What’s the best ct gun store with the most in store inventory. I’ve been having a hard time finding some. I’m looking for a store with good pre used firearms, ar-15 inventory, pcc’s too

William Kirk's part II. This time looking at CT's Grant response.

We are now in the timeframe where the briefs in support of assault weapon bans are being filed in the Supreme Court. Today we focus on response brief #2, the one in Grant v. Higgins. Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, goes through Connecticut's brief to outline the arguments made in support of an otherwise unconstitutional gun ban. Yes, the arguments are disingenuous, yes they are ridiculous but what do you expect? So today, let's keep tally of everything they will argue to keep you disarmed, and in doing so, arm yourself with education.

Read the Memorandum of Connecticut here. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-238/430314/20261021172119817_25-238%20-%2025-566%20-%20Brief.pdf

Youtube AI Summary:

In this video, William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, analyzes the response brief filed by the state of Connecticut in the Supreme Court case Grant v. Higgins. Kirk frames the discussion as a "Bingo" game, highlighting recurring and, in his view, disingenuous arguments used by supporters of assault weapon bans.

Key arguments analyzed from the brief include:

• Claims of Excessive Lethality (2:52 - 3:55): The brief argues that AR-15 style rifles are significantly more lethal than standard handguns, causing "catastrophic" tissue damage, which the state contends justifies a ban.
• Rejection of the 'Common Use' Test (3:59 - 4:45): Kirk notes that the respondents attempt to circumvent the Heller standard by debating the interpretation of the phrase "dangerous and unusual," arguing that the government has a historical tradition of restricting uniquely dangerous items.
• Historical Analogies (5:37 - 5:50): The state cites the historical regulation of Bowie knives as a precedent for banning weapons they deem "unusually dangerous."
• Law Enforcement and Self-Defense (7:13 - 8:43): The brief argues that AR-15 platforms pose an acute threat to police and are rarely used for legitimate self-defense, a point Kirk disputes by highlighting the irony regarding police funding and training.
• Legislative Deference (10:12 - 10:44): The respondents assert that a measured lawmaking process is appropriate, arguing that there is no "adverse possession theory" for constitutional rights.

Kirk concludes by encouraging viewers to read the full memorandum linked in the video description to better understand the legal arguments being deployed against Second Amendment rights.

Can a NYer bring an AR-15 to a gun range in CT? What if it has a fixed 10 round mag and Kali Key BCG (bolt action)?

Anyone recommendations for a gunsmith that will drill and tap a carbon fiber rib for a mid-bead? Gun is a Super Black Eagle 3.

Suppose an individual submitted and received approval for a Form 1 several years ago for a registered pre-ban stripped lower receiver, with the intention of eventually building it into a short-barreled rifle (SBR). However, the receiver was never actually assembled into an SBR, and therefore, the required engraving was never completed.
Now, with the recent rule change, would that individual still be required to engrave the receiver before completing the SBR build, or would the new requirements apply to previously approved Form 1 applications as well?
Essentially, I’m trying to determine whether the engraving requirements in effect at the time of the original Form 1 approval still apply, even though the firearm was never physically manufactured into an SBR.
I realize this is a somewhat unusual situation, but I’d appreciate any clarification or insight into how the rule change affects previously approved, but not yet completed, Form 1 builds.

Big thanks once again to the Tom and the crew over at Swamp Yankee for coming through and giving me a place to spend my money

Light setup is about as budget as it gets, it’s an ebay 1inch picatinny mount and the harbor freight special. Currently running the silencerco sparrow on it but i’m looking into lighter options. What’s your favorite 22 as of late?

I’m thinking of buying a Ruger Mark IV. Some of the models I’m looking at have a muzzle brake, some are just threaded barrels. Does a LGS handle the sale and pin the brake or thread protector? How does it work if I buy the pistol from an online store (I’d rather not but how does that work)?

Edit: I hate this state.

What belts are you guys running for your edc?

Is there a Glock Blue label dealer in CT that has actual blue label discounts? Im looking mostly for a plain G45.6 which gssf suggested pricing of $515; My local dealer wants after the alleged discount $1,100 + tax for a blue label G45.6 aimpoint coa which is all they have currently. Im waiting for my gssf coupon to come in but is there a blue label dealer in CT that has actually discounted blue label plain G45.6s?

Picked up a stripped 10/22 receiver from Swamp Yankee Arms yesterday. Filed a Form 1 last night. Feddersen 12" Bull Barrel. I think every 10/22 should come this way!

Went in to Ron’s to grab some ammo… walked out with a gen 6 19 COA…
Way too good of a deal to pass up, somebody definitely would’ve snagged this thing in the next few days. After waiting 2 months and spending the money on the 45, it felt wrong to leave this one on the shelf

…but does this A2 stock kit count towards making it featureless? Obviously it’s not the only criteria but would this make a rifle build “less scary” to Uncle Ned and Tong? Similar to the FightLite SCR lower design?

https://ar15discounts.com/products/nbs-a2-stock-kit/

William Kirk, Washington Gun Law, delves into the response brief(s) for Viramontes/Grant. His video summary:

The time has finally arrived, where the briefs in support of assault weapon bans are now being filed in the Supreme Court.  Today we focus on response #1, that in Viramontes v. Cook County.  Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, goes through the brief to outline the arguments made in support of an otherwise unconstitutional gun ban.  Yes, the arguments are disingenuous, yes they are ridiculous but what do you expect?  So today, let's start keeping a tally of everything they will argue to keep you disarmed, and in doing so, arm yourself with education. 

Read the Memorandum of Cook County here.  https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-238/430314/20261021172119817_25-238 - 25-566 - Brief.pdf

YouTube AI Summary:

In this video, William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, examines the response brief filed by Cook County, Illinois in the Supreme Court case Viramontes v. Cook County. Rather than expressing typical outrage, Kirk uses a "bingo" card strategy to highlight the recurring, disingenuous, and "ludicrous" arguments frequently used to support assault weapon bans (1:06 - 1:47).

Key arguments analyzed in the brief:

• Military-style designation: Claims that weapons useful in military service, like the M16, can be banned (1:58 - 2:25).
• Redefining "Dangerous and Unusual": Arguments that the legal standard for regulation should be more flexible, citing historical examples like Bowie knives, trap guns, and slungshots (2:26 - 3:58).
• Self-Defense Mischaracterization: The argument that the AR-15 is not commonly used for self-defense and instead possesses the "destructive power of an armed battalion" (3:59 - 5:04).
• Preferred Weapon of Mass Shooters: References to its use in high-profile attacks and claims that law enforcement is "outgunned" by these platforms (6:24 - 7:00).
• The Common Use Test: Dismissal of the test based on popularity, arguing that numerical value doesn't insulate a weapon from regulation, citing Heller and Bruin (7:01 - 8:07).
• Local Legislative Deference: A push for states and localities to manage their own regulations regardless of broader standards (8:08 - 8:44).

Surprising Development:

• Kirk highlights a specific, unexpected argument from the county: a rejection of the Solicitor General's premise that AR-15s are necessary for resisting tyranny. The county argues that such responsibilities are exclusively reserved for the modern professional military (8:45 - 9:58). Kirk strongly refutes this, asserting that resisting tyranny remains a core principle of the Second Amendment (9:37 - 9:58).

The video concludes by reminding viewers that oral arguments for this case are scheduled for December 2nd (10:16 - 10:20).

I just read CT's brief and I got to say LoL. Many of their arguments are half truths or completely unfounded. With that said, last year I wrote a very nice college paper regarding gun control and the unconstitutionality behind many of our gun laws that I would like to submit to the correct person in support for CCDL's cause. Whether the lawyers determine if it would be useful or not, I feel like it would be helpful.

Not CT related but our neighbors next door get a win with a federal judge striking down NY's body armor ban. The court did stay their opinion for 14 days however giving the state of NY time to appeal.

The opinion: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/7667/attachments/original/1792596699/2026.10.21_095_OPINION.pdf?1792596699

From the article:

Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. (NASDAQ Global Select: SWBI), a U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design ("Smith & Wesson"), today announced that it has acquired the Savage Arms business ("Savage Arms" or "Savage") by merger from an indirect subsidiary of JDH Capital I, L.P. (together with its affiliates, "JDH"). Savage has been producing firearms for more than 130 years and is one of the world's largest manufacturers of hunting, competition and target shooting centerfire and rimfire rifles and shotguns.

The transaction combines two iconic American firearm manufacturers with leading capabilities across distinct segments of the firearms market. Savage's strength in hunting and bolt-action rifles is highly complementary to Smith & Wesson's leadership position in handguns and growing presence across other long gun categories, creating a broader product portfolio across a wide range of shooting disciplines.

Any shop yall have been to recently that has used .22lr stuff? Looking for pre war to 1990ish pistols and rifles.

Also- which Walmarts in CT still carry ammo? Rocky hill does not.

Thanks!

Does anyone here have experience with Central CT Arms (in Portland) “house branded” lower receivers? Quality? True mil-spec?

Specifically the AC30, which is 5/8x24. Anyone seen one in a LGS lately?

CT early voting begins today. Gun owners are notorious for not voting. The only way we will preserve our rights is to vote the anti-2A politicians out. You have 2 weeks of early voting. There is no reason not to help yourself. You can register and vote the same day. Come on CT gun owners. You carry to protect yourself now vote to protect your rights