‘Unconstitutional’ Connecticut gun-control law prompts Second Amendment lawsuit


Several gun rights organizations filed a lawsuit last week against a draconian law enacted by Connecticut legislators in 2013.

Enacted not too long after the Dec. 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 28 dead, the law instituted “an expansion of Connecticut’s assault weapon ban, background checks for all gun and ammunition sales, a new registry of existing high capacity magazines and a ban on the sale of magazines holding more than 10 bullets,” as reported by NPR.

In a suit filed last Tuesday, the Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL), the Second Amendment Foundation and two gun owners specifically zeroed in on the provision concerning the sale and use of magazines holding more than 10 bullets.

“The plaintiffs are challenging the prohibition on Connecticut residents that makes it illegal to load more than 10 rounds of ammunition into lawfully owned magazines that can hold more. The plaintiffs assert that this prohibition imposes an unconstitutional burden on the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” CCDL announced in a statement.

The organization’s president, Holly Sullivan, added that “[f]or most Americans, magazines that hold more than 10 rounds are simply considered standard capacity magazines.”

“Many firearms are not even available with magazines that hold less than ten rounds,” she said. “In Connecticut, the legislature has redefined those magazines as Large Capacity Magazines. However, many of these magazines are commonly used by most other Americans who own firearms. Law-abiding gun owners in Connecticut are left more susceptible to harm or death by being limited in their means of self-defense.”

Read the full complaint below:

Does the suit actually stand a chance in court, though? Based on previous rulings, yes.

Last year a federal judge struck down a similar California law, arguing that the rule infringes on local citizens’ Second Amendment rights.

“California’s law prohibiting acquisition and possession of magazines able to hold any more than 10 rounds places a severe restriction on the core right of self-defense of the home such that it amounts to a destruction of the right and is unconstitutional under any level of scrutiny,” Judge Roger T. Benitez ruled.

“California’s ban is far-reaching, absolute, and permanent. The ban on acquisition and possession on magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds, together with the substantial criminal penalties threatening a law-abiding, responsible, citizen who desires such magazines to protect hearth and home, imposes a burden on the constitutional right that this Court judges as severe.”

In justifying his ruling, he also cited the same self-defense argument posited by the CCDL.

“The magazine ban arbitrarily selects 10 rounds as the magazine capacity over which possession is unlawful. … The ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American citizens for the lawful purpose of self-defense,” he wrote.

That probably bodes well for gun owners in Connecticut, as the CCDL’s lawsuit also contains this argument.

“A person with 15 rounds of ammunition available will be better able to defend himself or herself from a criminal gang, or from a drug-crazed criminal who continues attacking even after being shot, than a person who has only 10 rounds of ammunition available before they must reload their gun,” the lawsuit explicitly reads.

Of course, far-left gun control zealots — particularly those responsible for lobbying for the 2013 Connecticut law — aren’t trying to hear the truth.

“Assault weapons and high capacity magazines are the weapons of choice for mass shooters,” Newtown Action Alliance chair Po Murray said in a statement riddled with falsehoods.

“The U.S. Constitution must protect the lives of innocent children and adults in schools not the gun lobby’s pursuit of profits selling weapons of war designed to efficiently kill the maximum number of people.”

This radical group helped congressional Democrats draft legislation in 2015 that would implement similar draconian “solutions” on a national scale.


Members of Newtown Action Alliance “are meeting with as many of the 60 new members of Congress as they can, and delivering information about the ammunition legislation and other efforts to all of the lawmakers’ offices,” The Connecticut Mirror reported at the time.

Gun control advocates have and continue to refuse to admit one of the key underlying basis for the Second Amendment, which is that criminals don’t follow laws.

“This law does nothing more than penalize law-abiding citizens while criminalizing components of handguns they own that were previous legal,” Second Amendment Foundation founder and executive vice president Allan Gottlieb said in a statement.

Thus, a ban on magazines containing 10 or more rounds would do little to affect crime.

“[T]here is little evidence that high‐​capacity magazine restrictions have any positive effects on public safety,” the Cato Institute notes. “To support these laws, states point to horrific crimes involving large-capacity magazines. But the connection between the crime and the magazine is conjectural at best, while the prohibitions against such magazines have disrupted the lives of many otherwise law-abiding gun owners — and all without any evidence of improvements in public safety.”

“In some courts, it seems that merely uttering the phrase ‘gun violence’ suffices to justify any exercise of state power. These policies are ineffective, dangerous, and unconstitutional.”


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Vivek Saxena


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles