Written Testimony Submitted Today

I entered written testimony today to the CT General Assembly (CGA) for three bills. In opposition to HB 6667 and HB 6816, and in support of HB 6817. Click on the link called "Raised Bill [doc]" for the bill PDF in it's entirety.

HB 6667 Testimony

                                                   Oppose HB6667

My name is XXXXX XXXXX, and I have been involved with civilian firearms ownership since 1980. I also served in the U.S. Army from 1981 to 1987 earning my “EXPERT” marksmanship badge with the M16. I have held my CT state pistol permit since 1983 right after turning 21. I have competed in many firearms events in both rifle and pistol. I load my own pistol and rifle ammunition using standardized recipes and have developed and tested my own. I perform my own basic gunsmithing, fabrication, modification, and repairs. I have introduced and instructed many “firearms curious” individuals to their first firearms experience as well as an introduction to reloading while stressing safety at all times. I belong to the N.R.A., The CT Citizen’s Defense League, XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX Club, The Garand Collector’s Association, and am an authorized purchaser through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. I consider myself to have more firearm experience than the average firearm owner, and certainly more experience than the majority of members of the CT General Assembly, Administration, state bureaucrats, and sadly to say from experience, most law enforcement.
 

The U.S. Constitution; Second Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
 

Constitution of the State of Connecticut; Article First, Section 15
Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.
 

Neither of these statements confer any right to arms, but instead exist to PREVENT government from denying a right to be armed. These rights come from God the Almighty to Americans by birth, not granted by any government entity. That would be called a “privilege” not a right. They also serve to remind those in government that passing ANY gun-control is a blatant violation of their “Oath of Office.”
 

The pro-civilian firearm disarmament element in the state government are once again targeting the peaceable gun owners of the state, this time by apparently attempting to circumvent the recent SCOTUS decision in NYSR&PA vs Bruen and restrict the carrying and ownership of firearms for non-criminal purposes.
 

I was going to go point by point why I oppose this legislation, but the entire document is absolute garbage and MUST BE OPPOSED. Any legislator that values The U.S. Constitution, The Connecticut Constitution, and the freedoms valued by the residents of Connecticut should also oppose this entire bill.

HB 6816 Testimony

                                                   Oppose HB6816

My name is XXXXX XXXXX, and I have been involved with civilian firearms ownership since 1980. I also served in the U.S. Army from 1981 to 1987 earning my “EXPERT” marksmanship badge with the M16. I have held my CT state pistol permit since 1983 right after turning 21. I have competed in many firearms events in both rifle and pistol. I load my own pistol and rifle ammunition using standardized recipes and have developed and tested my own. I perform my own basic gunsmithing, fabrication, modification, and repairs. I have introduced and instructed many “firearms curious” individuals to their first firearms experience as well as an introduction to reloading while stressing safety at all times. I belong to the N.R.A., The CT Citizen’s Defense League, XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX Club, The Garand Collector’s Association, and am an authorized purchaser through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. I consider myself to have more firearm experience than the average firearm owner, and certainly more experience than the majority of members of the CT General Assembly, Administration, state bureaucrats, and sadly to say from experience, most law enforcement.
 

The U.S. Constitution; Second Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
 

Constitution of the State of Connecticut; Article First, Section 15
Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.

The pro-civilian firearm disarmament element in the state government are once again targeting the peaceable gun owners of the state, this time by creating a law that:

1). Relies on junk science to infringe on the rights of the peaceable gun owners of the state of Connecticut. This junk science relies on technology that only works in theory and IF it were to be implemented would be easily defeated in seconds with a simple file. It will accomplish nothing but limit the supply of brand new firearms to the non-criminal peaceable citizen, which purchases those firearms from licensed dealers, which I believe is the intended purpose. The criminal will not be affected one bit since they buy stolen and black market arms unabated.

2). The juvenile criminal element that decides to use a firearm in the commission of a crime does not and cannot purchase their ammunition from a retail outlet. Raising the age to purchase ammunition from 18 to 21 simply is another infringement against the peaceable citizens as defined in the U.S. and Connecticut Constitutions, since ammunition and magazines are as much an “arm” as intended by our Founding Fathers.

3). Restricting the mere possession of body armor is another infringement against the peaceable citizen. An arm can be strictly defensive as well as offensive. Modern body armor is as much an “arm” as a knight’s shield and armor were. Allowing government personnel to have such defensive protection and remove it from the citizens proves once again the distrust CT state government has for its citizens. The sale, transfer and possession of body armor should be completely unrestricted. 

HB 6817 Testimony

                                                   Support of HB6817

My name is XXXXX XXXXX, and I have been involved with civilian firearms ownership since 1980. I also served in the U.S. Army from 1981 to 1987 earning my “EXPERT” marksmanship badge with the M16. I have held my CT state pistol permit since 1983 right after turning 21. I have competed in many firearms events in both rifle and pistol. I load my own pistol and rifle ammunition using standardized recipes and have developed and tested my own. I perform my own basic gunsmithing, fabrication, modification, and repairs. I have introduced and instructed many “firearms curious” individuals to their first firearms experience as well as an introduction to reloading while stressing safety at all times. I belong to the N.R.A., The CT Citizen’s Defense League, XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX Club, The Garand Collector’s Association, and am an authorized purchaser through the Civilian Marksmanship Program. I consider myself to have more firearm experience than the average firearm owner, and certainly more experience than the majority of members of the CT General Assembly, Administration, state bureaucrats, and sadly to say from experience, most law enforcement.
 

The U.S. Constitution; Second Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
 

Constitution of the State of Connecticut; Article First, Section 15
Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.
 

Neither of these statements confer any right to arms, but instead exist to PREVENT government from denying a right to be armed. These rights come from God the Almighty to Americans by birth, not granted by any government entity. That would be called a “privilege” not a right. They also serve to remind those in government that passing ANY gun-control is a blatant violation of their “Oath of Office.”

I am writing to provide my support for HB6817, which according to the text of the bill, clarifies and corrects many infringements imposed over the decades in the state that directly affect only the peaceable citizen and their God-Given Right to personal self-defense, like in state parks and forests. It also would allow those peaceable citizens that hold a carry permit from their home state, to no longer become an instant criminal for doing nothing more than by crossing an imaginary line at the state border. Just like a driver’s license, they would be expected to be held to our state’s laws. The most important point for me is #12 to establish a Castle Doctrine. Having to retreat in the face of a violent criminal is never something any citizen should have to do, and the violent criminals running rampant in our state should become acutely aware that their lives may be forfeit in the commission of a crime.