Posted on 03/04/2014 7:30:01 AM PST by Kaslin
Connecticut gun owners are calling the state’s anti-gun bluff. The state recently passed a slew of anti-gun legislation, including a gun registration program for so called “assault rifles” that has been received with less enthusiasm than Obamacare. In fact, many gun owners in Connecticut have elected to ignore the patently unconstitutional law in the same way that Millennials have ignored the IRS requirement for health insurance. And now, as the state issues threatening letters and increased confiscation rhetoric, citizens are telling the state: “Come and take them.”
Lawmakers in Connecticut have already threatened current gun owners with confiscation in accordance with the new regulation requirements. And despite a fraction of state gun owners deciding to comply with intrusive registration requirements, the Governor has accelerated his anti-gun rhetoric. (Colorado voters decided to hold recall elections… Connecticut gun owners have decided to take the Barack Obama approach: Ignore inconvenient laws.) Letters have been sent to “known gun owners” demanding registration, or the surrender of their “assault weapons”. The birth place of the Constitution, it turns out, is still home to armed students of human liberty.
Despite the strong rhetoric, and threatened legal action, citizens have remained stunningly unphased by the authoritarian nature of Connecticut’s gun registration scheme. In fact, Connecticut Carry (a decidedly pro-Second Amendment group) has even gone so far as to challenge the state to go door-to-door:
Connecticut Carry calls on every State official, every Senator, and every Representative, to make the singular decision: Either enforce the laws as they are written and let us fight it out in court, or repeal the 2013 Gun Ban in its entirety.
Connecticut Carry has essentially called their state’s bluff: “Repeal the law, or start confiscating”. After all, going door to door, in an effort to confiscate the guns of well-armed citizens, seems like a mildly insane idea… Even in wildly liberal havens such as Hartford.
Connecticut’s assault on self-defense is not, unfortunately, an isolated incident. The NYPD has started a similar gun confiscation program in New York, and New Jersey (judging by their rhetoric) is not far behind. New Jersey, as it turns out, is next in line to butcher the Second Amendment into an unrecognizable web of regulation and restriction as they consider banning .22 Rugers and Henry Rifles… Because, well, such guns could be used in a crime. Recently proposed gun legislation in the Garden State would outlaw the ownership of any rifle that has a capacity of more than 10 rounds… Because, as studies have shown, it is usually the 11th round that is used in a violent crime. (Um… I’m still waiting for someone to create that sarcasm font for me.)
Apparently, Connecticut, Colorado, New York, California, New Jersey, and a growing number of other states, believe it is acceptable to restrict their citizen’s rights on the supposition that those rights might be misused to inflict damage on the greater populace. George Washington is often attributed a quotation that articulates such injustice as a violation of human rights: It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it.
In the end, it is neither the legislators, the governors, nor the courts that are the final arbitrator of justice. It is the people. The un-elected masses. Connecticut gun owners are essentially calling on the state to either begin confiscation (and prosecution) of Connecticut’s gun owners… Or shut up and repeal the latest batch of unenforceable gun restrictions; because they understand that laws have little bearing when they infringe upon the common understanding of liberty. And that’s not the interpretation of some right-wing gun nut… Unless, of course, that’s how you describe Thomas Jefferson. Connecticut will soon find itself involved in a protracted legal debate over the meaning of the Second Amendment… Or they will be in the precarious position of confiscating weapons from otherwise law-abiding (well-armed) citizens.
Write whatever laws you want… If you can’t enforce them, they’re as useless as President Obama’s foreign policy.
March 25 is Greek Independence Day.
1821 overthrow of the Ottoman empire.
Totally incorrect. We have many worthy battles that need to be fought.
I’m guessing the first things CT will do is deny drivers licences and vehicle registrations.
How do they know who has a rifle?
“They can buy parts to modify their firearms; that AR-15 is okay if they replace the barrel with one that doesn’t look as scary and replace the standard-capacity magazine with multiple smaller-capacity 10 round magazines. That is a waste of money that does nothing for public safety, but it does make the individual’s problem go away, at least in the short term, and with minimal effort.”
I’m not sure of your age, but I can remember a time that we were able to smoke while flying on any commercial airline.
The Libtards started putting limitations in place while telling us that the limitations were safety reasons and that they would not become stricter.
Now, where do we stand on that simple act?
Need I expand on this?
Well said!
Why would they do that? You really need to stop speculating *rme*
I look at it this way, if I submit I am likely subjecting my children and grandchildren to tyranny. My rights come from God, not from the Marxists seeking to impose their will upon me.
Just as I served my country and was willing to sacrifice my life for liberty, so too should I be willing to suffer or sacrifice for the sake of liberty. Someone has to do it as others before have done it.
Not sure about California confiscations but they did make certain semi-auto’s retroactively illegal like in CT. Enforcement and/or confiscation is left to local LEOs.
In New York, FOID’s are being revoked for adjudgement of mental illness (for some very flimsy reasons such as a single visit to a MH professional). Upon revocation the po-po show up & confiscate the citizen’s guns.
Since mental illness is now defined as objecting to the Obama agenda, expect this pretext to be invoked frequently.
The impasse in Connecticut will turn ugly soon. Reverence for the police died when Officer Friendly died of old age. Remember when a cop killer was the worst criminal in the world? That was because the cop on the beat really was your friend. He was far more likely to use his nightstick than his gun and he didn’t routinely tog up in combat gear with an AR-15 & ride into the neighborhood in an MRAP.
Today, the police are seen as armed enforcers of the will of the State. They search your car and ticket you & take your money. Anything you say to them can & will be used against you. A chilling prospect.
We are lectured, “Don’t judge all Muslims because of a few terrorists!”
Well, “Don’t criminalize all gun owners because of the criminal misuse of guns” seems to use the same logic. Doesn’t it?
Doesn’t it?
Without those, all your other battles are lost before they're begun.
We agree. But people have a range of priorities in their lives. I’m hoping a sufficient number of CT citizens will refuse to allow this law to stand rather than working around the letter of the law. Full compliance with the letter and the spirit of the law is the worst of all possible options. Even if I had too little backbone to defend freedom, I would rather put my guns and ammo on the front lawn with a “take what you want” sign than give them to a government that was confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens. Better to arm unknown individuals, some of whom will oppose tyranny, than to disarm everyone.
Conservatives are, however, by nature law-abiding. We expect leftists to realize that their demands are unconstitutional and back down eventually (which is not rational on our part - they want unconstitutional, unlimited power, violating our rights is the goal and not just an oversight). It takes a little thought for us to cross the line from complying even with dumb laws because they are laws to active resistance. I think it is worth articulating the available options with firearms, with ObamaCare, with mandates to provide artistic services to gay weddings, and with the rest of the big government overreach.
You are a patriot. Thank you
I'm not sure what you are refering to. Source?
I live in CA and have not heard or seen such a service.
Thank you, sir!
Apparently they’ve been getting the info from the NICS forms at gun stores? Yes, I know, they’re strictly forbidden from doing that, but what the heck?
In this case, I think the notices are going out to people who stupidly registered, but after the deadline.
Gonna be some dead cops in Cali before this is over.
See post 31.
This is why some conservatives don't like the NRA because they have capitulated on other conservative principles (Supporting Harry Reid for one) and cannot see the forest for the trees sometimes.
No. Liberal logic is a different thing altogether. They are mentally defective to start with. Add to that an agenda concerning Muslims (which I swear is meant to do nothing but p!$$ off Conservatives) and their inate fear of guns and you have a serious problem trying to establish a benchmark or find middle ground.
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.