Connecticut’s most wide-ranging gun control measure since the 2013 law enacted after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting takes effect Sunday, with proponents vowing to pursue more gun legislation despite legal challenges happening across the country.

The new law, signed by Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont in June, bans the open carrying of firearms and prohibits the sale of more than three handguns within 30 days to any one person, with some exceptions for instructors and others.

“We will not take a break and we cannot stop now, and we will continue to pass life-saving laws until we end gun violence in Connecticut. Our lives depend on it,” said Jeremy Stein, executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence.

  • TurnItOff_OnAgain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am a gun guy and I feel like these are fine restrictions. There is no need to open carry, and 3 handguns in a month is strange.

    • clif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I instantly distrust anyone I see open carrying in public. Hunting or on the farm? Sure, makes sense. In the grocery store…ehhh.

      The weekend after it became legal here I saw a guy in cut off jean shorts+beater tank with a 22LR Beretta Neo in a drop leg holster at a local diner. I can only assume he’s an elite operator.

      • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The only people who carry in public are cowards. It is that simple.

        They are people who are too scared to venture out in public without a gun, and those are the people most likely to use them when unnecessary.

        • Iamdanno@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think some of them are wannabe heroes. They think they are going to heroically stop a crime, when they are more likely to kill an innocent bystander or themself.

        • Maeve@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are surprisingly many people who cc in public, legally or not. Pressed to choose, I would prefer to deal with cc, because open carry is easier for a rando to take it, plus oc in my particular area are larpers and nervous Nelly/ showoff types which are, in my experience more dangerous than the average gang member at the corner store buying a beer and lotto. That said, I’m rural so I’m not sure how that changes in met areas.

          • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m fine with concealed carry, especially because it makes it easier to point out that they knew the proper way to handle the situation.

            I do think we need a more conservative teaching style about using Force though.

            Conservative as in holding back when using firearms.

            • Maeve@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m in full agreement with you, especially in conservatism. I blame Dan Abrams and Hollywood, glorification of excessive force. And I think Larry Flynt called this one.

    • CaptainProton@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well you only need one for a mass shooting, and carry bans aren’t going to stop you if you’re about to fucking murder a bunch of innocent strangers, so what problem is this solving exactly?

    • crashoverride@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      3 guns in 6 months/ a year is strange. How can you not foresee, within a year time, that you’d need a gun, for any purpose?

      • holycrapwtfatheism@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ehh while perhaps not popular amongst this crowd there’s also collectors. I’ve bought and traded more than 3 in that timespan as collectibles/trade options for a sale or some such. Not everything is for nefarious reasons.

        • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah. Maybe something you wanted just popped up on sale. Collectors, target shooters, hunters… Plenty of legitimate reasons.

          • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            As i said to someone else, I am talking about those people who won’t ho out the door with one.

            I like guns, I have guns, I don’t carry my guns for no reason.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is an exception for antiques so you can buy your flintlocks to your heart’s content.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is an exception for antiques so you can buy your flintlocks to your heart’s content.

        • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Collector’s get a pass, I have guns and use them for hunting.

          I’m talking about the dudes that can’t walk out the door without a pistol on.

  • nezrock@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    This law is going to be struck down as unconstitutional almost immediately.

    If they’re going to ban open carry, they need to remove all fees and procedures (prints, etc) for obtaining a concealed carry permit. Otherwise, it only serves to disenfranchise poorer people.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Odd that it could be struck down as unconstitutional since CT banned open carry when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were passed.

      Edit: It was actually Rhode Island that did although Connecticut did pass gun control measures in the early 1800s.

      • nezrock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The right to bear arms for self defense is in enshrined in the Connecticut Constitution, with no explicit or implied exceptions.

        The US Supreme Court ruled last year, that, quote, “Americans have a constitutional right to carry a firearm in public places, arguing that a century-old New York law requiring a ‘proper cause’ to carry a gun outside of the home is a violation of Second Amendment rights.”

        That case they ruled on is from when New York tried to do the same thing (setting a precedent).

        The law is in outright defiance of the latest Supreme Court interpretation, and the Connecticut Constitution.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Let’s not pretend the Supreme Court gives a shit about precedent even if it is recent. Conservatives killed that idea.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m confused. Don’t these restrictions do nothing to stop mass shootings? Open carry is for intimidation. Most mass shooters don’t use handguns, they use rifles.

    So what are these restrictions for?

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Firearm crimes are most commonly committed with handguns. Banning open carry opens up a “See something, say something” attitude if you see someone with a gun.

      I don’t know that banning open carry is necessarily a good idea, but banning the sale of more than 3 handguns in 30 days sounds reasonable.

      • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, it says so much about America that this is “sweeping legislation.” It says so much more about America that this will be challenged and likely overturned.