HARTFORD, Conn. — After a marathon 11-hour debate, the state Senate passed a gun safety bill Friday that would make it easier to file civil lawsuits against gun manufacturers and make it harder for some residents to obtain a pistol permit.

On a mostly party-line vote, the Senate granted final legislative approval for a controversial measure that would allow civil lawsuits against gun manufacturers, marketers, distributors and retailers who fail to take “reasonable controls” against selling guns to traffickers, straw buyers, and those the sellers believe would commit a crime.

“Despite the deadly nature of their products, gun manufacturers and sellers have enjoyed broad immunity to civil action, which has allowed them to turn a blind eye to dangerous sales practices that all too often end in tragedy,” said Senate President Pro Tempore Martin M. Looney, a New Haven Democrat. “This bill holds the industry accountable by giving victims an opportunity to recover appropriate damages from an irresponsible gun industry member.”

The measure passed by 25-11 with Democrats largely in favor and Republicans largely against. The two members to break with their parties were Democratic Sen. Cathy Osten of Sprague, who voted against the bill, and Republican Sen. Tony Hwang of Fairfield, who voted in favor. Republicans staged an 11-hour filibuster and offered 18 amendments that were rejected by the Democratic majority.

Sen. Rob Sampson, a Wolcott Republican, offered numerous amendments in an unsuccessful attempt to change the legislation that he says would lead to more lawsuits.

“This bill does not address gun violence or criminals who choose to commit it,” Sampson said. “This bill represents a concerted national effort to effectively litigate the firearm industry out of business. It’s an attack on lawful business owners in the firearm industry alone, with civil liability based on the unforeseen actions of criminals. There are vague and subjective terms—trap doors—throughout, which are a dream for anti-gun activists and litigators looking to harm the industry with meritless cases. This is simply a political bill disguised as an effort to keep people safe.”

Sampson added, “The message is clear: If you manufacture, sell, or promote legal firearms in Connecticut, you are no longer welcome here. It will have a chilling effect on the state’s firearm industry, and thus your innate right to self-defense through the Second Amendment, the likes of which we have never seen. This is not about public safety and will not save a single life.”

Before the Senate approval, the state House of Representatives voted 100-46 last month in favor of the legislation.

Gov. Ned Lamont will sign the bill, his chief spokesman, Rob Blanchard, said Friday.

House Bill 7042 allows the state attorney general, as well as private citizens and cities and towns, to file civil lawsuits against those “who fail to implement so-called reasonable controls in preventing the sale of firearms to straw purchasers, firearm traffickers, and individuals who are prevented from purchasing firearms under our laws.”

Democrats said the bill is necessary because the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, known as PLCAA, was passed by Congress in 2005 that provided special immunity protections for gun manufacturers.

So far, nine other states have passed similar legislation to expand the possibility of gun-related lawsuits, including New York, New Jersey, California, Maryland, Illinois, Colorado and others.

The 11-hour debate, which started at about 1:30 p.m. Thursday and ended at 12:30 a.m. Friday, was among the longest of the year. The Senate then continued debating other bills and adjourned at 1:37 a.m. Friday.

In a long stemwinder on the Senate floor, Republican Sen. John Kissel of Enfield blasted the bill as an attack on Second Amendment rights. During his speech, Kissel made winding references to railroads, attorneys’ fees, scratch-off tickets, casinos, Hartford, car fatalities, troopers, eye-hand coordination, Jack LaLanne, Methuselah, the Bible, and hallucinogenic mushrooms. He talked about walking from the Hartford train station to state Capitol and visiting his grandfather in Philadelphia as Republicans talked throughout the entire day and past midnight.

11 misdemeanors

The multi-pronged bill also makes it harder for some residents to obtain a gun permit if they committed crimes in other states. Currently, Connecticut residents who commit felonies and 11 “disqualifier misdemeanors” are not permitted to obtain a pistol or revolver permit. But residents who commit essentially the same misdemeanors in other states, and then move to Connecticut, are still able to obtain a permit.

The bill would cover anyone convicted of those misdemeanors in another state during the past eight years; they would now be blocked from getting a pistol or revolver permit, lawmakers said.

Under Connecticut’s “clean slate” law, convictions for certain misdemeanors are erased. But Connecticut’s clean slate law does not apply to out-of-state convictions.

In a longtime oversight, police and attorneys have somehow never noticed that out-of-state convictions were handled differently, officials said.

Separately, attorneys for the families of victims of the shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown in 2012 filed a civil lawsuit under a different provision of the law concerning unfair trade practices. The provisions in the bill would be in addition to the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, known as CUTPA.

Striking workers

With time running out in the regular legislative session that adjourns at midnight on June 4, some lawmakers are concerned about the length of the debates in the final days. When debates extend for long periods, other bills can get left without a vote because time runs out at midnight next Wednesday.

Republicans were concerned Friday when the House debated on a highly controversial bill on awarding unemployment compensation to workers who have been on strike for at least 14 days. The measure passed by 87-57 with 13 moderate House Democrats against the bill by 5 p.m., which allowed time to debate other bills on transportation and motor vehicles.

In a letter to all legislators, the parent company of East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney expressed “strong opposition” to the bill that would impact more than 4,300 unionized employees at Pratt and Colllins Aerospace operations at plants around the state.

The letter stated that the median base pay under the new union contract “is now over $51/hour, an increase of over 26% in the last five years.” The “typical Pratt union-represented employee” likely “will see annual earnings this year of over $140,000.”

For years, the House has avoided debates in the final days on issues where the governor has pledged a veto, which Lamont has done.

But House Speaker Matt Ritter, a Hartford Democrat, told reporters Friday that the striking workers’ bill is a high priority for some members of the House Democratic caucus.

“This is the one exception,” Ritter said.

©2025 Hartford Courant. Visit courant.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.