NSSF is the trade association for America's firearms industry.
Our mission: To promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports.
NSSF is the trade association for America's firearms industry.
It's mission: To promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports.
Search NSSF

Connecticut Bill Introduced to Ban Possession of All Magazines Over 10 Rounds

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.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 Responses to “Connecticut Bill Introduced to Ban Possession of All Magazines Over 10 Rounds”

  1. Walter

    At least the Senator who introduced the bill is appropriately named; Looney….obviously a knee jerk reaction to the Arizona tragedy and the perfect storm for anti-gun legislators to score hits against the 2nd amendment. I’ve emailed the Judiciary Committee members twice; the first time on Feb 2nd when they were ‘discussing’ the possibility of introducing this bill and then today, urging their NO vote to RBN 1094. The first email garnered one response from a member who was ‘inclined not to support’ the legislation, only one. I don’t expect to hear from anyone this time around…..

  2. Mike N

    Sadly I did the same with the same results. I’m no lawyer but I believe this is unconstitutional on it’s face because it is an “EX Post Facto” law.

    If this passes I am not sure what I will do with my magazines. All gun owners and anyone that believes in freedom must oppose this abomination!

  3. Anonymous

    Since when are ex post facto laws legal under the Constitution?

    Or is this another case where “progressives” aren’t bound by the same laws everyone else is.

  4. Dave

    Time to call for a total boycott of Conn.

  5. Mike N

    I would love to boycott this state. But being born, raised and making my home here I really don’t have that choice. I fear for our future because the apathetic masses keep sending the same clowns to Hartford and Washington that created this sorry state of affairs to begin with.

    I can’t understand given the 2 amendment and the State constitutional protection of gun rights how any foolish gun control ever passed and allowed to be enforced in the first place.

  6. David

    I’m reading this from Missouri. Wish you all good luck to stop the idiocracy of the 10 round clip ban. Write, email and phone your reps. It will help. Good luck to you all! Citizens of Missouri suppoprt you!

  7. Connecticut Car Rates

    How are they going to collect them? It seems as though most owners are going to be reluctant to come forward.

  8. Walter

    You might be interested in seeing responses to my email I sent the Judiciary Committee and our three representatives in D.C.;
    Rosa DeLauro;
    Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing your views on this important issue.

    I am a firm supporter of our Second Amendment rights as Americans. The manufacturing and use of firearms has a special place in Connecticut’s history and, with this in mind, I oppose legislation that infringes upon a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms. Gun regulations that I support are common-sense safety measures that will help keep our families safe and help take guns away from criminals.

    I believe that the tragedy that happened in Arizona earlier this year has made it clear that we must put in place reasonable laws that protect Second Amendment rights while also doing more to ensure the safety of our families, friends, and communities. You should know that I am a cosponsor of the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act introduced by Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York. This legislation would bring the nation to the same 10-round-maximum standard of ammunition that is used in four other states today, as well as nationwide for a decade while the previous federal assault weapons ban was in effect. This legislation has been referred to the Judiciary Committee.

    You can be sure that I will continue to keep your views in mind as Congress considers legislation that may affect Second Amendment rights. I believe that Congress has an obligation to examine ways to improve gun laws while also ensuring that they do not violate Constitutional rights.

    Thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future with your concerns on this issue or any other matter.

    Rosa L. DeLauro
    Member of Congress
    Richard Blumenthal;
    Thank you for your thoughtful note regarding gun control legislation. I appreciate hearing from you.

    I support the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear firearms, as protected under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. I have consistently said that the Second Amendment, as well as the Constitution of the State of Connecticut, secures for individuals a fundamental, constitutional right to bear arms.

    In considering any proposed gun safety measures, which can take a variety of forms, I must be mindful that the Supreme Court has ruled that any regulations on firearms must be narrowly drawn and carefully drafted to pass this constitutional test.

    As your Senator, I am pleased to serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over gun control issues.

    As I have the opportunity to consider any gun safety legislation, I will strongly consider the opinions of law enforcement professionals, as well as other concerned citizens, and will always weigh such proposals with regard to their constitutionality and their effect on public safety and security. And I will be sure to keep your views in mind as well.

    Thank you again for your message. Please feel free to contact me in the future with any additional questions or concerns.


    Richard Blumenthal
    United States Senator

    Sen. Jason Welch;
    Thank you for voicing your concern. Government needs to stop overreacting to tragic situations and drawing arbitrary lines that infringe upon personal liberties and rights but do not address true problems.
    I will oppose the proposed ban and further restrictions.
    Sen. Jason C. Welch

    Sen. Gayle Slossberg;
    Thank you for taking the time to write and express your concerns about Senate Bill 1094 An Act Banning Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines. I always appreciate the opportunity to learn how you feel about matters before the legislature. As you know, SB 1094 proposes to outlaw the possession of any firearm with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition.

    I am very sensitive to the fact that this bill has been proposed in reaction to a frightening escalation in gun violence, both nationally and in our neighboring communities. I find this trend very disturbing and strive to make well-researched policy decisions that will effectively curb gun violence. At this time, I am reviewing the facts, case studies, and research to determine whether such a ban would accomplish this, or simply cause a nuisance for the responsible, law abiding gun-owners I represent. I will certainly keep your view in mind when deliberating on this matter. Please know that I have no interest in supporting any measures that make baseless, sweeping restrictions on your Constitutional right to bear arms.

    I hope this addresses your concerns. Again, thank you for taking the time to reach out to my office about this matter. Please do not hesitate to follow up should you have additional thoughts or concerns about this, or any other matter.

    With Warm Regards,
    Senator Gayle Slossberg

    Senator Gayle Slossberg
    14th Senate District
    Milford, Orange, West Haven

  9. Flynjump

    I received the exat same reply from Sen. Blumenthal, not that I expected anything different. I will continue to contact our “so called” leaders and urge them to defeat this unconstitutional bill.

  10. Palma

    Interesting piece. It can be difficult.Really great to finally find a blog I can relate to. Just my kind of thing.