Drizzt
Member
Owners file suit to void gun ban
Enforcement tops concerns on rules
By KEN DIXON [email protected]
Gun owners and dealers have filed a lawsuit in state Superior Court in an attempt to overturn part of the state's landmark 1993 legislation banning assault-type weapons.
The plaintiffs, among them a longtime Stratford gun dealer, claim that the Department of Public Safety is unable to administer the regulations in a uniform manner.
The suit charges two other plaintiffs purchased identical weapons, but when they attempted to register them on successive days with State Police in Canaan last summer, one rifle was seized, while the other owner was allowed to keep his.
The case was filed Thursday in state Superior Court in Litchfield, the site of the failed 1994 attempt to overturn the state's controversial restrictions on so-called assault weapons.
Ralph D. Sherman, a West Hartford lawyer, said Friday that the suit asks the court to declare the regulations void and order DPS Commissioner Arthur L. Spada to neither enforce them nor arrest anyone for possessing weapons previously deemed illegal.
The suit also requests the termination of a DPS database on such weaponry.
"They are phony regulations," said Sherman, who is the chairman of Gunsafe, an organization of Connecticut firearm owners. "The Department of Public Safety has changed its mind several times on what these regulations are supposed to be. It's a major challenge to an administrative agency that's not following correct procedure."
Sherman charged that the DPS might now say that thousands of weapons purchased legally since 1993 may now be illegal.
The plaintiffs include Daniel Patten Sr. of upstate Norfolk, Lawrence DeLuca of nearby Barkhamsted and Frank D'Andrea, owner of D'Andrea's Gun Case, on Barnum Avenue in Stratford. Sherman's co-counsel is Andrew J. Buzzi Jr. of Danbury.
The lawsuit claims that Patten received a letter from the DPS telling him to register his Hungarian AKM target rifle. On Aug. 6, he went to the Troop B Barracks in Canaan and was told that since he purchased it back in the 1980s they would have to seize it.
The next day, DeLuca brought his Hungarian AKM, with a serial number nearly identical to that of Patten's weapon, to the barracks and was given a certificate of possession, Sherman said.
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, a chief legislative proponent of gun control, on Friday defended the state's assault-weapons ban.
Blumenthal said the state Supreme Court has upheld the 1993 law.
Lawlor said if there's a problem in registration procedures, the General Assembly can revisit the ban.
Last year, a law was passed to allow owners of legally purchased weapons, including Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type, MAC-10, MAC-11 and others until Oct. 1, 2003, to apply for a state certificate to possess their weapons if they were purchased between October 1993 and May of last year.
It is a Class D felony, punishable by five years in prison and $5,000 fines, to illegally possess the assault-type weapons.
Robert Crook, president of the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen, a plaintiff in the 1994 appeal, said Friday that as the Oct. 1 deadline approaches, more and more rifle owners are baffled by the state's rules.
"The court case is needed because, based upon the state police policy, or whatever their interpretation is, nobody knows what guns they have to register," said Crook, whose group is providing financial support for the new court challenge.
Lawlor, co-chairman of the Legislature's Judiciary Committee that drew up the regulatory language, said that even if a state trooper in the field made a mistake, the legislation itself might not be flawed.
"Apparently it's a misunderstanding on the part of at least one state trooper about what the law is," Lawlor said in a phone interview. "I don't necessarily think the regulations are the problem."
Lawlor recalled that Crook and the National Rifle Association took part in drafting last year's legislation and supported it when it came to a vote last spring.
Blumenthal said Friday he had not yet read the lawsuit, but the state's assault weapon ban has been upheld by Connecticut's highest court.
Blumenthal said that in past challenges to the 1993 law claims were made that the regulations were too vague to permit consistent enforcement and were rejected. "If the criticism is the law should be enforced more rigorously, we could certainly sit down and discuss that," he said.
D'Andrea said the Department of Public Safety seems confused with the regulations. "It seems like nobody really knows what's going on," he said of the reception state troopers give gun owners. "Whoever's in charge at one point sees it one way and someone else the next day sees it another way."
Another apparent problem is the DPS' inability to get the rules out to all gun dealers and enthusiasts.
"We can't go by what we think," said D'Andrea, who's been in the gun business for 32 years and was a plaintiff in the unsuccessful 1994 attempt to overturn the weapons ban.
Lawlor said the gun lobby makes it a struggle to enact gun-control legislation. "I wish we could regulate guns as easily as we regulate toys," he said. "We can keep unsafe toys off the market, but we can't keep unsafe guns off the market."
http://www.connpost.com/Stories/0,1413,96%7E3750%7E1336749,00.html
Enforcement tops concerns on rules
By KEN DIXON [email protected]
Gun owners and dealers have filed a lawsuit in state Superior Court in an attempt to overturn part of the state's landmark 1993 legislation banning assault-type weapons.
The plaintiffs, among them a longtime Stratford gun dealer, claim that the Department of Public Safety is unable to administer the regulations in a uniform manner.
The suit charges two other plaintiffs purchased identical weapons, but when they attempted to register them on successive days with State Police in Canaan last summer, one rifle was seized, while the other owner was allowed to keep his.
The case was filed Thursday in state Superior Court in Litchfield, the site of the failed 1994 attempt to overturn the state's controversial restrictions on so-called assault weapons.
Ralph D. Sherman, a West Hartford lawyer, said Friday that the suit asks the court to declare the regulations void and order DPS Commissioner Arthur L. Spada to neither enforce them nor arrest anyone for possessing weapons previously deemed illegal.
The suit also requests the termination of a DPS database on such weaponry.
"They are phony regulations," said Sherman, who is the chairman of Gunsafe, an organization of Connecticut firearm owners. "The Department of Public Safety has changed its mind several times on what these regulations are supposed to be. It's a major challenge to an administrative agency that's not following correct procedure."
Sherman charged that the DPS might now say that thousands of weapons purchased legally since 1993 may now be illegal.
The plaintiffs include Daniel Patten Sr. of upstate Norfolk, Lawrence DeLuca of nearby Barkhamsted and Frank D'Andrea, owner of D'Andrea's Gun Case, on Barnum Avenue in Stratford. Sherman's co-counsel is Andrew J. Buzzi Jr. of Danbury.
The lawsuit claims that Patten received a letter from the DPS telling him to register his Hungarian AKM target rifle. On Aug. 6, he went to the Troop B Barracks in Canaan and was told that since he purchased it back in the 1980s they would have to seize it.
The next day, DeLuca brought his Hungarian AKM, with a serial number nearly identical to that of Patten's weapon, to the barracks and was given a certificate of possession, Sherman said.
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and Rep. Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, a chief legislative proponent of gun control, on Friday defended the state's assault-weapons ban.
Blumenthal said the state Supreme Court has upheld the 1993 law.
Lawlor said if there's a problem in registration procedures, the General Assembly can revisit the ban.
Last year, a law was passed to allow owners of legally purchased weapons, including Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type, MAC-10, MAC-11 and others until Oct. 1, 2003, to apply for a state certificate to possess their weapons if they were purchased between October 1993 and May of last year.
It is a Class D felony, punishable by five years in prison and $5,000 fines, to illegally possess the assault-type weapons.
Robert Crook, president of the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen, a plaintiff in the 1994 appeal, said Friday that as the Oct. 1 deadline approaches, more and more rifle owners are baffled by the state's rules.
"The court case is needed because, based upon the state police policy, or whatever their interpretation is, nobody knows what guns they have to register," said Crook, whose group is providing financial support for the new court challenge.
Lawlor, co-chairman of the Legislature's Judiciary Committee that drew up the regulatory language, said that even if a state trooper in the field made a mistake, the legislation itself might not be flawed.
"Apparently it's a misunderstanding on the part of at least one state trooper about what the law is," Lawlor said in a phone interview. "I don't necessarily think the regulations are the problem."
Lawlor recalled that Crook and the National Rifle Association took part in drafting last year's legislation and supported it when it came to a vote last spring.
Blumenthal said Friday he had not yet read the lawsuit, but the state's assault weapon ban has been upheld by Connecticut's highest court.
Blumenthal said that in past challenges to the 1993 law claims were made that the regulations were too vague to permit consistent enforcement and were rejected. "If the criticism is the law should be enforced more rigorously, we could certainly sit down and discuss that," he said.
D'Andrea said the Department of Public Safety seems confused with the regulations. "It seems like nobody really knows what's going on," he said of the reception state troopers give gun owners. "Whoever's in charge at one point sees it one way and someone else the next day sees it another way."
Another apparent problem is the DPS' inability to get the rules out to all gun dealers and enthusiasts.
"We can't go by what we think," said D'Andrea, who's been in the gun business for 32 years and was a plaintiff in the unsuccessful 1994 attempt to overturn the weapons ban.
Lawlor said the gun lobby makes it a struggle to enact gun-control legislation. "I wish we could regulate guns as easily as we regulate toys," he said. "We can keep unsafe toys off the market, but we can't keep unsafe guns off the market."
http://www.connpost.com/Stories/0,1413,96%7E3750%7E1336749,00.html
like my pappy always told me, guns are not toys....
