Skip to comments.Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms:Satire with a Point
Posted on 03/08/2014 6:43:28 AM PST by marktwain
A satire article with an appropriate measure of truth is going viral on the Internet. "Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms after finding most cops in the state are on the list" is a satire posted on callthecops.net four days ago on March 4th. At the bottom of the page, discreetly posted, is this disclaimer:
This site is a satire of the current state of Law Enforcement, Fire Fighting and Emergency Medical work. Stories posted here are not real and you should not assume them to have any basis in any real fact.The article was emailed to me from a trusted friend who stated that he had not verified it. Long established skepticism combined with a short search revealed the satire. It is good satire, because there is considerable truth in the article. The primary deviation from reality is the assumption in the article, that police officers in Connecticut would be required to follow the law, and register, transfer, move out of state, or surrender semi-automatic rifles and magazines that are included in the law, just like everyone else.
I hate to tell the author of this but this is bogus ... If you read CT PA13-3 as well as the associated PA13-220 it clearly states Leo's can own and carry and purchase firearms that utilize magazines that hold more then 10 rounds as well as "assault rifles" and their associated standard capacity 30 round magazines. On page 3 Section 1 part d speaks to the ownership of magazines, the firearm section is a few pages further but reads the same.The authors of the legislation were not as clueless as the article makes them out to be. They foresaw that a great many police likely owned the second amendment protected items that they desired to outlaw, and that this could make enforcement efforts difficult and dicey. So they offered the police this bribe: we will make you exempt from the law as long as you work for us. You will not have to register your weapons... because we expect you to follow orders. This sort of exemption for enforcers of authoritarian regimes is common around the world. I recall the story of a fellow student that I knew in graduate school. He was from Indonesia, and someone at his high school had challenged him to fight. When he showed up, he was toting a Sten submachine gun that his father owned. It was forbidden to nearly everyone in the country, but his father was a policeman.
Did I take an oath to the Constitution? What bearing does that have on this conversation? . . . I dont want to talk about the Constitution, Maam, at all, at all.Police are clearly part of the new nobility. The ruling class has to have its enforcers.
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.