CT Carry Law

Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
419
Likes
20
Location
--Maine--
Bucketduder, what i was referring to is that
Anything you do, has just become whatever it was but now has the stigma of "with a deadly weapon". This means that if you get into a fight, instead of assault, you now have assault with a deadly weapon (Sections 53a-59 through 53a-61 deal with the various levels of assault.) In addition, you can have Section 53a-216, Criminal Use of Firearm or Electronic Defense Weapon levied against you. This basically says if in the commission of a felony you use either of the above, you can be charged with this.

In addition, any use of self defense
a person is not justified in using physical force when (1) with intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, he provokes the person to use physical force, (2) use of such force was the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law, or (3) he is the initial aggressor (unless he withdraws from the encounter, effectively communicates this intent to the other person, and the other person continues to or threatens to use physical force)

This is what i was refering to when "you must make reasonable effort to avoid stressful situations. " It is your responsibility to not allow the situation to become stressful/escalated. Or stay out of it in the event that you encounter one.
 

buketduder

NES Member
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,082
Likes
189
Location
Florence Mass
Well is me saying "no, i will not give you my money" provoking him? .if someone threatens me harm or to rob me, i will do what i have to do to keep my life/property. It is up to the State to prove it was not self-defense..not up to me to prove it....i get your point though..but i am not running away and getting shot in the back...
 

buketduder

NES Member
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,082
Likes
189
Location
Florence Mass
CONNECTICUT-CRIMINAL LAW-DEFENSE OF PERSON OR PROPERTY AS JUSTIFICATION TO USE FORCE OR DEADLY FORCE

A person may not be convicted of a crime for using physical force or deadly physical force under certain circumstances. The person using the force has the burden of introducing testimony or other evidence to show that he or she was using force to defend himself, herself, or another person, or his or her premises, or other property under the circumstances established by the following statutes. Once he or she introduces this evidence, the state has the burden of disproving it beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 21, 2009
Messages
56
Likes
0
CONNECTICUT-CRIMINAL LAW-DEFENSE OF PERSON OR PROPERTY AS JUSTIFICATION TO USE FORCE OR DEADLY FORCE

A person may not be convicted of a crime for using physical force or deadly physical force under certain circumstances. The person using the force has the burden of introducing testimony or other evidence to show that he or she was using force to defend himself, herself, or another person, or his or her premises, or other property under the circumstances established by the following statutes. Once he or she introduces this evidence, the state has the burden of disproving it beyond a reasonable doubt.

I am the owner of the former CT Gun Laws.com site which has been quoted here numerous times (now ctgunlaws.net, i let the site drop, didn't know people were actually reading it)

A few things:
1. Where are you getting this information so I can review it?
2. The information in my site is based purely on my view of the law, that's why I have placed links to the actual laws so you can form your own opinions.
3. Connecticut is a "retreat first" state. In cases where it comes to property theft (IE carjacking, purse snatching, etc) if you can give up the property safely and retreat from the situation, you must.

CTGS 53a-21 said:
Sec. 53a-21. Use of physical force in defense of property. A person is justified in using reasonable physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent an attempt by such other person to commit larceny or criminal mischief involving property, or when and to the extent he reasonably believes such to be necessary to regain property which he reasonably believes to have been acquired by larceny within a reasonable time prior to the use of such force; but he may use deadly physical force under such circumstances only in defense of person as prescribed in section 53a-19.

Use of physical force means non-lethal means. So you can't pull a gun on someone trying to take your property unless you fit into the below GS as even the act of pulling your weapon is an intent to use deadly force.

CTGA 53a-19 said:
Sec. 53a-19. Use of physical force in defense of person. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, a person is justified in using reasonable physical force upon another person to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of physical force, and he may use such degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose; except that deadly physical force may not be used unless the actor reasonably believes that such other person is (1) using or about to use deadly physical force, or (2) inflicting or about to inflict great bodily harm.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if he or she knows that he or she can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety (1) by retreating, except that the actor shall not be required to retreat if he or she is in his or her dwelling, as defined in section 53a-100, or place of work and was not the initial aggressor, or if he or she is a peace officer or a special policeman appointed under section 29-18b or a private person assisting such peace officer or special policeman at his or her direction, and acting pursuant to section 53a-22, or (2) by surrendering possession of property to a person asserting a claim of right thereto, or (3) by complying with a demand that he or she abstain from performing an act which he or she is not obliged to perform.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, a person is not justified in using physical force when (1) with intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, he provokes the use of physical force by such other person, or (2) he is the initial aggressor, except that his use of physical force upon another person under such circumstances is justifiable if he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so, but such other person notwithstanding continues or threatens the use of physical force, or (3) the physical force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.

So as you can see, unless you are in your home or work place, you must retreat or give up the property to justify deadly force. This doesn't mean you can't punch the person and knock them out, but in order to justify pulling a gun on someone or even shooting them, you have the REASONABLY believe the actor is (or is about to) use deadly force or inflict great bodily harm to you or a third person.

Let's look at this reasonably. You're in your car, someone runs up to the window with a gun and demands the car. Do you give it up or shoot them? Yes, you can say there is a threat of deadly physical force here. BUT, who are you putting at risk now by using your weapon? Are there bystanders around? Other motorists? Remember, when you use your weapon you are liable for injuries both to the actor and those around you. If you shoot at the carjacker and miss and hit someone on the street, they will nail you to the wall. They will say, "You could have just given them the car and no shots would have been fired." ... now you and I know that is not true. There is no promise that the carjacker would not have shot you anyway. But in this state, you can assume the law will say he wouldn't have.

Now, my understanding of carry in CT is while it is not a "concealed carry" by law state, in most cases (especially populated areas), the police will not hesitate to arrest you. Part of this is due to lack of knowledge on the part of police (IE, if you ask a police officer if it is illegal to open carry they will tell you it is even though it is not), and part of this is an over zealous state police department that clearly does not want citizens to carry.

If you and research the arrests which pertain to people who accidentally exposed the gun or appearance of a gun, in most cases the charges are thrown out in court.

The state does need to step in and put a law on the books. If they want concealed carry, they to place a law in effect which states that. The use of other laws to further the agenda is an example of what's wrong with local laws in alot of places. The laws were not placed on the books so law enforcement and special interest state groups could bend them to further their agendas.

And an update on the website, I am going to put some time in over this summer updating the information.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 21, 2009
Messages
56
Likes
0
Forgot to add something; alot of what is on the site is what you COULD be charged with. It's taking the law, bending it to match the largest charges. This is what alot of prosecutors do prior to plea bargaining just so they can hit you with what you should have been charged with.

Ex: You are outside a car show, you are carrying, someone starts a fight with you. No one wants to be a witness for either you or the instigator. The instigator sees you have a gun and claims he felt threatened by it. That is a BS charge that can be levied against you now. They won't actually charge it since it will likely fall flat on it's face in court; but, they can use it and get you to plea down to assault or something stupid like that. Plea bargaining is a simple de-escolation of chargers. It's like selling a car for 2K over what it's worth and letting the person talk you down to what you really wanted to get for it.
 
Top Bottom