Yet.........
Posted on 02/22/2014 11:21:49 PM PST by neverdem
Laws are more than just symbolic gestures. Connecticut's General Assembly must come to grips with this truth before its recent effort to “save lives” ends up destroying them.
State law enforcement officials are now in the difficult position of dealing with one of the most widely flouted laws since the end of the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit and Prohibition. If it’s really serious, the state will have to find space to imprison 300,000 residents for the next five years.
The first article of the Connecticut Constitution couldn’t be more clear. “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state,” it says.
Busybodies at the Capitol in Hartford decided that “every” doesn’t really mean every, and it banned the semi-automatic rifles that would be most useful in defense of the state. As of Jan. 1, owners of arms that have a menacing appearance had to submit registration paperwork to the state.
Only about 50,000 did so. There’s no way to know how many “assault rifles” remain unregistered, but the best guess is that the new “gun safety” law instantly created 300,000 felons.
Eager to exploit the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, easily frightened lawmakers rushed to add yet more hurdles to gun ownership in the state. Those wishing to possess a pistol already had to pay fees, take tests and fill out paperwork to obtain a firearms-purchase permit.
Separate permission from the state was required just to buy ammunition in a process that must be repeated every five years. Bearing arms outside the home requires another permit that the state may, or may not, issue at its discretion...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Too bad about the 50,000 sheep.
Everyone of the 300,000 should show up on a pre-determined day at the state capital and turn themselves in to be arrested...
That would put an end to this nonsense...
Yet.........
And the Ukes are armed with only motorcycle helmets and bats, knives, chains. They might carry out one or two successful SWATings in CT, but after that, 300K armed with high capacity reach-out-and-touch-someones fighting on their home turf...?
Hopefully reason infects the brains of the legislature and they quietly, and without fanfare, overturn their unconstitutional ban.
State law enforcement officials are now in the difficult position of dealing with one of the most widely flouted laws since the end of the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit and Prohibition. If it’s really serious, the state will have to find space to imprison 300,000 residents for the next five years. The first article of the Connecticut Constitution couldn’t be more clear. “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state,” it says.
Don’t Connecticut gun owners also have phones and pens? There problem sloved!
This is how fascism works. Pass laws that make everyone felons and then selectively enforce the laws against your political enemies.
I can't believe 50,000 did.
Imprison 300,000?
Just channel Earl Warren and FDR; they imprisoned 110,000 Japanese in California in 1942.
A point to remember is that many “bullet proof” vests will not stop a .308 round.
Now that's the 50,000 dollar question, isn't it?
I would love to hear their answers.
The left is dumbfounded. Normally the folks just act like good sheep and comply. What will they do now?
Yeah, the dem's all-time wet dream maker, FDR, was all-in on putting U.S. citizens in detention camps.
Old habit/practice for the Democrat party.
They will confiscate unregistered firearms found incidentally during a low-risk police activity (like enforcing a summons for a parking ticket), and then make a high-profile prosecution on that charge.
The search which discovers the firearm(s) will be warrantless, unlawful, and invalid. Charges may be dismissed or nullified by a Jury. The law itself may be successfully appealed and ruled to be unconstitutional. It won't matter. "The process is the punishment".
Repeat as opportunity presents itself.
This will backfire when the firearms owner turns out to be a registered Democrat - and one of the state legislators.
Former Supreme Court Justice Stevens wants to Rewrite Second Amendment
Posted on February 22, 2014 by Gary DeMar
John Paul Stevens served on the Supreme Court from 1975 to 2010, the second longest tenure of all Supreme Court justices. Fortunately for freedom-loving Americans, he can’t do any more damage. Of course, this hasn’t stopped the present crop of justices from significantly remaking America into their own misguided image.
His latest book, Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution, is an inside look into the mind of a Supreme Court Justice, and it’s not a pretty sight. Stevens has been described as a “Midwest Republican conservative” that became a “hero of the political left.”
In his book, Stevens proposes that the Second Amendment be changed from this . . .
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”
. . . to this:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.”
Stevens shows by his call for the addition of “when serving in the militia” that the original meaning referred to private citizens (people) and not only people serving in the military....
And as felons - they will lose their right to vote.
Take that all you FReepers who think it’s a good idea for felons who are released to no longer have the right to vote.
They take our guns and that gives them the right to take away our vote. What could be better for the dems?
” they imprisoned 110,000 Japanese in California in 1942.”
Yep. 110,000 UNARMED Japanese. 300,000 gun owners might be a bit different. Maybe.
The NRA was first organized after the Civil War because marksmanship in the Union Army was pitiful. The NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, the NRA-ILA, was first organized in the early 1970s, IIRC, to deal with gun grabber assaults on the Second Amendment.
“Just channel Earl Warren and FDR; they imprisoned 110,000 Japanese in California in 1942.”
But those folks weren’t gun owners! They had no means to defend themselves. And in a perverse way, there was some semblance of reason for the action taken.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.