I tried to search the forum on the legality of me purchasing ammo in CT... Can I buy ammo legally in CT in a private sale (FTF) with my MA license? I do not have a CT permit/license. Thanks in advance.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Purchasing ammo in CT question
- Thread starter str8shooter
- Start date
xtry51
NES Member
No.
If you're purchasing ammo you need the permit and anyone selling ammo or a firearm needs to confirm you are permitted under the state law to do so. This meaning they would have to see your ct permit.
Next question is why are you asking? Are you bringing a police officer to the exchange with you?
If you're purchasing ammo you need the permit and anyone selling ammo or a firearm needs to confirm you are permitted under the state law to do so. This meaning they would have to see your ct permit.
Next question is why are you asking? Are you bringing a police officer to the exchange with you?
Last edited:
dcmdon
NES Member
To the OP. I could not imagine why anyone would post this question on a public forum. If you know the seller you should have just purchased the ammo. Its nice to know the law. But the problem is that if you ask the question on the Internet. You can never take it back.
One other thing. You - the buyer would not be breaking any law if you went to CT and purchased ammo. The SELLER would be breaking the law. See the statute below. "No person, firm, or corp shall SELL". You are not breaking any law buying ammo without an ammo certificate.
So if the other person is willing to sell, you should buy.
One other thing that would make it legal would be for you to stand on one side of the state line and he on the other. Then you could pass him money and he could pass the ammo over into MA. See how fast this gets really stupid.
Don
p.s.
Here's the relevant statute.
c) On and after October 1, 2013, no person, firm or corporation shall sell ammunition or an ammunition magazine to any person unless such person holds a valid permit to carry a pistol or revolver issued pursuant to subsection (b) of section 29-28 of the general statutes, as amended by this act, a valid permit to sell at retail a pistol or revolver issued pursuant to subsection (a) of section 29-28 of the general statutes, a valid eligibility certificate for a pistol or revolver issued pursuant to section 29-36f of the general statutes, as amended by this act, or a valid long gun eligibility certificate issued pursuant to section 2 of this act and presents to the transferor such permit or certificate, or unless such person holds a valid ammunition certificate issued pursuant to section 15 of this act and presents to the transferor such certificate and such person's motor vehicle operator's license, passport or other valid form of identification issued by the federal government or a state or municipal government that contains such person's date of birth and photograph.
One other thing. You - the buyer would not be breaking any law if you went to CT and purchased ammo. The SELLER would be breaking the law. See the statute below. "No person, firm, or corp shall SELL". You are not breaking any law buying ammo without an ammo certificate.
So if the other person is willing to sell, you should buy.
One other thing that would make it legal would be for you to stand on one side of the state line and he on the other. Then you could pass him money and he could pass the ammo over into MA. See how fast this gets really stupid.
Don
p.s.
Here's the relevant statute.
c) On and after October 1, 2013, no person, firm or corporation shall sell ammunition or an ammunition magazine to any person unless such person holds a valid permit to carry a pistol or revolver issued pursuant to subsection (b) of section 29-28 of the general statutes, as amended by this act, a valid permit to sell at retail a pistol or revolver issued pursuant to subsection (a) of section 29-28 of the general statutes, a valid eligibility certificate for a pistol or revolver issued pursuant to section 29-36f of the general statutes, as amended by this act, or a valid long gun eligibility certificate issued pursuant to section 2 of this act and presents to the transferor such permit or certificate, or unless such person holds a valid ammunition certificate issued pursuant to section 15 of this act and presents to the transferor such certificate and such person's motor vehicle operator's license, passport or other valid form of identification issued by the federal government or a state or municipal government that contains such person's date of birth and photograph.
Last edited:
Every time the state decides to get fancy with their new regs by defining a situation which restricts our rights, they, by the law of unintended consequences, define a bunch of scenarios that fall outside of the restrictions. Our gun regs in CT are FULL of them, too. Like the Colt thing. I'm pretty confident that the politicians didn't want ANY Colt rifle to be sold to us. You've got to know that was their intention but they way they defined it, they left themselves open for all kinds of situations that fall perfectly legally outside of their regs. Like the AK47 thing and 7.62 x 39 ammo. You know they wanted ALL AKs and their clones affected but were too fancy for them selves and defined out an entire family of other AKs in another caliber. This ammo thing, too, is dumb. You've got to know that two fellas who want to trade ammo will do so without any fanfare or paperwork or, as pointed out above, you find ludicrous scenarios you can concoct that just stay legal. It's so dumb. And, rather than step back and rescind a bunch of junk legislation, they continue to slather on layer upon layer of additional regulations in order to try to stop one activity only to expose another.
CT gun laws are the Rube Goldberg of gun laws, period.
I'm not complaining too hard. I know that some really attentive AG could easily bend the ear of this liberal governor and legislature and probably "fix" things in one fell swoop. Why they don't is curious to me, however.
The real test is when someone is dragged into a court before a judge. The attorney for the defendant can site the law word for word showing why his client is innocent under the reg the way they were written. The judge, however, will claim that that was not the law's intent and find him guilty. This state is really something.
Rome
CT gun laws are the Rube Goldberg of gun laws, period.
I'm not complaining too hard. I know that some really attentive AG could easily bend the ear of this liberal governor and legislature and probably "fix" things in one fell swoop. Why they don't is curious to me, however.
The real test is when someone is dragged into a court before a judge. The attorney for the defendant can site the law word for word showing why his client is innocent under the reg the way they were written. The judge, however, will claim that that was not the law's intent and find him guilty. This state is really something.
Rome
dcmdon
NES Member
Actually Rome,
Being a resident of both MA and CT, I can tell very definitely that CT Statutes are a model of clarity and conciseness compared to MA laws.
One other unintended circumstance.
CT statutes define a pistol or revolver as " any firearm having a barrel less than twelve inches. "
http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/pistol_rev.htm
CT also says that you can not carry a loaded rifle or shotgun in your car.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap943.htm#Sec53-205.htm
The combination of these two laws is that you can carry a loaded SBR with a barrel length of less than 12" as long as its not considered to be an AW.
For example. This is a 10.5" PREBAN SBR that I own. Per CT law, its not a rifle.
Don
A CT Handgun:
Being a resident of both MA and CT, I can tell very definitely that CT Statutes are a model of clarity and conciseness compared to MA laws.
One other unintended circumstance.
CT statutes define a pistol or revolver as " any firearm having a barrel less than twelve inches. "
http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/pistol_rev.htm
CT also says that you can not carry a loaded rifle or shotgun in your car.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap943.htm#Sec53-205.htm
The combination of these two laws is that you can carry a loaded SBR with a barrel length of less than 12" as long as its not considered to be an AW.
For example. This is a 10.5" PREBAN SBR that I own. Per CT law, its not a rifle.
Don
A CT Handgun:
Last edited:
Where's the "pulling my hair our" icon???
dcmdon
NES Member
All laws are this way. The reality is that once a bill or law is in the public domain, it will get scrutinized specifically to look for unintended consequences.
Part of this is good lawmaking, since each interest group will look at a given law specifically as to how it will affect that group.
PA13-3 - the horrible cluster eff of a law that essentially banned the future sale of all AR15s in CT was unveiled with no public comment period based on "emergency certification" and was voted on within a day of it being made public. So none of this proofreading was done before its passage. Specifically, here are some items off the top of my head:
PA13-3 - did not exempt certain very important security people. Specifically, armed private security at nuclear facilities and military bases in CT. (There are two nuc plants. Haddam Neck (mothballed, but still "hot") and Millstone.
PA13-3 did not include rimfire rifles in any of its extra restrictions.
PA13-3 made any semi-auto handgun with a threaded barrel an assault weapon; baring any future sales of these handguns. This included Olympic style rapid fire target guns.
All of these (ahem) oversights were addressed in PA13-220 - AN ACT CONCERNING REVISIONS TO THE GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND CHILDREN'S SAFETY ACT
Part of this is good lawmaking, since each interest group will look at a given law specifically as to how it will affect that group.
PA13-3 - the horrible cluster eff of a law that essentially banned the future sale of all AR15s in CT was unveiled with no public comment period based on "emergency certification" and was voted on within a day of it being made public. So none of this proofreading was done before its passage. Specifically, here are some items off the top of my head:
PA13-3 - did not exempt certain very important security people. Specifically, armed private security at nuclear facilities and military bases in CT. (There are two nuc plants. Haddam Neck (mothballed, but still "hot") and Millstone.
PA13-3 did not include rimfire rifles in any of its extra restrictions.
PA13-3 made any semi-auto handgun with a threaded barrel an assault weapon; baring any future sales of these handguns. This included Olympic style rapid fire target guns.
All of these (ahem) oversights were addressed in PA13-220 - AN ACT CONCERNING REVISIONS TO THE GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND CHILDREN'S SAFETY ACT
Last edited:
Actually Rome,
Being a resident of both MA and CT, I can tell very definitely that CT Statutes are a model of clarity and conciseness compared to MA laws.
One other unintended circumstance.
CT statutes define a pistol or revolver as " any firearm having a barrel less than twelve inches. "
http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/pistol_rev.htm
CT also says that you can not carry a loaded rifle or shotgun in your car.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap943.htm#Sec53-205.htm
The combination of these two laws is that you can carry a loaded SBR with a barrel length of less than 12" as long as its not considered to be an AW.
For example. This is a 10.5" PREBAN SBR that I own. Per CT law, its not a rifle.
Don
A CT Handgun:
Shouldn't this be true in MA as well?
dcmdon
NES Member
It might be.
But I don't know the nuances of MA law the way I know CT.
Mass does something that defines a "firearm" as a handgun or something like that. So when you read the MGLs you need to keep that in mind. Or don't you? I'm just not sure.
Len??
Don
But I don't know the nuances of MA law the way I know CT.
Mass does something that defines a "firearm" as a handgun or something like that. So when you read the MGLs you need to keep that in mind. Or don't you? I'm just not sure.
Len??
Don
Soliciting another party to unlawfully sell him the ammunition could make an individual criminally liable for that offense on an inchoate basis.
Pursuant to CGS 53a-8, "A person, acting with the mental state required for commission of an offense, who solicits, requests, commands, importunes or intentionally aids another person to engage in conduct which constitutes an offense shall be criminally liable for such conduct and may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principal offender."
dcmdon
NES Member
It would be nearly impossible to prove that a buyer even knew that selling to him was illegal . . . unless he posted it in a public Internet forum.
Even then, application of that statute would be a huge stretch.
Which circles back to my first point in the paragraph you quoted above.
Even then, application of that statute would be a huge stretch.
Which circles back to my first point in the paragraph you quoted above.
The SIG brace only makes a pistol a rifle when being used as a stock, and only in the eyes of federal law. Federal and state definitions do not need to agree and often don't.
dcmdon
NES Member
Don't forget that we need to differentiate between what the state considers it to be and what the feds consider it to be.
If I accept your premise that the feds consider it to be a rifle its of no consequence. The feds don't restrict what I can carry loaded in my car. The state does.
Which means I could lawfully carry it in my car loaded.
AHM
NES Member
Remarkably, the CT Ammunition Certificate statutes only regulate
sales of fully loaded cartridges - not components; not even powder or primers.
sales of fully loaded cartridges - not components; not even powder or primers.
Similar threads
