Skip to comments.
Is Gun Confiscation on the Way in Connecticut? See the Letter the State Is Sending to Owners
The Blaze ^
| 02/27/2014
| Jason Howerton
Posted on 02/27/2014 11:28:53 AM PST by SeekAndFind
After tens of thousands of defiant gun owners in Connecticut chose not to register their semi-automatic rifles to comply with a hastily-passed gun control law, the state is now taking some action. Officials are reportedly notifying gun owners who submitted late applications that they have one last chance to get rid of their illegal weapons.
State officials did accept some gun registration applications that were submitted after the Jan. 4 deadline, however, not all late applications were accepted, the Journal Inquirer reports.
But rather than turn that information over to prosecutors, state officials are giving the gun owners a chance to get rid of the weapons and magazines, the report adds.
So gun owners who actually tried to register their guns and magazines, intentionally late or not, are now on the states radar for owning guns that became illegal overnight. Owning an unregistered semi-automatic rifle or high-capacity magazine that was legal prior to Jan. 3 is now a class D felony under the new law.
The Capitalism Institute claims to have obtained a copy of the notarized letters Connecticut officials are sending out to late registration applicants:
Source: The Capitalism Institute
While we cant confirm the authenticity of the letter above, the Journal Inquirer, which is a local paper covering North-Central Connecticut, reports the state does hold notarized letters for violators.
As TheBlaze reported earlier this month, as little 15 percent of the now-illegal semi-automatic rifles have actually been registered with the state of Connecticut.
No one has anything close to definitive figures, but the most conservative estimates place the number of unregistered assault weapons well above 50,000, and perhaps as high as 350,000, the Courant reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: banglist; connecticut; guns
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
To: Blood of Tyrants
I am thinking making it a requirment to REGISTER their guns AFTER they own it is itself ex-post-facto
21
posted on
02/27/2014 11:51:57 AM PST
by
Mr. K
(If you like your constitution, you can keep it...Period.)
To: smokingfrog
Love the graphic and the facts behind it. The CCW badges make me laugh but I could warm up to that one.
22
posted on
02/27/2014 11:52:50 AM PST
by
T-Bird45
(It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
To: SeekAndFind
Reminds me of notices of firearms confiscation posted in Nazi Germany:
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/registration_article/registration.html TRANSLATION:
Regulations on Arms Possession in the Occupied Zone
1. All firearms and ammunition, hand grenades, explosive devices and other war matériel are to be surrendered. The delivery must take place within 24 hours at the nearest German military administrative headquarters or garrison, provided that other special arrangements have not been made. The mayors (heads of the district councils) must accept full responsibility for complete implementation. Commanding officers are authorized to approve exceptions.
To: Mr. K
No, this is not an
ex post facto law.
The law forbids owning something, and requires owners of things to register them. Failure to register, and continuing to own after the ban, are violations committed after the law was passed.
This is a blatant violation of the Second Amendment; it is a clear infringement on the "right of the People to keep and bear Arms."
To: SeekAndFind
If a state, now KY, has to recognize out of state homo weddings, then NY needs to recognize all CCWs.
Plain and Simple.
25
posted on
02/27/2014 11:54:27 AM PST
by
ealgeone
(obama, border)
To: Mr. K
It seems that Concealed Carry Permits do the same thing: Tells the state where to go to get the guns.
I think I’ll take a pass.
26
posted on
02/27/2014 11:57:29 AM PST
by
Uncle Miltie
(Mohammed was a pedophile and Islam is a Totalitarian Death Cult.)
To: ealgeone
RE: If a state, now KY, has to recognize out of state homo weddings, then NY needs to recognize all CCWs.
If the Obama administration can sue a Transport company for firing Muslim employees for refusing to deliver alcohol, using violation of civil rights as the reason, why aren’t Christians being defended by Obama when they are forced to service gay weddings?
To: Mr. K
To: NorthMountain
you can’t ban something AFTER people own it
You can’t make it illegal to own something AFTER the fact that they own it
29
posted on
02/27/2014 12:04:53 PM PST
by
Mr. K
(If you like your constitution, you can keep it...Period.)
To: SeekAndFind
There is something fishy about this.
The warning letter claims the postmark deadline was Dec 31st.
This warning letter is dated Jan 2nd.
Not enough time has gone by for this to make sense.
30
posted on
02/27/2014 12:05:26 PM PST
by
mwilli20
(BO. Making communists proud all over the world.)
To: tsomer
Is this legit? The lamestream media doesn’t even show any links on this matter. None. If it IS legit, there’s an obvious cover up in the mainstream media.
To: missnry
If they are not making a run on the Capital ... I would be surprised. Prepare to be surprised.
32
posted on
02/27/2014 12:08:31 PM PST
by
mwilli20
(BO. Making communists proud all over the world.)
To: mwilli20
Not enough time has gone by for this to make sense. Yes, if you give the weasely "received or postmarked by" language in the letter any credence. In all likelihood, the receipt deadline passed (the 31st) and these letters issued immediately. They're not going to nitpick postmark dates unless someone challenges the state in court.
33
posted on
02/27/2014 12:36:28 PM PST
by
Charles Martel
(Endeavor to persevere...)
To: SeekAndFind
34
posted on
02/27/2014 12:47:35 PM PST
by
ealgeone
(obama, border)
To: CitizenUSA
“Anything ( not just constitutionally- protected things like arms) they know you have ......they can try to take away from you.”
First guns, then salt, then sodas, then bacon, there’s no end to it....
35
posted on
02/27/2014 1:16:50 PM PST
by
snoringbear
(E.oGovernment is the Pimp,)
To: Mr. K
Yes, actually, you can. What you can’t do is prosecute them for owning it before you banned it; that would be an”ex post facto” law. You can prosecute them for continuing to own it after you banned it.
The questions really are:
1) Does the State have the authority to ban posession of ANY material object?
and
2) If “yes” to (1) above, does the State have the authority to ban posession of weapons?
I’m unclear on (1), but (2) is a clear violation of the Second Amendment.
To: SeekAndFind
37
posted on
02/27/2014 2:40:57 PM PST
by
fortheDeclaration
(Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
To: Axeslinger
“What are they going to do when their local LEO’s come breaking down their neighbor’s door at 2am to confiscate this now illegal weapon?”
Why, gather at the evidence office and politely request its return. In large numbers. Suitably equipped. The Ukranian model should suffice.
38
posted on
02/27/2014 3:00:53 PM PST
by
ctdonath2
(Making good people helpless doesn't make bad people harmless.)
To: SeekAndFind
The CT State Police will need to draft clear orders for their officers to enforce this law. I would suggest that they model their written instructions on the excellent work of the distinguished, experienced, and professional General Thomas Gage:
Orders from General Thomas Gage
to Lieut. Colonel Smith, 10th Regiment 'Foot
Boston, April 18, 1775
Lieut. Colonel Smith, 10th Regiment 'Foot,
Sir,
Having received intelligence, that a quantity of Ammunition, Provisions . . . Tents and small Arms, have been collected at _________ . . . you will March . . . with the utmost expedition and Secrecy to _________, where you will seize and destroy all . . . Ammunition, Provisions, Tents, Small Arms, and all Military Stores whatever. But you will take care that the Soldiers do not plunder the Inhabitants, or hurt private property . . .
What could go wrong?
39
posted on
02/27/2014 3:40:19 PM PST
by
Pollster1
("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
To: CivilWarBrewing
Is this legit? I'm skeptical. Registered gun owners are directed to either turn in the guns and magazines, destroy them, or sell them out of state through a dealer. Scenario:
(knock knock)
"Hello?"
"Hi, we're the local gestapo, and we're here to take your registered gun."
"Oh Damn! Wish you'd stopped by yesterday! I melted it down just last night--to make plowshares! You could've saved me the trouble!"
"Plowshares? Excellent! Thank you for your time."
40
posted on
02/27/2014 5:05:25 PM PST
by
tsomer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson