The National Shooting Sports Foundation filed a lawsuit July 8 alleging that the process used to pass the state’s recent gun control package violated the normal legislative process according to Connecticut statutory law.
Spurred by the Newtown school shooting in December 2012 ”“Â when 26 children and staff members were killed ”“Â Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed a new package of gun control legislation April 4, one day after it was approved by both the state Senate and House of Representatives.
The legislative package included provisions for mandatory universal background checks on all firearm sales, the creation of a dangerous weapon offender registry, and expanded bans on assault weapons and large capacity magazines.
“A 139-page bill was assembled behind closed doors, bypassing both the public hearing and committee processes, and quickly sent to floor votes on the same day in both the House and Senate where legislators did not have adequate time to even read the bill,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel, in a statement. “All of this is in violation of guarantees citizens are supposed to have under Connecticut state statutes and protections in our state and U.S. constitutions for which our forefathers fought.”
NSSF, based in Newtown, represents more than 7,000 firearm companies nationwide, including all major gun manufacturers.
The lawsuit is at least the second lawsuit filed against Gov. Dannel P. Malloy and other government officials in response to the legislation.
Several gun advocacy groups and individuals filed a lawsuit May 22 claiming the gun control package violates citizens”™ constitutional right to bear arms.
After each filing, representatives from Malloy’s administration have said the governor expected legal challenges to be filed and was prepared to defend against them.
“A 139-page bill was assembled behind closed doors, bypassing both the public hearing and committee processes, and quickly sent to floor votes on the same day in both the House and Senate where legislators did not have adequate time to even read the bill …”
And “speedy passage” is what you get from that?
“Questionable Procedure” is more like it.