Posted on 03/30/2014 2:44:11 AM PDT by Daffynition
A year ago this coming Friday, the Connecticut General Assembly passed and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed into law "An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Child Safety." This bill, which requires owners of semiautomatic rifles defined as assault weapons to register them and includes other restrictions on guns and standard-capacity magazines, was placed into law using emergency certification, which means it had no public comment or input.
If hearings on the bill had been held, the legislature would have heard from the thousands of law-abiding gun owners who see this law as unconstitutional and continue to support its repeal.
The law neither prevents violence nor protects children. It has, however, far reaching effects. It converts law-abiding citizens into potential felons by the tens of thousands, by making criminals of those of us who choose not to comply with the registration requirements. This despite our having legally and safely owned guns and ammunition for years. It has been reported conservatively that there are more than 50,000 unregistered assault weapons in Connecticut. Their owners can be charged with a Class D felony.
(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...
Will it be as big as the anti income tax rally that was in 1992, if I remember correctly?
I’d hit it.
Vermont is more Libertarian, IMHO.
Talk about your “high-capacity magazines”....
Please do. ;)
A Rachel Corey pancake would be a nice touch.
LEOs usually park their [free-use, free-maintenance, free-gasoline, free-of-property tax] cruisers in their yard....a dead giveaway to where they live.
Politicians have specially designated plates/tags that stand out, so if they don’t have a garage, you can pretty much tell where they reside.
Bill Amen is still in Hartford? South Windsor residents, please vote "A man?" out. South Windsor is not a Dem town, more of a swing town.
LEOs usually park their [free-use, free-maintenance, free-gasoline, free-of-property tax] cruisers in their yard....a dead giveaway to where they live.
Politicians have specially designated plates/tags that stand out, so if they don’t have a garage, you can pretty much tell where they reside.”
For the most part, LEO’s don’t get to take their cruisers home here in CA. The egoist “legislators” OTIH, all have their district numbers as their personal license plates, so I guess you could follow them home if you so desired. But my guess is that if a group showed up at one of their residences, that the cops would not be far behind “to protect them from the peons they represent.” The better thing to do is to take them on at “town meetings.” Citizens have to do this because the “press” also protects them ( that is unless they are Republicans).
One of the funny things that our cops do where I live is park their old retired Crown Vics in front of each of our local banks which is such BS. I know criminals are not the brightest bulbs on the string, but I just imagine that they know that by now all of the Crown Vics have been retired.
Lots of them.
Bill Aman is from my district.
He's out.
> Here in California all LEOs (and their immediate families) automobile registrations are kept secret. This number includes all non-sworn members of law enforcement like dispatchers and secretaries. Even the white hats at the airports. Result, a white hat at LAX was able to run up a five figure tab with his FasTrak transponder and never get caught until the Orange County Register did and expose on toll violators which showed that LEOs were at the top of the list by a wide margin.
Corruption is one the reasons the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) was passed, especially when they’re operating on public funds (something tyrants forget). If they ever try to strip the public of it, rest assured they are up to no good and about the put the citizens in chains, rape them, or both.
Somebody, somewhere knows where a cop, politician, judge, gun grabber, whatever lives. A website just asking for names and addresses of all the above could probably track down every one in the country in less than 6 months. They could list them by city and state for easy locating.
You’re in his district? Sorry to hear that. I lived in East Hartford and I think my district (in the 90s, it was the 9th, parts of Manchester, East Hartford and Glastonbury.) had some Republicans, but most of East Hartford had Dems.
Martha Dean is CTs version of Sarah Palin - a real Tea Party Rock Star!
Martha has a steep climb but she knows it.
What I love about her, is when she walks into a room....she’s the smartest person there.
So far as I can tell, she’s a good public speaker...seems at ease and can answer questions on her feet. We went to her official announcement at the Old State House. It was lovely and the setting was so appropriate. While it wasn’t hugely attended...it was a reasonably sized crowd for a weekday night.
She’s a straight shooter and doesn’t mince words. I’m liking her a lot. If she had won the AG job.....we wouldn’t have this onerous gun law Dan’l foisted on CT in the night session.
Not sure if you dropped an 'l' or added a 'c'!
"Can't be said often enough - the true felons are those that would make citizens into criminals in order to further anti-Freedom agendas."
Marbury v. Madison 1803, vol 5, pg 137
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation that, in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that
a law repugnant to the Constitution is void,
and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)
While acts of a de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy, the acts of a person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist de jure can have no validity whatever in law.
An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
18 USC § 2382 - Misprision of treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
18 USC § 2384 Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
My favorite quote a while ago, “I honestly thought from my own standpoint that the vast majority would register,” state Sen. Tony Guglielmo told the Hartford Courant. “If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don’t follow them, then you have a real problem.”
So, Sen. Tony Guglielmo, back down and repeal the law!! NOW!
Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)
While acts of a de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy, the acts of a person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist de jure can have no validity whatever in law.
An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.
This isn't rocket surgery.....
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.