https://insideinvestigator.org/hunting-guns-protection/>“Connecticut has not banned hunting rifles. Whether or not they are constitutionally protected, they are certainly democratically protected,” Perry said. “As a rule, something that is popular doesn’t need constitutional protection, because it’s popular. Hunting rifles would certainly fall into that category.”>He went on to say, “As to whether Connecticut could restrict hunting rifles, I think we probably could not, because I think it could be shown that they are not unusually dangerous. They are not ill disproportionately suited in the way that… AR-15s are, and the record might well show that they were used and useful for self-defense. I’ll be honest, we have not done that analysis, but I have no reason to think that wouldn’t be true.”unironically correct. the 2nd amendment and CT state RTKBA
>Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17). The original 1818 text came from the Mississippi Constitution of 1817.explicitly only protect weapons of war and weapons commonly used in self defense. ergo a hunting rifle is not protected, but an AR-15 or a glock 17 are protected
now, why the fuck would anyone but the more evil piece of shit tyrant regulate hunting rifles and shotguns, idk, since they are basically never used in murders, but democrat tyrant going to democrat tyrant.
also looks like /news/ stealth added that 15 min timer from /v/ and /vg/
