TexasCHLforum.com

I think the entire legislative issue in Connecticut is a solution looking for a problem. Besides some videos of drones with handguns attached to them, I don't think there is a real issue with these becoming the weapon of choice for anyone. what disturbs me more is the overreach they are using to outlaw photography in public places calling it voyeuristic. Laws already exist to prohibit someone from photography through persons widows etc. This is just another case of government overreach, the FAA has placed licensing restrictions on drones over a certain size, now the Connecticut legislature has taken it upon itself to prohibit something that doesn't exist on the open market. (I know the military has weaponized drones) I suppose that someone could with the right tools and equipment construct weaponized drones, but why try to enact new laws. Using any type of remotely controlled weapon, be it a bomb, a booby trapped shotgun at a doorway etc.. is already illegal. Anyone using such a device against a person would already be prosecuted under existing laws.

I don't own any drones, weaponized or not, and I don't know if they would fall under the 2A as bearing arms, but I'm pretty sure it would be a difficult sell that you used one in self defense.I just think that legislatures should find other things to worry about than to try to ban things that aren't a problem.JMHO