of Connecticut statutory law in order to pass Senate Bill 1160, a package of strict gun-control regulations.
The suit further alleges that enactment of the new law violates fundamental due process rights guaranteed by both the Connecticut and United States Constitutions. NSSF is asking the court to declare the law invalid and issue an injunction prohibiting its enforcement.
“A 139-page bill was assembled behind closed doors, bypassing both the public hearing and committee processes, and quickly sent to floor votes on the same day in both the House and Senate where legislators did not have adequate time to even read the bill. The governor then signed the package into law the next day. All of this is in violation of guarantees citizens are supposed to have under Connecticut State Statutes and protections in our State and U.S. Constitutions for which our forefathers fought,” said Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel, NSSF. “Our suit focuses on this abuse of process that has resulted in enacted law that does nothing to improve public safety, while resulting in adverse effects on law-abiding citizens, manufacturers, retailers and sportsmen’s organizations.”
Remember, January 1st is a holiday and the two weeks before that are absolute madness to make the deadline. If you plan on sending the paperwork in, make sure you plan ahead enough (two weeks or so) and send it certified return receipt requested and follow up to make sure.
Sorry for the delay… dug up some of my old gear to make recording easier, and well….. the software didn’t want to cooperate. Heck, I even had this done a few days ago. Suffice it to say, it is here, but the audio conversion is a bit “funky” to say the least. I had to change the audio to a variable bit rate in order for the MP3 to record. Otherwise, the normal format sounded like I was talking under water! I’ll have this fixed soon.
Because of all the news, changes, laws and new forms, I’ll add another podcast later this week. It’s been busy and I have a lot to report.
CT Gun Laws – Updated
The legislative session is over, but not before a little more damage……. and some minor correction. Regarding the new laws, here is what you need to read:
I keep getting this all the time from my non-shooting friends “why are you against a universal background check”….. right next to the idiotic “if it saves just one life”, but I digress….
California already has a similar system that the anti-gun community want to use as a national model called “APPS”, Armed and Prohibited Person System”. A system designed to cross reference gun owners and those prohibited persons. Sounds like a grand idea, right?
Umm…. no. It is based on the premise that a prohibited person, usually a criminal, will buy a legal gun. Common sense dictates the flaw in that logic. Many people (I’d go so far as to say the majority based on my research) would be on that list for reasons that have nothing to do with mental health or criminality. I can see several categories of people ending up on this list, including:
Those that take sleep medication (already in issue in New York and permit revocations in CT).
Voluntary check-ins at hospitals for various conditions like anxiety (like in this video below).
Sharing an address with someone who is deemed a “prohibited person”.
Flawed information in either of the two lists.
Military personnel “decompressing” when they return home, PTSD (which ironically, doesn’t prevent you from serving in another active duty tour in a combat role).
Data gathering by physicians with an anti-firearms bias (intake forms).
and much more
I’ve seen and researched far too much to see the issues with this type of program.. The problem with the “if it saves one life” argument, it often costs a life as well when a firearm is taken away from someone who needs it, and now doesn’t have it.
CT’s new legislation, SB 1160 has a lot of new reporting criteria which is the first (and HUGE) step towards this system. I expect to see more expansion on this in future legislation. This is why litigation, such as the lawsuit being headed by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL), is so important.
Below is a video put out by the NRA. Notice the former DOJ agent’s comments about the prosecutions from this program (let alone the cost – TO JUST CALIFORNIA!).
We have had A LOT of changes this session. Below is a bunch of information to get you started. Keep in mind, I believe if you own a gun, you should also have an attorney. The couple hundred bucks you pay up front can save you tens of thousands down the road.
Our state legislature has an “Office of Legislative Research” (OLR) which breaks the law down here. Mind you, this is a rough idea and you should still discuss with your attorney.
Because it was loaded with mistakes, they decided to fix it with more mistakes. This is the amendment that was passed to fix some portions of the new law. Many provisions of the new law took effect upon signage, others take effect at various months up to January 1st, 2014.
My suggestion would be to read the OLR summaries first. They will give you a general idea of what was in the actual bill and the amendments that passed. Then, look up what applies to you (though I suggest giving it a full reading at least once). I may suggest, one sitting for this is a bit much. Pace yourself. Make a list of all the questions you may have, then find yourself an attorney who can answer these questions for you.
As a bonus, since this is one of the biggest topics since passage. Assault weapons ban (AWB) does exist and was added to here in CT. In fact, the term “assault weapon” is a misnomer. The majority of these firearms are semi-automatic rifles. Technology that is over 100 years old. The legislature, essentially, banned many firearms simply because they were black and look scary (to them). They also made it much more difficult for people with disabilities to shoot various rifles as many of these had adjustable features. Here is a link to a summary of the AWB portion of the law.