Edward Peruta
Regular Member
This subject will be discussed tonight on Summary Judgment between 6 and 8pm at www.sjtalkshow.com
Live call in to the program is 860-721-8814.
JUSTIFICATIONFOR A FACIAL
or
ASAPPLIED CHALLENGE
TOnumerous CONNECTCUT FIREARM LAWS
or
ASAPPLIED CHALLENGE
TOnumerous CONNECTCUT FIREARM LAWS
Most if not all of Connecticut's laws pertaining to firearms were conceived, advocated, drafted, proposed, subjected to public scrutiny at public hearings, and then debated, voted upon and approved in the Connecticut General Assembly.
The record is clear that most of Connecticut's current firearm laws were passed and signed into law during the pre Heller/McDonald period when the Federal and State Constitutional right to KEEP and BEAR arms was thought to be a right exclusive to the states for the purpose of maintaining a State Militia. (Judge Gill video).
In the Connecticut Constitution, unlike the Federal Constitution, the right to BEAR arms is clearly stated as a right of the citizens without any mention or reference to the word Militia. (Article First, Section15, "Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.")
The legislative record of Connecticut Firearm laws, often referred to as "LEGISLATIVE HISTORY" is often reviewed and cited by opposing sides to justify legal positions and theories taken in civil and criminal cases.
Here in the Constitution State of Connecticut, the recent social, political and legal focus has been on the most recent post Newtown 2013 firearm legislation, (PA 13-3 and PA 13-220), when in fact, Connecticut citizens have been and are subjected to frequent violations of their First, Fourth, Fifth,Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth amendment rights.
Elected and appointed public officials in all three branches of our State and Federal governments have taken political. legal and social positions and actions that clearly ignore and violate other clearly established basic constitutional rights when firearms are involved.
Civil, Administrative and Criminal Firearm case files together with case documents, transcripts and decisions, provide clear and convincing evidence that government officials believe that the current matrix of firearm laws are vague, ambiguous and misapplied.
The lack of ability to clearly understand Connecticut firearm laws is often used and cited to support and defend unlawful actions by government officials in cases where firearms are a factor.
One only has to research the growing list of civil, criminal and administrative case files which involve firearms to understand the magnitude of the issue.
There are at least 23 Cases that support the argument regarding:
Suitability, Restricted speech, Delays, Denials, Revocations, Searches, Arrests of individuals and seizures of property (Permits and firearms), Destruction of property, Arrests, Delayed Trials and administrative hearings, Excessive Bonds.
Last edited:
