No more colts sold or made in ct

[CTarNUT]

So i have been watching the hearings all day about sb 603 and 607 proposed by Sen Martin Looney. (the name says it all) This bill would require microstamping of ammo and the latter bill would require microstamping on the firing pin and breech face as to imprint the case with a number identifying the gun to the case. The first bill would in fact ban ammo in ct as the manufacturers said they would abandon sale in ct. I have to say the pro gunners testifying outnumbered the anti's about 5:1. All the local maufacturers were present to testify. The most intersting testimony was colt's with a promise from the ceo to no longer sell their product in ct and seriously consider relocating the comany outside of the state. I think everone is gunna shoot down the ammo bill because that was the vibe from even the dems on the comittee. I was proud to see so many average joes up there testifying against the bill. Unfortunately the dems on the commitee seemed to have had their mind made up before anyone spoke. The simple fact is that even if it is a good tool to LEO's the technology is not proven or even feasable in production. The comissioner of the Department Of Public safety even testified opposing the bill. All i can say is call your rep and senator and scream like hell. Im so mad right now at how the elected officials ignore the people and push the gun grabbing agenda. This is just a backdoor gun ban on new guns because instead of trying to comply the manufacturers will just abandon the small ct market.

 

[IrishIron]

I was there testifying as well.

We had a great turnout from the industry and spoke specifically about the business implications. My feelings are exactly the same as yours. They have their mind made up on it. Continuing to make noise will help.

Bullet serialization is not going anywhere but microstamping will come out of that committee.

 

[CTarNUT]

The comitte members were asking the most loaded questions and anyone can see that this is not about preventing crime but rather trying to get rid of guns. If they can require a technology that essentially doesnt exist in practical use, they have outlawed guns.

 

[clinotus]

I'm reading online that Colt put out more of a smack down that you posted. Will be good to see if the state has an internal battle to resolve the issue rather than the hearing its. But that I mean the state splits among the fighters for the revenue the state derives from Colt vs. the idiots who want to press their issue forward and loose Colt.

Also, the best point was the guy who stated that the AWB caused him to lose his job. A+

Good luck guys.

 

[KimberCT]

I'm reading online that Colt put out more of a smack down that you posted.

Is there a transcript posted somewhere? I'd like to read it.

 

[clinotus]

Is there a transcript posted somewhere? I'd like to read it.

You can read some of the play by play here: Arfcom Thread

The transcripts should be available 9 days from now here: Connecticut General Assembly Judiciary Transcripts.

 

[Secesh]

I think NH would be quite happy to have Colt relocate up here.

 

[CTarNUT]

I think NH would be quite happy to have Colt relocate up here.

Im sure they would but the point is that the lawmakers should consider the concequences of their actions on all aspects of the people they allegedly represent and claim to be looking out for

 

[gene]

Im sure they would but the point is that the lawmakers should consider the concequences of their actions on all aspects of the people they allegedly represent and claim to be looking out for

When did that come back into fashion?

 

[CTarNUT]

When did that come back into fashion?

It is clear that personal agendas are more important than the overwhelming public outcry. Its just another case of the lawmakers saying that we are not smart enough to know what is good for us. We are obviously a danger to ourselves and everyone around us. My signature says it all. This is a clear case of what Ben was talking about. I would rather live freely in fear than have security in a cage.

 

[M14Robert]

The whole shooting industry should threaten a boycott on CT like STI and Barrett did in CA.
No ammo to LEO (state and fed gov) or civilians.
No support of LEO firearms (state and fed gov) as well.
Give all the badge holders an asp or baton ONLY and see what happens.

 

[Chris]

I got to talk to the Ruger Rep and the NSSF rep at the GOAL Annual Meeting. One of the questions I posed was how they felt about the various laws that have been enacted and specifically how Ronnie Barrett replied to California.

The NSSF rep wished that more companies could do what Ronnie did. Unfortunately, the margin in the industry is so small that the loss of any sized market is tough to handle.

So I asked about the various manufacturers that won't comply with the MA law. His reply was that if the law was set in stone it would be easy, but the history of the AG has been such that you could make a considerable investment and then have the AG say 'no' for no real reason at all.

The Ruger rep avoided the question directly and pointed out the number of arms that were MA compliant. When I pressed he also fell back to the fact that the company is a business and has to make choices that make sense to the stockholders.

So, for Colt to relocate would probably have more to do with good business than anything. But it doesn't hurt their image if they can say to their customers "see, we support you with our feet too".