Each state, in terms of a ‘ban’ state, may/will have its own variations of an ‘assault weapons’ ban.
In 2011, Connecticut Lawmaker Pushes First-in-Nation State Registry for Gun Offenders, whereas State Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney suggested ->”Gun-offender registry acts help combat gun violence by requiring proactive monitoring of gun offenders, which discourages them from re-offending.”
A suggestion that would have extended to those in possession, that failed to turn in, not only the offending ‘gun’ but any accessories that are ‘banned’… i.e. magazines over the 10rd limit.
That attempt failed but sent the message, in 2-2011.
From 4/2011 via courant regarding S.B. 1094, actually two posts regarding the bill, State Gun Bill Dies In Committee and Bill Banning Large-Capacity Ammo Magazines Left Off Committee Agenda, directly highlights above note regarding possession/felony:
“HARTFORD — — It was one of the most controversial proposals raised at the Capitol this legislative session.
But a gun bill that would have made it illegal to own large-capacity ammunition magazines — those capable of firing 10 rounds or more — never even came up for a vote.
The bill brought hundreds of gun owners to the Capitol last month.
“Over 200 people from all walks of life came and testified against it, and I think they made their case,” Sen. John Kissel, the ranking Republican on the judiciary committee, said Friday.
The panel’s failure to vote on the bill by its Friday deadline means it is “basically dead,” Kissel said, although, as with any proposal, it could be resurrected as an amendment before the House or Senate.
Opponents said the measure was a legislative overreaction to the Jan. 8 shootings in Arizona that killed six and critically injured U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Police said the alleged shooter, Jared Loughner, used a 33-round magazine.
A handful of states limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds, but the Connecticut bill would have gone further. It would have banned the future sale of large-capacity magazines and required anyone in possession of one or more to turn them over to local or state police within 90 days of the law’s taking effect. Failure to do so could have resulted in a felony charge.
Several gun owners said such provisions would constitute an illegal taking of their property and likely would have been ruled unconstitutional by the courts. The proposal, they added, would have hurt law-abiding gun owners while doing nothing to deter crime.
To Kissel, the committee’s decision to let the proposal die proves that public opinion can affect public policy. “We’re always open to listening to our constituents,” he said. “When over 200 people are willing to spend 12 hours at a public hearing, it has a huge impact.”
Obviously, they were mad about law abiding citizens defending their 2nd amendment with their 1st amendment. Shocking…
But, there’s more-> Who Needs 30 Bullets? posted 3/28/2011
and reads premeditatedly: “ The bill received its public hearing by the Judiciary Committee Wednesday. It would make it illegal in Connecticut to own ammunition clips capable of holding 10 rounds or more — some hold more than 30 — and would require anyone in possession of one or more to turn them over to the police within 90 days of the law’s taking effect.
As three of Connecticut’s big-city mayors — Pedro Segarra of Hartford, John DeStefano of New Haven and Bill Finch of Bridgeport — said in a letter to the Judiciary Committee: “Large-capacity ammunition magazines are designed to enable shooting mass numbers of people quickly and efficiently without reloading.
An inconvenience. That’s a small price to pay for saving lives.””
Most trial lawyers would have the rope by now… but…
Jim Gardner interviewed POTUS Obama right before the incident, in 12/2012 at the white house, this link http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/pm-note-rice-withdraws-sandy-aid-headed-to-space-boehner-and-obama-meeting/ reflects that, dated 12/13/2012.
And in the this video around 15:35 in old Jim verifies that he spoke about ‘gun violence’ and ‘doing something’……. just before the incident happened…….
Connecticut is famously home of Colt and thousands of [former] jobs in the firearm industry.
So how would anti-constitutional Full Soviet ‘citizens’ take out two birds [jobs and self-defense]?
False Flag, for an unified objective against law-abiding citizens that was amplified by elected politicians, fake charities and actors => Domestic Terrorism.
And what happened after Sandy Hook?
hint-> months later, two years after their initial failure, April 04, 2013 Governor Signs Historic Gun Bill
“Legislative leaders who negotiated the bipartisan compromise bill said it was their toughest-in-the-nation response to the shooting deaths of 20 first-graders and six women on Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown.
“This is a profoundly emotional day, I think, for everyone in this room and everyone watching what is transpiring today in the state of Connecticut,” Malloy said before sitting down at a table and signing the bill, bit by bit, with a succession of pens that were then passed to Newtown family members and lawmakers as souvenirs of the historic moment.
“We have come together in a way that relatively few places in our nation have demonstrated an ability to do,” Malloy said. “In some senses, I hope that this is an example to the rest of the nation – certainly to our leaders in Washington, who seem so deeply divided about an issue such as universal background checks, where the country is not divided itself.”
“When 92 percent of Americans agree that every gun sale should be subject to a background check” – as provided in the new Connecticut law, but not in federal law – “then there’s no excuse for representatives or senators who don’t come to the assistance of those that they are elected to represent,” Malloy said.”
And don’t forget this giblit -> Obama: ‘We Must Change’
No ‘conspiracy’ to commit treason/sedition…… here………
The achieved goal in further degrading the 2nd amendment, nationwide, not just in Connect-i-cut…. Where even before 9/11, they were banning bullet types and…… ‘assault weapons’ again…..
Whilst you are researching, have a look at all the other bills proposal a year prior in 2011 -> https://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/JUDdata/ca/2011ca-00415-R001000JUD-ca.htm
You’ll notice a few things that ‘rhyme’….