Gun grabbers in Connecticut are allowing their true colors to shine through. The “Large Capacity” Magazine ban currently under consideration in the State legislature shows the level of contempt they hold for mere citizens.
Many States, California among them, have sought to limit the ability of a law abiding citizen to use a modern firearm with a “high capacity” magazine for self defense. Here in CA, the limit is 10 rounds. A magazine holding more than 10 rounds is considered an “assault weapon” here. (And allowing someone else to use, or even hold one, is called an illegal transfer!) But CA and every other State that has such a foolish law on the books has at least recognized that such devices currently held are private property and may not be confiscated by the State without compensation. Gun grabbers in CT, on the other hand, have as little regard for the private property rights of their citizens as they do their right to armed self defense.
Magazine bans fail as regulatory tools because so many “grandfathered” magazines exist. The 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban outlawed the manufacture or importation of “high capacity” magazines; however, those already in the purchasing pipeline on the law’s effective date were grandfathered in. As a result, thousands upon thousands were ordered by importers; far more than were actually in existence at their suppliers’ warehouses. Thus new magazines were made to fulfill the orders and legally imported. The Federal government could have outlawed these, but such an action would have required compensation as a taking under the 5th Amendment. Since Bill Clinton didn’t want to buy warehouses full of stamped sheet metal and springs, his AWB didn’t try to stop the importation of grandfathered magazines. Nor did the Federal law or any of the State laws attempt to confiscate existing magazines. This effectively neutered these laws. Gun grabbers in CT didn’t want to see their new law fail for the same reason and thus they’re OK with taking them; however, they also don’t want to spend real money to buy the magazines in question. So they’ve decided to do the taking without regard for the 5th Amendment’s just compensation requirement.