What did Governor Malloy say?

Governor Malloy was on the Chaz and A.J. show this morning where he took a call on the new Gun law.

Caller:
Hey governor. I’m just curious about this new gun bill that came out especially with pistols with high capacity mags. Right now I’ve got two 14-round mags that are only loaded to 10 as required, but it’s unclear, can I carry both of them if they’re loaded to 10 or can I only carry one?

Malloy:
First of all what you have to do is disclose – there’s a way to disclose that you have them and you’re grandfathered in. So, that’s how our law works in Connecticut. You don’t lose the right to have them, you just have to say that you have them. “Hey, I’m Joe. I’ve got two of these.” and that’s it. So the limitations that you’re fearing aren’t necessarily in our bill. They are – I think you’re referring to New York’s law, quite frankly, and New York has a different set of laws than we do.

The Governor is mistaken. The law he signed into law back in April does indeed prevent someone from carrying a so-called ‘Large Capacity Magazine’ even if it is properly declared, and absolutely limits the number of bullets to 10.

Section 25(f)(7) of Public Act 13-3:

“Pursuant to a valid permit to carry a pistol or revolver, provided such large capacity magazine (A) is within a pistol or revolver that was lawfully possessed by the person prior to the effective date of this section, (B) does not extend beyond the bottom of the pistol grip, and (C) contains not more than ten bullets.”


By requiring the magazine be “within” a pistol or revolver you are limiting the number of declared ‘large capacity magazine’ one is able to carry, along with the number of bullets it can contain. For the governor’s statement to be true you would need to carry multiple guns or find a gun the holds 2 or more magazines.

The Governor and Legislators were in such a rush to pass SB1160 they did not even hold public hearings, denying citizens their due process. Maybe if Governor Malloy had given the people, you know, those of us he called the “fringe of the fringe” a chance to speak about the bill, we could have pointed out issues such as this. Maybe if Governor Malloy had listened to those of us he labeled as the “fringe” he would understand the points of these new laws that are so confusing to us, the ones that actually try to obey the law. But, apparently, he doesn’t know what he signed into law.


This legislation is so convoluted that lawyers and elected officials are not sure what’s legal and what’s not. Donate to the CCDL’s Litigation Fund
 as we work to overturn this nonsense.

46 thoughts on “What did Governor Malloy say?

  1. What a farce!!!!!!!!! It will be a crime if this law isn’t struck down on so many levels. You need 2 lawyers an accountant and perhaps a few others to try and make sense of this. If upheld enforcement is going to be so arbitrary it is criminal in its self.

  2. Dannel, even HE doesn’t know what he signed. Great job leading by example…Is it time to vote him out yet?…

  3. You know, we were allowed to comment on the law. The unfortunate end result was the democrats and rino republicans not listening to the experts. The republicans better put up some one for their gubernatorial candidate the voted against this law. I will vote none of the above if its Mckinney, Boucher or any of the other rinos! Semper Fi!

    • No we were not allowed to comment on this law. They allowed testimony before the actual bill that became law was even finished being written. They allowed testimony on bills that were being proposed but were not raised into any committee.yet. We were sold down the river without even being heard.

    • Chien, you are incorrect. I testified 3 separate times in Hartford in front of 3 different committees…Mental Health, Gun Violence and School safety. At each hearing, we were cut off anytime we mentioned anything outside those topics. ie. If you mentioned magazines in the school safety committee, you were cut off and NOT allowed to speak. MOST of the things that found their way into the bill were NEVER discussed in an open forum so we couldn’t even address many of the potential problems.

  4. Use this example as evidence that the bill is unclear and unconstitutional. Please, the Governor doesn’t even know the bill.

    • And the fact the state police website has erroneous information regarding long gun transfer

  5. Hello CCDL. I just looked up the provision which Gov. Malloy seemed to not understand and I found it in Sec. 24(f)(7). Assuming I am reading the bill right. Just wanted to let you know.

  6. So now I confused , how many rounds can I carry in my G23 ? If I fill out the registration paper that I have the mags I can carry 13 rounds or is it still 10?

    • You’re stuck with 10 rounds in the mag that’s in the gun, whether it’s a registered limited capacity magazine (LCM) or a 10-round glock mag. If you carry one or more spare mags, they cannot be 13-rd mags, even if they only have 10 in them.

      Example: You have 2 mags. Both are loaded with 10 rounds. Mag A is a 13rd magazine that you have registered with the state according to their ridiculous process. Mag B is a factory 10-rd magazine. If you walk out the door with Mag A in the gun and Mag B in your pocket, you’re okay. If you reverse that; Mag B in the gun and Mag A in your pocket, you’re now breaking the law.

      Ultimately, this law just makes it easier for well-meaning citizens to be caught breaking the law for BS reasons.

      *I’m not a lawyer and have been wrong at least a few times in my life, so take this with a grain of salt.

      • What happens if you find yourself in that shooting situation and you switch magazines to get rounds 11-20? You now have the 10 round magazine int he gun and the 13 round magazine (although empty) out of the gun. To you have to switch back before the police get there? Will you still be charged because they know you must have had them switched in the heat of battle?

  7. Convoluted, ya think? Of course they want it impossible to comply. Well Mr. Bill. We are going to charge you with 214 felonies for doing nothing with your legally purchased, sales tax paid items. Unless, of course you surrender your firearms, give up permanently your rights and a pay us a nice plump hardy fine. (So we can buy more votes.) What I learned Tuesday was all the far out scenarios I imagined were true. How old do you have to be to hunt in CT these days? 14? How does a 14 year old get ammo? Its not on a range. Where I disagree with the Attorney is he sees the legislature as fools. I see them as the Spawn of Satin. A plague of locusts if you will.

  8. It’s kind of the same response as Biden’s shotgun “warning shots” into the air rant. Totally bogus advice. I am sure that Malloy does NOT know what he actually signed into law for he did NOT care as long as the law pushed some sort of anti-gun agenda (gun and magazine bans). He surely did NOT read the bill, he didn’t have time. I hope someone has this recorded for this would be perfect evidence to bring into court for the CCDL and especially the NSSF lawsuit. The blatant ignorance of the politician that made the unconstitutional bill into law. I can only hope Malloy is voted out next year but my guess is that all the Demorats will go out swinging with yet another round of hideous anti-gun bills. They might “lay low” until after the 2014 elections. But then again, the complacent gun owners in the state are the ones that are really going to screw everyone over by doing nothing. I guess we’ll have to see but I’d be surprised if there were a lot of Dem seats turned Repub after the elections.

    • Right. As long as we comply with draconian, anti- self defense, anti constitutional laws, gun owners are really doing nothing to stop this agenda towards disarming law abiding citizens.

    • Sorry that I may not be a resident in Conn. to help with voting Malloy out next election. I’m retired and have the freedom to move to a pro gun state. I can’t live in such an anti gun and high taxation environment any longer. My spouse supports the idea as well.

  9. I don’t think that the law is “convoluted” – its written in plain English. Its is a large law, with PA13-3 and PA13-220 making it. Of course WE are required to know it front to back. The Gov is a moron of course so how can you expect him to remember anything?

    Next session we should give testimony in EVERY committee hearing taking testimony and start out with “Why are you wasting your time with this bill when you should be putting your efforts to repeal PA13-3 etc” Do this with every committee hearing and press coverage will be there and the country will know we are not happy and its getting to a boiling point.

    • Now that is an interesting idea. Comment on every bill they bring forward and tie it to the repeal of this bill. I like it. It would be manpower intensive, because eventually they would get to know the key players and try to restrict us from speaking. There would need to be a large ready reserve of speakers waiting in the wings.

      • That is one thing they cannot do. If a bill is up for public testimony, they must allow everyone that is signed up to speak, the opportunity to do so.

        • And of course they always follow the rules.

          Seriously, as Bob said, if you go off topic they will cut you off. I suspect they will consider this off topic to most other bills.

          • This past session was first time I have ever seen anyone cutoff during testimony. Technically all testimony taken by these “BS” newly formed committees were not directly connected to any proposed bill. Once a REAL bill is raised and opened to testimony in “REAL” committees there is much more leeway allowed on subject matter.

            I am only speaking from experience here….

        • I signed up for the BPTF on 30 JAN 13 in Newtown HS — they only let the newtown people speak … (I think 1-non-newtown guy got to speak for about 1 min at midnight). It was BS.

        • (c) Conduct of Hearings.
          (1) Convening and Procedures. A chairperson or a vice chairperson shall convene
          all hearings. If a hearing is not so convened within fifteen minutes following its scheduled
          starting time, any member of the committee may convene that hearing. The time of
          commencement of the public hearing shall be designated in the published notice. The order
          of testimony of the witnesses and the length of time that each witness may testify shall be
          determined by the presiding chairperson who shall give due regard for the convenience of
          the public. Members of the public who wish to testify at a public hearing may place their
          names on a list, which shall be made available at a time and place to be determined by the
          chairpersons. Members of the public shall either (A) place their own name on the list, if
          they wish to testify, or (B) place the name of one other person on the list who will testify.
          Members of the public placing the name of another person on the list shall also place their
          own name on the list next to the name of the person who will testify. The placement of
          another person’s name on the list by a person who receives a fee solely for that service shall
          be ineffective and the person so named shall not be permitted to testify.

          http://www.cga.ct.gov/html/rulesprecedents.pdf

  10. Pingback: Connecticut gun group shows Gov. Malloy does not understand law he signed « CITIZENS MILITIA of MISSISSIPPI

  11. Seriously? If the Governor HIMSELF can’t understand the law HE ENACTED and signed off on, how does he expect the Citizens to?

  12. How does a 14 year old with a CT hunting license get ammo anyway? How do I, at 75, get 6 rounds for my home protection revolver since my permit expired?

    • I know that The Politburo has declared it a felony to provide ammunition to a minor or anyone. My defense would be, by the act of granting my 14 year old a hunting license the state has De-Facto given its approval to the transfer. Since the act they have licensed is impossible to perform without the ammunition. As far as your 6 rounds go, New England is a wonderful for some lovely day trips.

      “Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition”

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJfJPxLntZU

        Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition
        Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition
        Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition
        And we’ll all stay free

        Praise the Lord and swing into position
        Can’t afford to be a politician
        Praise the Lord, we’re all between perdition
        And the deep blue sea

        Yes, the sky pilot said it, you gotta give him credit
        For a son of a gun of a gunner was he

        Shouting, ‘Praise the Lord, we’re on a mighty mission
        All aboard, we ain’t a-goin’ fishin’
        Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition
        And we’ll all stay free’

        Kind of appropriate, don’t you think. A look back to when America was strong and we were all in the great struggle together, the change in your pocket was silver and every village and borough had an ample supply of heroes. Also a realization of how very very far we have fallen.

  13. I love how he uses the word ” disclose” , what is really meant is registration, and if he or anyone else knows a lick about history, we would all know that confiscation always follows registration if tyranny is allowed to continue unbridled.

    I hear of too many “patriots”. Who are supporting the litigation fund and go to the rally’s, and write, email and call politicians regarding these new unconstitutional laws……… Yet these same. Folks are sheepishly complying with the new draconian registration laws!!!!

    Can someone explain to me what good this is doing along with this litigation, which is a total waste of time and money as long as folks just let the government know what weapons and large mags they have???????

    A much better solution, would have been for all the gun owners in CT to organize and all together decide to register NOTHING!!!!

    This would have sent a clear message, and Malloy would be beside himself figuring out a way to enforce this law that thousands of people refused to comply with.

    I am telling you right now if you comply, this litigation is a waste of time and money, and the state will still have all your “disclosed” info to hand out to the boys in black to expedite their future gun confiscation.

  14. What is the status of the litigation our group has embarked on with regard to this law?

  15. The State Police spent a number of days in a training seminar to educate our law makers because the very folks who made these laws had absolutely no idea what they were doing. Couple that with a governor who basically doesn’t give a crap about the legal gun owners of this state (“the fringe of the fringe) and you get what we have now. These recent Connecticut gun laws were nothing but “feel good” legislation. Once passed the politicians moved on to other matters.
    I was at the State Capitol when this law was passed and we were shuffled around by our own capitol police deliberately so that we could not gain access to the gallery to observe our law makers at work. The anti-gunners were allowed to mingle on the floor with law makers. We were denied access and some law makers refused to talk to us when requested by formal channels.

  16. You’re right about voting this Malloy out of office. But keep in mind his oath of office: To protect and defend the constitution of the United States. What all of should have done is start a petition to be submitted to the legislature that would demand– not request, not suggest but demand the immediate resignation of the governor and key legislatures who
    “e-certed” this gun legislation and forced it through the legislature. The “e-vert” law was only intended for emergency legislation to vote on funds in case of natural disasters such as tornadoes, massive floods or massive structural damage of our infrastructure. E-cert was never intended to pass routine legislation. What the legislature did and what the governor did was illegal, pure and simple. They did it only because they could. What’s next: concentration camps to take care of the “jewish problem”? The law makers and the governor are simply out of control. They exceeded their authority and they tell us the only remedy is the courts. I don’t buy it.

  17. Dont register a thing you will probably be taxed on it and added to a threat list depending on your inventory. If you already own it legaly then let the state check there records!

  18. Pingback: Permitless Carry . . Illinois . . . Connecticut Information

  19. Pingback: Connecticut gun group shows Gov. Malloy does not understand law he signed | New York City Guns

  20. Pingback: » The Yankee Gunner Podcast – 013The Yankee Gunner

  21. Is someone going to update the PDF presentation on CT Public Act 13-3 by Miller Law Group from meeting on 10/8/13? If I read it correctly, on page 19 it states you can carry more than 10 rounds in your pistol, as long as it was purchased prior to 4/5/13.

Comments are closed.