Connecticut pistol micro-stamping update
The Connecticut Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing yesterday concerning SB 353, an Act Concerning the Microstamping of Semiautomatic Pistols. Here is an update from the National Rifle Association.
A strong showing of law-abiding gun owners spoke loudly yesterday in Hartford at the hearing on Senate Bill 353, a bill which would ban the sale of all semi-automatic handguns not equipped with so-called “micro-stamping” technology.
Thank you to the hundreds of opponents of this proposal who took time from work and their busy lives to stand up and say “NO” to yet another misguided anti-gun bill.
Members of the Joint Committee on Judiciary must vote on SB353 by Friday, April 3 in order for the bill to advance.
Thank you again to all who have made their voices heard. If you haven’t yet done so, please be sure to contact your lawmakers and urge them to oppose SB353!
Contact information for the members of the [Judiciary] committee can be found here. Also, please contact your State Legislators and respectfully urge them to oppose SB353.
Contact information for your State Representative can be found by clicking here. Please click here to find contact information for your State Senator.
Maybe the feel-good legislators ought to have their skulls macro-stamped with "STUPID" and/or "EMPTY," since their legislative follies are far more dangerous to the country than the guns owned by honest, law abiding citizens for all legal purposes.
What a joke. I heard one of the advocates say the average criminal won't have the manual for the gun and doesn't know how to alter the right parts. Once their is an incentive, the average criminal will fire up google and learn how … not to mention that the "market" will provide alteration services.
Some 'gang bangers' don't even own guns – they "rent" them. Does anyone think the "leasing agents" won't figure out methods to get around this?
If this dog passes, I predict:
1) A surge in crimes committed with revolvers
2) A boom in gunsmith classes
3) The failure of this legislation to deter any crime.
4) The failure of the proponents of this measure to acknowledge its failure.
Ugh… I should proof read better… and by that I simply mean I should proof read:
"Once there is an incentive…"
Better – now the ghosts of my high school English teachers will leave me alone… At least for the rest of the day – or my next post.