'Amnesty' Could be Granted for CT Gun Owners

Those who missed the Dec. 31, 2013 deadline to register "assault weapons" and large capacity magazine clips may have recourse, but it would take action from elected leaders in Hartford.

The capitol building in Hartford, CT. Credit: Patch File Photo
The capitol building in Hartford, CT. Credit: Patch File Photo
By Gary Jeanfaivre

There could be good news for Connecticut gun owners who missed the Dec. 31 deadline to register their assault weapons and large capacity magazine clips.

A senior state lawmaker has reportedly been in conversation with other legislators about the possibility of granting amnesty to gun owners who were unsuccessful in their last-ditch attempt to register.

The Hartford Courant reports that state Sen. John McKinney (R-28) penned a letter to the governor's office last week, asking them to process any registration forms that were postmarked Jan. 2. The reason behind his request, McKinney said, was because many residents attempted to send the forms on Dec. 31 but they were not mailed by the post office until after Jan. 1 due to the holiday.

The governor's office said that because of how the state's new gun law is written, it would require legislative action to be able to process any registration forms postmarked after Dec. 31.

Approximately 50,000 "assault weapons" were registered and about 40,000 residents declared their large capacity magazine clips by the Dec. 31 deadline, in accordance with the law thatGov. Dannel P. Malloy signed in May of last year. Those numbers are far lower than estimates the state received in a 2011 report from the Office of Legislative Research

"Based on Connecticut's percentage of National Instant Criminal Background Check System checks in the Unites States, NSSF estimated that the number of firearms owned by Connecticut residents is about three million. About one million of these firearms are handguns, of which 21%, or 231,000 use large capacity magazines. About 1.2 million are rifles, of which 30%, or 372,000 use large capacity magazines. Assuming four magazines owned for every firearm (assuming every firearm comes standard with at least two magazines), NSSF asserts there are over 2.4 million large capacity magazines in Connecticut that originated at the retail level. The NSSF final figure is larger than this because it counts firearms already in the state and those not purchased at the retail level."

Right now, those who did not register their weapons and ammunition have a few options, Michael Lawlor, Under Secretary for Criminal Justice and Policy Planning for Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, told the Courant:
  • render the firearm or magazine inoperable
  • sell it to a licensed gun dealer
  • remove it from the state
  • turn it over to law enforcement 
Brian C. Duffy January 29, 2014 at 06:23 PM
40,000 residents were able to make the deadline no problem. The ones that waited until Dec 31 are SOL and shouldn't own any guns due to stupidity. It reminds me of leaving the package store - beverages in bag -right at 8pm (when 8pm was law then) and the owner wouldn't let a procrastinator in. The guy storms away upset; the owner looks at me and says, "He had all day to get here."
Paul Bahre January 29, 2014 at 11:18 PM
No Brian registering amo clips is stupid beyond belief. No manufacturer's mark, no serial number all there is to say is that I have the number that I say I have. How do they know if someone has like one but put down 50 and they go to Alabama and buy 49 more? Gun registration is what they do in totalitarian countries. If I purchase a gun today and it's legal today it should be mine for ever and legal for me to own forever. The state does have a record of all my purchases since the original Brady bill. I"m just saying the State police have not been very forward with the People of CT and they are responsible for much of the convoluted gun control that came out of Hartford after Sandy Hook. The State police "weapon's expert" really tried her best to make all the guns look evil. If you bring in weapons experts never bring in a law enforcement officer, their are biased from the start. Just like if you want to increase the speed limits accross the state 20% you don't ask the state police what they think, that is already a forgone conclusion. State Police don't like the idea of citizen's being armed because it levels the field between them and the armed citizens and they like to be the only people on the street packing. If you bring in a weapons expert bring in noted experts that are not affiliated with gun manufactures but noted experts in the field of firearms, hopefully someone who has been published quite frequently. A neutral party if you will. The only thing we should ask of our state police is to maintain public safety and all that entails.
Brian C. Duffy January 30, 2014 at 05:21 PM
The main problem I have is the new gun laws don't go far enough. We need to have strict laws like in D.C…..total registration, no public conceal/open carry, most semi-autos banned. All require permits to possess for home defense only. Not surprisingly, CT's new laws were just upheld today by a Federal judge (Republican appointee) who cited the D.C. Heller case which resulted in the current laws in D.C. cited above. No word from the plaintiffs whether they plan to appeal further. The new laws are here to stay for better or worse.
Paul Bahre January 31, 2014 at 09:19 AM
Brian, you must love this Nanny State that we live in. The People's Republik of CT overrun by the same sort of socialist trash that has overrun DC city politics. I for one am for free choice and less government repression. So a federal judge ruled that DC was allowed to have draconian ordinances on the books so CT should be allowed to? Well the DC gun laws were struck down a couple of years ago and they had to start to issue gun permits. If you want to go live somewhere the state is overbearing move to Cuba or China or some other Socialist Hell hole... and enjoy but leave my USA a free country....
Brian C. Duffy January 31, 2014 at 05:10 PM
Paul, the 2008 SCOTUS Heller decision only struck down the total handgun ban. The other laws as mentioned in my prior post are current. Yes, they need to issue permits…for ALL firearms....to possess only in the home or owned business. No public carry and the D.C. police will inspect and determine if the model is on the permitted list. Google "D.C. current gun laws" and go to any site you choose that outlines the laws. You will not be happy. This is why you never hear Wayne Lapierre mention the Heller case.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »