The following Media release was issued today by the Citizen's Defense League:
Bridgeport, CT – Today, a widely-anticipated lawsuit
was filed in U.S. District Court in Connecticut, challenging the
constitutionality of the new firearms law that was passed hastily by the
Connecticut legislature in response to the tragic shooting in Newtown by a
disturbed individual. The lawsuit seeks immediate injunctive relief and a
ruling declaring the new law unconstitutional under the Second Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution. It alleges that Connecticut’s new firearms law is not only
unconstitutional but dangerous, since it makes both citizens and law
enforcement less safe by depriving citizens of firearms that are in common use
throughout the country. The very firearms and design features banned by the new
law are commonly used in part because of safety, accuracy and ease-of-use
features that make them effective in the hands of citizens who must defend
themselves and their families against criminals and the mentally ill who do not
obey such laws.
Brought on behalf of individual gun owners, retailers, and
citizen’s defense and sportsmen’s organizations, the lawsuit seeks to vindicate
the constitutional rights of citizens who are harmed by the broad prohibitions
and unworkable vagueness of the new law. The legal challenge focuses on
Connecticut’s ban of more than 100 additional common firearms that the law now
dubs “assault weapons” and on the ban of standard design features, including
magazines that hold more than 10 round of ammunition, that provide improved
safety, accuracy, and ease-of-use. The lawsuit also challenges the practical
bans imposed by the new law on an even broader array of firearms due to the
law’s vague language and interpretative confusion combined with severe criminal
penalties.
Plaintiffs bringing the lawsuit include individuals such as
an elderly widow who lives alone in a rural area where the emergency response
time of a lone resident trooper serving the area is 45 minutes, a rabbi whose
synagogue in the Bridgeport area has been broken into by intruders, a young
professional woman whose efforts to defend herself are made more difficult by
the loss of an arm due to cancer, among other individuals.
In addition, retailers whose businesses have been severely
harmed by the law have joined the lawsuit, which was conceived and organized by
fellow-plaintiff organizations the Connecticut Citizens Defense League,
commonly known as CCDL, and the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen. Both
organizational plaintiffs represent large numbers of Connecticut citizens whose
rights to own the firearms of their choice for self-defense and other lawful
purposes, such as sports shooting and hunting, have been harmed by the new
prohibitions.
Despite the new law being called “An Act Concerning Gun
Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety,” Connecticut’s new firearms law
makes Connecticut citizens less safe. Among the individuals harmed by the law’s
provisions are women, the elderly, and anyone of a smaller physical stature --
individuals who typically lack the strength to operate older style, heavier, or
difficult to use firearms and yet who need to be able to protect themselves in
challenging home-invasion and other self-defense situations.
CCDL’s President, Scott Wilson, who has seen his
organization’s membership grow from 2,500 to 7,600 in just a few months, says
“On behalf of our members and all of the plaintiffs, we wish to thank the
National Rifle Association, whose vision and stalwart defense of citizens’
fundamental rights has helped make this important legal challenge possible.”
Wilson says, “Connecticut’s new gun ban violates Second Amendment rights by
depriving law-abiding citizens of firearms that are in common use throughout
the country precisely because of their known effectiveness in the protection of
citizens, their families, and homes. Criminals and the mentally ill will not
abide by this terrible law, which means it has the perverse effect of actually
making citizens and law enforcement officers less safe.”
Bob Crook, Executive Director of the Coalition of Connecticut
Sportsmen, says, “This law will do nothing to prevent a tragedy or solve the
problem of crime committed with guns. Instead of violating constitutional
rights, we need to get serious about addressing violence and mental illness.”
He continued, “Two recent independent studies by Pew and the federal government
have just revealed that gun homicides are down almost 40% and general crime
involving guns has dropped a whopping 70% since 1993, which corresponds with
the elimination of the federal assault weapons ban. In contrast, the few areas
of the country where gun crimes have increased dramatically are the very places
where local or state governments have banned or severely restricted gun
ownership by law-abiding citizens.”
Many of the design features now banned by Connecticut’s new
law have long been standard in firearms design as they enhance safety, accuracy
and ease-of-use, and include: design features that enhance a citizen’s ability
to balance a firearm properly so that it can be shot safely and accurately
based on the size of the owner – especially if the owner is smaller-sized like
many women, the elderly, and youth shooters (retractable shoulder stock);
design features that allow a long gun to be held more easily for accuracy and
to be held onto by its owner if an attacker tries to take the gun from a victim
(pistol grip and forward pistol grip); design features that allow those who are
in stressful situations with multiple home-invaders or attackers to have
sufficient bullets for meaningful self-defense without impractical situation of
having to try to reload or access a second gun (standard magazine capacities
over 10 rounds), etc. The specific firearms now banned by the law include
some of the most commonly used and popular models in Connecticut and in America
today, including the light and versatile AR-15.
Some local retailers supporting the lawsuit say that in
addition to the increased dangers created by the law, the law is vague and
unworkable. Although they are knowledgeable about various types of firearms,
many are having difficulty trying to determine which firearms are banned and
which are legal to sell. If they decide incorrectly, they could be facing years
in jail. Some say it is difficult for reputable dealers to continue serving the
law-abiding citizens of Connecticut under these circumstances. If licensed
dealers leave the state, it will become increasingly difficult for the people
of Connecticut to acquire firearms to defend themselves. Meanwhile, these
retailers say, the criminals will still be armed and in an even stronger
position to harm and terrorize the people of Connecticut.
The Connecticut lawsuit, like similar legal challenges in
New York, Colorado and Maryland, is expected to better define the limits of a
citizen’s right to own a commonly used firearm of personal choice for
self-defense, defense of family, and other lawful purposes. Each of these
states has enacted new firearms laws that make citizens and law enforcement
less safe as they try to defend against criminals and the mentally ill who do
not obey these laws.
Refer all questions to:
President, CT Citizens’ Defense League 860-235-7490
Brian Stapleton, Esq.; Goldberg, Segalla, LLP 860-760-3300
Comments