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.
Is it a bluff?
I guess they’ll find out.
Require the Legislators to go door to door to confiscate the firearms.
This is the best way to fight these unconstitutional laws. Ignore them. Ignore Obamacare too.
Make these commies show their true hand, a hand that resorts to being the instigators of violence against law abiding Constitutionally protected citizens.
California already started their friendly at-your-door confiscation service.
We have a moral obligation not to submit to truly unjust laws.
Hmmm...How do I put this...IMO anyone who lives and pays taxes to corrupt commies in Connecticut are insane. Now imagine those people armed to the teeth and not going to give up their guns! Looks like a Violent Crimes: SUV episode in the making.
Hmmm...How do I put this...IMO anyone who lives and pays taxes to corrupt commies in Connecticut are insane. Now imagine those people armed to the teeth and not going to give up their guns! Looks like a Violent Crimes: SUV episode in the making.
Beat me to it...
Please explain. What is your source
for that assertion? Thanks.
The laws will never be repealed. They may not enforce them through daily physical confiscation. However, since they will still be on the books, the laws will be “enforced” only when they become convenient, kind of like IRS tax audits.
No way!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3129345/replies?c=1
As a resident of a far-left state (Maryland), for family reasons, I understand the quandary facing armed CT residents. They have so many choices, all of which pose risks or costs:
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.
They can buy new CT-compliant firearms and store their current weapons in another state, at least until the house-to-house confiscation talk dies down. That is a waste of money that does nothing for public safety, but it does make the problem go away, at least in the short term, and with minimal effort.
They can (especially if they have grown children so the heavy-handed enforcement will not disrupt their duty to family) openly defy the law and challenge the thugs to “come and get them”. That can result in a felony conviction that will make firearms ownership illegal, or worse, and I’ll bet leftists would love that outcome.
They can ignore the law - not openly defy the law but also make no effort to comply with even the letter of this unconstitutional law. That will probably mean the law has no effect unless and until they use a firearm in self-defense, at which time they will be the ones charged with a crime (and sued by the criminal “victim” of an illegal gun and its violence).
Finally, they can devote all their available time and money to electing a conservative state government and a conservative federal government that will protect this fundamental God-given right. That is what I will be doing.
The 2nd amendment fight is the only one we should be concerned about. The commies are covering us up with other issues to splinter our efforts when the God given right to protect ourselves and our property should be our only cause. Win this fight and we win all others, lose it and we lose all others. We must stop allowing ourselves to be distracted by all the other issues the ba5tard raises.
It’s like this.
Dear panty waste commies,
You are going to have to use more than a pen and a phone if you want to take my God given rights.
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.