Skip to comments.Is Connecticut preparing for gun confiscation?
Posted on 02/28/2014 10:36:47 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Reports that the state of Connecticut is preparing to send out letters to gun owners with unregistered firearms has caused some to speculate the state may be preparing to engage in house to house gun confiscation.
The Capitalism Institute claims to have a copy of a letter officials in Connecticut are preparing to send out to residents in the state who have not yet registered their firearms with the state.
In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, the state passed a draconian gun control law which required all owners of what it deems assault weapons to register them with the state by Jan. 3 of this year. As part of the law, Connecticut broadened the term to include more than 100 different types of semi-automatic weapons. The law prohibits the sale of any new weapons that meet the definition, but the law contains a grandfather clause providing individuals submit personal information to a state registry.
However, to date, an estimated 100,000 owners with 350,000 weapons have yet to come forward, which has caused concern among state officials over the civil disobedience. The law also prohibits the purchase of magazines containing more than ten rounds; however the lack of serial numbers makes it impossible for officials to determine how many residents have them unless they register them. To date, slightly over 36,000 magazines have been registered out of an estimated 2 million.
With the deadline now passed, officials are pondering their next step.
The letter by the Capitalism Institute was supposedly sent to those who registered their guns after the Jan. 3 deadline. It says, We are returning your application for assault weapon certificate and /or large capacity magazine declaration because it was not received or postmarked prior to January 1, 2014.
The letter goes on say with their registration request denied the gun owner has several options including voluntarily turning over the weapon or magazine to law enforcement, removing it from the state, sell it to a licensed gun dealer or make it inoperable.
The Blaze reported that a spokesperson with the Special Licensing and Firearms Unit of the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection told them that although a letter has been drafted to send to gun owners found to be in possession of unregistered semi-automatic rifles deemed illegal by the states new gun control law, not a single one has been mailed out yet.
The spokesperson, who did not want to identify herself, refused to comment on the draft letters contents. When asked what other type of action the state plans to take, she referred the Blaze to the governors office.
If the letter turns out to be accurate, it would mean those who had their applications rejected are undoubtedly now in some type of government database with the information they submitted. This has caused some to express concern the government could go house to house and confiscate weapons. In New York, following the states new gun control laws that were also passed after Sandy Hook, police were able to target gun owners who possessed weapons that were previously registered in the state and legal, but were now considered illegal.
Jack Minor is a journalist and researcher who served in the United States Marine Corps under President Reagan. He is a book editor and ghostwriter for JMPublications.com, of which he is also the founder. Also, he has written hundreds of articles and been interviewed about his work on many TV and radio outlets.
If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. - Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
If they do, it may be the start of something they don’t want to have finished. Why isn’t there more outcry over this? This is tyranny at the highest level!
Hey Connecticut...GIVE THEM YOUR BULLETS FIRST
Direct link to YouTube of a conversation a citizen had with the Connecticut State Police:
I have to say, I didn't expect Connecticut to be the flashpoint, but here we are.
The Commies sure think they’ve won a complete victory. Let’s see if they really have in Connecticut. Will the gun owners in Ct give up their guns without a fight?
Typical progressive response: "There is scant evidence such a letter has even been thought of and, in any event, no one is talking about mailing it out to the public."
I.e., at this point, unless you are among those the government suspects has a semi-automatic in your home, you will not receive such a letter and may never have any idea of what is transpiring until, of course, it is too late.
Those that ignore such a letter may well find liens on their various bank accounts that must be paid prior to any further withdrawals.
Didn't we see this movie when it came out in the 1930's?
New York and Connecticut may well spark a revolt that spills over to other states. I hope not, of course, we always want peace. Just I hope the state considers all the ramifications of infringing on the 2A before deciding what to do.
Move your accounts to a free state, or disguise them under family trusts. Starve the beast, lest he cause you to have to shoot him later.
Excellent read, asks the Connecticut tyrants if their warning to start making arrests and confiscating firearms that is very likely to result in the high cost of human lives is really what they want.
The people who are being sent the letters were those who tried to register late. I don't think they are going to be the ones to fire back. Probably when they illicitly get the background check info and go after those people.
They probably think intimidation will work. They might get a big surprise.
How much blood and carnage will Governor Malloy (or any liberal) be willing inflict (using guns and SWAT teams?) and how many otherwise law-abiding tax paying citizens will the governor be willing to KILL or IMPRISON to disarm the citizens of Connecticut?
Will the police sent to enforce this Draconian law be willing to KILL their own neighbors and friends, that they may have known for years, possibly in front of children their own children know? How much gun violence will be necessary to protect us from the scourge of gun violence?
Sadly we may soon find out! Tyranny by nature is violence, so knew our Founders, thus the 2nd Amendment. God bless the Connecticut patriots!
19 April, 1775.
They absolutely think intimidation will work - but they will proceed as long as they can even when they fail.
The ironic thing is that you can go to any inner city and buy whatever guns you want for the right price. Unregistered of course.
The answer to this question is "some of them are willing to do so - and they will".
The question after that is "what will people do in response to the killings?".
That is a much harder question to answer.
When “Officer Friendly” turns into JACKBOOTED THUG and tries to disarm you, it’s time to shoot him.
(Check your history to see what fate awaits the disarmed elsewhere iffen you think I’m nuts.)
The real question is... Are CT residents preparing for it?
That's the hypocrisy that infuriates me! If they challenged the gangs it might be dangerous.
What happens when one of these SWAT gestapo raiding team gets torn apart in a raid by someone who knows what they are doing in a firefight? What happens when they kill someone resisting?
As you said these SWAT teams and their families live among the people they would be arresting and or killing. At some point I can see where revenge killings could come into play, as we call it in the hills a “blood feud”.
It will be interesting to watch how this plays out. Possibly a test run for the tyrannical left to see if there will be resistance and to see if the police will follow the orders of their overlords and kill their neighbors and use the “I was just doing my job or following orders...” line of excuses.
I know you are sincere, however, both of those devices appear unwise as they require reporting to the feds. We should expect the dem feds to be very sympathetic to a state's efforts to enforce its gun control legislation, no matter how unconstitutional that may be. Let's see what happens with CA's challenge to the 9th's recent decision on that state's gun control program.
i would love the mofos to come and get mine
they should be posted more often
I think they're already nipping that one in the bud. The state will have girls and guys working neighborhoods where they know nobody; or bring in out of staters who have no emotional connection to a particular region of CT.
This is uncharted territory so they'll want to minimize the chance a minion will get ‘cold feet’.
They ARE NOT that smart.
These dip$&!ts are going to touch off a powder keg and the results WILL NOT be pretty.
There is a positive that can come from it. If there is blood shed, it could trigger the revolution. I don't think however, we have the same mettle as a people that previous generations had. We are a bunch of talkers. We fold quickly.
“Is Connecticut preparing for gun confiscation?”
Yes, they are.
Can you say: Hello, Civil War!
Note to gun grabbers: Civil wars are NOT civil. Civil wars have a life of their own that cannot be contained or managed or fought with an assured victory.
This could be a spark. The state better stand down before things get out of hand.
One dead SWAT team and it will be over.
Actually, this is pretty well-charted territory. We have plenty of examples both historical and contemporary, of how this can play out. (cf. Ukraine, Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Egypt, Syria, 1930's Germany, 1900's Russia, 1790's French Revolution, 1776 American Revolution)
There are plenty of tactical and strategic lesson plans for all sides. A common theme that reoccurs is that "victory is never certain, never complete, and never permanent".
Yes - it can all happen here too.
People should review the specifics of the Guizman (sp?) assault in Easton CT several years back.
It took the combined SWAT-trained officers from six different towns to take down a single house presumed to contain two armed suspects.
The truth is that there aren’t enough officers, let alone SWAT officers, to go after a small fraction of the ~100,000 CT residents who ignored the directive to comply with this law. And the ONLY way to effect confiscation is to go after everyone at the same time.
So after the first evening’s raids we’ll see escalating levels of armed resistance. Within a couple/few days the cops are going to refuse to obey orders and then what? Call in the national guard?
It’s going to get real ugly, real fast. Nobody really wants it, but the Libs are too dumb to see the sad and regrettable inevitability of it should they decide to initiate then escalate?
Molon Labe ping
They won't "confiscate" anything, at least not with a midnight SRT visit to your house.
They don't have to - the law effectively keeps anybody with an unregistered "assault weapon" from ever leaving the house with it - mission accomplished.
Take your unregistered "assault weapon" to the range, or gun shop, or rifle match, or *anywhere* - then officer friendly shows up quietly with his buddies to check your registration status and *boom* the rifle is confiscated and you go to jail, having done absolutely nothing wrong. The cases will take decades to appeal, and the state has your gun in the meantime.
Nobody gets hurt, and the state gets their point across -one gun owner at a time.
...then officer friendly shows up quietly with his buddies to check your registration status and *boom* the rifle is confiscated and you go to jail, having done absolutely nothing wrong.
A few days later some of YOUR buddies pick off Officer Friendly and his buddies from ambush on their way to work, and the bureaucrat who sent them just disappears.
When Officer Friendly turns into JACKBOOTED THUG and tries to disarm you, its time to shoot him.
Nobody Gets Hurt,,,,
watch the game.
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.