Connecticut residents looking to buy a handgun for self-defense (or other lawful purposes) may soon find their options limited, thanks to a bill introduced by Gov. Ned Lamont on Thursday.
Governor’s Bill 5043 looks to prohibit the manufacture and sale of “convertible pistols.” Much like the California law that has widely been drescribed as a Glock ban, Lamont’s legislation defines a “convertible pistol” as “any semiautomatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted by hand or with a common household tool into a machine gun solely by the installation or attachment of a pistol converter… whether or not there is a notch at the rear of the pistol frame.”
Not long after California introduced its legislation, Glock announced that it was making some fundamental changes to the design of their pistols. While the company didn’t say the changes were tied to California’s law or the ongoing lawsuits brought by cities like Chicago and Baltimore (working hand-in-hand with the gun control lobby), it’s widely believed that the changes were made to avoid litigation and legislation that could result in a ban on their products.
But the new “V” series still has a cruciform trigger bar, and there have been reports that even with the redesign illegal auto-sears or switches can still be installed to convert the semi-automatic pistol into a full-auto machine pistol. It’s possible, then, that Lamont’s bill wouldn’t just ban the sale of previous generations of Glocks and other pistols based on Glock’s design, but would keep the “V” series from being sold in Connecticut as well.
As written, the bill would take effect on July 1 of this year, and any “individual or any firm, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association or other similar entity that, within this state, distributes, transports or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, any convertible pistol” would be guilty of a Class D felony punishable by up to five years in prison and/or a $5,000 fine.
Like every other gun control bill, Lamont’s legislation would exempt law enforcement and the military, but the average Connecticut gun owner would be cut off from access to one of the most popular lines of handguns in the country.
Shortly after California’s law took effect the National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Second Amendment Foundation filed a federal lawsuit challenging the new statute. In their complaint, the groups (and two individual plaintiffs) argue that the law violates the right to possess and to acquire “weapons that are in common use.”
That is flagrantly unconstitutional. Heller itself held that “the handgun[is] the quintessential self-defense weapon” and “the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home.” As such, it necessarily follows that a ban on the sale of a particular type of popular handgun is unconstitutional.
California already bans many handgun models targeted by this law. This Court has held that these restrictions are likely unconstitutional because these handguns are “in common use.
Undeterred, the State is now expanding its ban on “popular handguns designed for self-defense.” Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court declare this expansion is no more constitutional than the original ban and enjoin § 27595(a)’s enforcement.
Jaymes v. Bonta is still in the early stages of litigation, and any trial is still months away. Lamont’s bill will almost certainly face a similar challenge if it becomes law, but unless plaintiffs are able to obtain an injunction Glocks and other striker-fired pistols could soon be yanked from the market in Connecticut.
We’ll be talking more about this bill with Connecticut Citizens Defense League president Holly Sullivan on Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co next week, but Connecticut gun owners and Second Amendment supporters should be reaching out to their legislators now and urging them to reject Lamont’s asinine legislation. It’s already illegal to possess an auto-sear, and its a crime to install one on a semi-automatic pistol as well. Banning the firearm itself makes as much sense as banning cars that can go over the speed limit, and that’s without even getting into the constitutional considerations of prohibiting the sale of arms that are in common use just because a small number of criminals are illegally converting them for nefarious purposes.
Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here
