Posted on 03/03/2014 8:44:13 PM PST by lbryce
Complete Title: Fed-Up Navy Veteran Forewarned Conn. Lawmakers on Gun Registration: ‘I’m Telling You Right Now, I Will Not Comply’
Now that tens of thousands of gun owners in Connecticut are in direct violation of a hastily-passed gun control law, a video of a fed-up Navy veteran warning lawmakers that he “will not comply” with the law is just going viral. As previously reported by TheBlaze, as many as 100,000 gun owners technically became felons overnight because they chose not to register their semi-automatic rifles and/or high-capacity magazines.
A man, identified as John S. Cinque, reportedly appeared at a public meeting in North Haven, Conn., on April 22, 2013, to confront lawmakers over the gun control law.
Cinque started by asking if the bill would have done anything to prevent the tragic Sandy Hook shooting. Eventually, Connecticut State Rep. David Yaccarino (R) replied, “maybe not.”
Cinque went on to ask what the state plans to do with residents who “will not comply with this law.”
“That’s up to you, that’s your right,” Yaccarino said. “As far as Sandy Hook, we don’t know if it would’ve or wouldn’t have, but we also have an obligation to do our best to protect public safety.”
That’s when Cinque went off, causing the room to erupt in applause.
“I’m a 30-year public servant, 20-year career fireman, OK? United States Navy veteran, upstanding citizen all my life, three children — and with the stroke of a pen from the ivory tower with the gold top, you’ve decided to create me to be a felon. A class D felony for doing absolutely nothing wrong.”
He also warned lawmakers that gun control advocates would not simply stop at gun registration.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
Video has been removed.
They should institute a suit against the state for seizing private property legally acquired without just compensation.
These legislators are not law-makers - they are thugs.
The citizens have right to keep and bear arms. They also have right not to have the state steal their personal property. Thru also have right to Due Process of law, not patent unconstitutional legislation purporting to criminalize them for fully lawful protected conduct. It is the officers of the state that are criminal in connecticut, not the citizens.
“That’s up to you, that’s your right,” Yaccarino said.
Since the state Representative left it up to Cinque, the correct answer would have been "Thank you Representative, since it's up to me, nothing will be done".
I hope that Mr Cinque’s gun supporting neighbors and fellow Connecticut citizens are ready to stand up to the government. This could very well end in some blood being spilled, unfortunately, all because some know-it-all, all powerful, holier than thou politicians are trying to run people’s lives.
I would think that there has to be at least one or two of those politicians that have a weapon or two that has been banned. I would love to see the FFL that sold them the weapons go public so they can be confronted. We all knows, its ‘good enough for me, but not for thee’ with politicians.
YouTube:John S Singue: Connecticut Veteran Says "I Will Not Comply" to Unconstitutional Gun Laws
Thanks. I stopped at the comment and didn’t get to see that you’ve already posted it only after I did so myself.
I've recorded EVERY gun rally in CT for the past 4 years. The following is the link to that entire town meeting which occurred almost a year ago.
This pirated video will also be replaced.
I like how the oozing sleazeball of a politician uses Obamacare being upheld by the Supreme Court as justification for what legislators can do as far as infringing on our rights.
John Roberts, all on you you coward. You and your name will forever be mud.
Bravo to Mr. Cinque. These zipperheads need to be called out on this.
When is someone going to ask in a very public way: What are you doing about the (mostly illegally acquired) guns used by the gangbangers?
If blood is to be spilled, Imhope some of it is the legislators that passed this unconstitutional law.
Federal Law trumps state’s rights in this case each state is a party to the Second Amendment.
If 0vomitcare is an example, then they can start prosecuting non-compliant gun owners after they finish prosecuting non-compliance with 0vomitcare.
There are millions of people who have not signed up for insurance, and the government looks the other way.
(No, I”m not in favor of 0vomitcare or any other forced purchase. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.)
My observation is that they go after easy targets who are no threat, not targets that are a real problem. So they’ll go after the upstanding citizen with an unregistered gun, not the dangerous thug with a stolen gun. The same way they’ll go after a little old lady who is going 10 mph over the speed limit, not a gang member who is dealing drugs.
The easy targets are a great source of revenue and no danger to anyone, least of all law enforcement. The gangbangers are a danger to everyone, especially an officer trying to arrest them.
They and those who GIVE THE ORDERS should be the primary targets when bloodshed becomes unavoidable.
Bad analogy
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.