Connecticut House Passes Bill Targeting Glock Handguns and Striker-Fired Pistols

Connecticut’s House passed HB 5043, a “convertible pistol” bill targeting Glock-style handguns over illegal switches. The bill now heads to the Senate. IMG Jim Grant

The Connecticut House of Representatives voted 86 to 64 on April 22, 2026 to pass HB 5043, legislation that would effectively ban the sale of Glock handguns and similarly designed striker-fired pistols in the state. All House Republicans and 15 Democrats voted against the measure.

ADVERTISEMENT

Gov. Ned Lamont introduced the bill on February 5, 2026, as a governor’s bill pursuant to Joint Rule 9. He held a press conference promoting the legislation in early March and has expressed his intent to sign it. Key legislative supporters include Rep. Steven Stafstrom of Bridgeport, who led the floor debate, along with Rep. Eleni Kavros DeGraw, Rep. Josh Elliott, Sen. Derek Slap, and Sen. Martha Marx.

The bill bans the future sale, importation, distribution, and advertising of “convertible pistols” in Connecticut. The legislation defines a convertible pistol as “any semiautomatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted by hand or with a common household tool into a machine gun solely by the installation or attachment of a pistol converter.”

ADVERTISEMENT

This definition targets Glock handguns and similarly designed striker-fired pistols, which are among the most popular handguns in the United States. Violations would be classified as a Class D felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

The ban would take effect on October 1, 2026, under the current House-passed version. Current Glock owners could keep their firearms and sell them privately. The bill also redefines unfinished frames and receivers as firearms to target ghost guns and strengthens existing bans on bump stocks.

The stated rationale is to pressure manufacturers like Glock to redesign their pistols. Hartford police seized 51 modified Glocks between 2023 and 2024, and one such weapon was used in the killing of a 20-year-old woman and her 4-year-old son. Lamont noted that Glock already sells a modified version in Germany that is harder to convert.

ADVERTISEMENT

Second Amendment supporters have raised serious objections. The NRA-ILA called the bill “draconian” and warned it is “on shaky constitutional footing.” The organization noted that since Glock is the most commonly owned handgun in the nation for self-defense, banning its sale is constitutionally suspect under District of Columbia v. Heller, which protects arms “in common use.”

Rep. Craig Fishbein stated, “‘Shall not be infringed’ still appears in the U.S. Constitution… I own firearms capable of being converted… None of them have been converted into machine guns.”

Rep. Doug Dubitsky raised the alarm that if the rationale of banning any firearm capable of illegal modification is accepted, it could logically extend to all semi-automatic handguns.

Rep. Greg Howard pointed out that even Glock’s redesigned V-series was found to be convertible within days of its release. “For as long as human ingenuity is going to exist… somebody, somewhere is going to find a way to manufacture, design something that can overcome the reset cycle of a pistol and make it fully automatic,” Howard argued.

House Minority Leader Vin Candelora argued the bill will not reduce violence. “They could pass every law in the books to regulate guns and restrict guns and prohibit the purchase of guns — it doesn’t actually accomplish, I think, what we want to see, and that is a reduction of gun violence.”

Opposition was overwhelming. Critics also noted that convertible pistols could still be legally purchased out of state and brought into Connecticut, and that no law enforcement exemption exists for police departments to purchase new Glocks. The NRA is already challenging California’s nearly identical law in Jaymes v. Bonta and has signaled it will pursue the same challenge if Connecticut’s law is signed.

The bill now heads to the state Senate, where it is widely expected to pass easily. If signed, Connecticut would become the third state, after California and Maryland, to effectively ban Glock sales based on the convertible pistol framework.

If Gov. Lamont signs HB 5043 into law, Connecticut residents will lose access to the most popular defensive handgun in America based on the theoretical possibility that criminals might illegally modify it. The legislation punishes law-abiding citizens for the actions of criminals who are already violating federal law by possessing machine gun conversion devices.

This bill sets a dangerous precedent that could be used to justify banning virtually any semi-automatic firearm on the grounds that some aftermarket part might someday be invented to modify it. Connecticut gun owners should recognize this for what it is: another step in the incremental disarmament of the American people disguised as a public safety measure.

2 Likes

What Happens In California Does Not Stay In California

7 Likes

Follow the “leader”. Hard to believe it’s getting worse since I left the state when hb6667 made my decision for me, but here we are.

Cracked me up meeting a self professed California Marxist while at the outer banks in NC last fall. She informed me when she got back home she was going to get a Glock. Her expression when I explained why she better hurry home was hilarious. The discussion was over :partying_face:

7 Likes

I have to agree with CT on this, striker-fired handguns suck. :smiling_face_with_sunglasses:

Okay, Elmer :wink:

1 Like

Okay, you got me, I was being facetious, but I still believe they suck. :smiling_face_with_sunglasses:

1 Like

Maybe it’s because I learned to shoot handguns with a Glock, but I fail to see why people dislike striker fired guns.

Yeah yeah, the trigger feels different than a hammer gun, but it’s still far better than 90% of airguns that I grew up with!

As to CT,….

Any gun law is an infringement.

I will go out on a limb here and punch a hole in Heller,….

Machine guns were in “common use” by civilians until the NFA tax scheme was enacted to prevent gangsters from killing other gangsters during prohibition…..

And while machine guns were still allowed for civilians to purchase, the protect gangsters act,… err, sorry, the NFA priced most common civilians out of buying one.

Fast forward to the machine gun ban in the 1980s,….

Why did that happen?

Ohhh because most people couldn’t afford to get one anyway thanks to a decades old TAX SCHEME!!!

Then, because next to no citizens had one thanks to being priced out of possession, they were declared “dangerous and unusual” weapons and all future sales to civilians was banned…. INSTANTLY turning all civilian owned machine guns into collectors items and massively increasing the value/price of the few on the market! Further pricing citizens out of their right to bear arms……

Today, machine guns are NOT in common use amongst “the people” because nobody can afford them….

And SCOTUS will be looking simply at that “common use” wording and not how we got here….

I don’t give two :poop::poop: what the firing mechanism is,….

ANY GUN LAW IS AN INFRINGEMENT!:enraged_face:

4 Likes

And there’s your answer. :smiling_face_with_sunglasses: I was be trying to be funny. I don’t hate them, but I do prefer my Barettas over my few striker-fired, though my last striker-fired does have a nice, easy and short trigger pull.

1 Like