Conneticut !!!!! Don't be Infringed Upon!

[GD2A]

Originally Posted by IamCaleb

What weapons? Ever since the boating accident..........

I know folks say that all the time but in reality wouldn't a warrant be served?

[Grouse]

This 350k number for assault weapons and 2.5 mlion mags is bunk also.

Here is why. For ass weapons. We have had a background check system for 30 years. Basically a duplicate of the federal system. It is required for all new transactions. For all private pistol trasactions and for all tranactions to an ffl. Horse. Trading a gun. It was also optional for al private rifle sales. Given my anecdotal exp. I would say 50% did the dps form 3 on Private rifle sales. So i buy ass rifle from a ffl. Keep it a few years and sell it to mprimo dong a dps3 . He keeps it. And sells it to dafadda who keeps the rifle then sells it to stevect. Doing a dps 3. The stae counts me as 1, mprimo as 1 then dafadda as 1 and steve as 1. It records 4 guns. Not one. It record 4 people as owning a gun not just the last one. They are trying to run a set of metrics to weed out the errors, ut according to the lady who does the dps 3 calls all the good programers are working on the state health care exchange.

For the magazines. My local gun store who is part of the lawsuit. Registered 1/10 of the magazines reported for his personal stash. Another 1k in the buisness. I personally registered all of my mags. The problem is that there is no accurate way to. Track mags and never has been.

[milkmanjoe]

Originally Posted by Grouse

This 350k number for assault weapons and 2.5 mlion mags is bunk also.

Here is why. For ass weapons. We have had a background check system for 30 years. Basically a duplicate of the federal system. It is required for all new transactions. For all private pistol trasactions and for all tranactions to an ffl. Horse. Trading a gun. It was also optional for al private rifle sales. Given my anecdotal exp. I would say 50% did the dps form 3 on Private rifle sales. So i buy ass rifle from a ffl. Keep it a few years and sell it to mprimo dong a dps3 . He keeps it. And sells it to dafadda who keeps the rifle then sells it to stevect. Doing a dps 3. The stae counts me as 1, mprimo as 1 then dafadda as 1 and steve as 1. It records 4 guns. Not one. It record 4 people as owning a gun not just the last one. They are trying to run a set of metrics to weed out the errors, ut according to the lady who does the dps 3 calls all the good programers are working on the state health care exchange.

For the magazines. My local gun store who is part of the lawsuit. Registered 1/10 of the magazines reported for his personal stash. Another 1k in the buisness. I personally registered all of my mags. The problem is that there is no accurate way to. Track mags and never has been.

No such thing a "ass" guns or weapons.
Only the military and LE have select fire weapons, so, the word "assault" as tied to today's ar platform is a carefully constructed switch on words that Democraps have been manipulating since molester Bill Clinton was in office. Remember his manipultaion of "is". Every ar in possession in Connecticut that is non select fire is nothing more than a sporting rifle.
To count the platform in Ct. is impossible. There are guns dating back decades that were never known about. Those owners dare never surface. And there are alot of them. Also, since the unconstitutional law that directly infringes on Ct residents was put in place, nobody knows what guns left the state for storage elsewhere, or how many non registered were imported "just in case". What the people of Ct need to do is group together, hire the most powerful pro Constitution law firm available, and have the law declared unconstitutional, thus suspending it forever. Law Enforcement up in Ct is at a sort of impasse, stating they will uphold laws. Yet there are pro gun LEO's who have no interest in restricting law abiding people, and they don't want to get shot trying to go door to door. Not to mention going door to door, on sheer volume of residences, is impossible.
The legal route is the way to go, immediately.

[Dave Waits]

Basically, this is the crux of the argument; Any second-year Constitutional Law student will tell you that an Unconstitutional Law is Unconstitutional from it's inception, not when a court declares it so. Unconstitutional Laws do not carry any weight and are not to be adhered to. This is paraphrased from a statement made by Lawrence Tribe, the guy who actually writes the books they use in Constitutional Law Classes.

Laws such as this, that are used by Gov't to abdicate the rights of the Citizen are the main reason there is an Unorganized Militia.

[Grouse]

Originally Posted by milkmanjoe

No such thing a "ass" guns or weapons.
Only the military and LE have select fire weapons, so, the word "assault" as tied to today's ar platform is a carefully constructed switch on words that Democraps have been manipulating since molester Bill Clinton was in office. Remember his manipultaion of "is". Every ar in possession in Connecticut that is non select fire is nothing more than a sporting rifle.
To count the platform in Ct. is impossible. There are guns dating back decades that were never known about. Those owners dare never surface. And there are alot of them. Also, since the unconstitutional law that directly infringes on Ct residents was put in place, nobody knows what guns left the state for storage elsewhere, or how many non registered were imported "just in case". What the people of Ct need to do is group together, hire the most powerful pro Constitution law firm available, and have the law declared unconstitutional, thus suspending it forever. Law Enforcement up in Ct is at a sort of impasse, stating they will uphold laws. Yet there are pro gun LEO's who have no interest in restricting law abiding people, and they don't want to get shot trying to go door to door. Not to mention going door to door, on sheer volume of residences, is impossible.
The legal route is the way to go, immediately.

No shit, we all know that. You can harangue the point all you want. Many here in Connecticut do. They did for tens of weeks leading up to the law change. Just like Colorado, and New York. How did that argument work?

The fact of the matter is that our shit hole legislators in the US have allowed a progressive definition change since the mid 1970's. The definitions currently in law in Connecticut disagrees with you.

Arguing that point is nothing but a non sequitur and red herring. That argument is used as a litmus test to disavow, deride, and categorize the argument user a partisan against x policy.

The argument needs to be on the validity of the law, not on the classification of a single gun or word. To many here in CT are using sophistry arguments to the n'th degree. They are failing because after hearing the litmus test spoken people of moderate to semi right persuasion have tuned out. It has become clear that the cases and Federal judges here in the North East have no where to go. Even given a good supreme court ruling, it is very unlikely we will see a reversion to the law prior to this.

What will most likely happen is the law will be amended in single action points so that each change is a law unto its self. Requiring each one to be challenged, heard, decided upon individually. Dragging the issue out for decades.

As for people saying they are in support of CT. I think that is talk, nothing more. Here is why. The rest of the nation is sick of hearing "how to live" from the great north east. Which has a habit of pontificating life. How many times have you thought New York City should just shut the fuck up. When it comes down to it, we will see a similar issue as Detroit. Let the region die in its own festering vomit. Those of the more conservative and gun minded liberal persuasion will leave. I know i am hoping to soon, I know one other on this board that is also. Aside from that i can count probably 5 firearms holders who are in the process of relocating. The general thought is, the fight is null and lost here. Better to move to a state when we have a larger minority and better chance of making a large issue out of this.

[milkmanjoe]

Originally Posted by Grouse

No shit, we all know that. You can harangue the point all you want. Many here in Connecticut do. They did for tens of weeks leading up to the law change. Just like Colorado, and New York. How did that argument work?

The fact of the matter is that our shit hole legislators in the US have allowed a progressive definition change since the mid 1970's. The definitions currently in law in Connecticut disagrees with you.

Arguing that point is nothing but a non sequitur and red herring. That argument is used as a litmus test to disavow, deride, and categorize the argument user a partisan against x policy.

The argument needs to be on the validity of the law, not on the classification of a single gun or word. To many here in CT are using sophistry arguments to the n'th degree. They are failing because after hearing the litmus test spoken people of moderate to semi right persuasion have tuned out. It has become clear that the cases and Federal judges here in the North East have no where to go. Even given a good supreme court ruling, it is very unlikely we will see a reversion to the law prior to this.

What will most likely happen is the law will be amended in single action points so that each change is a law unto its self. Requiring each one to be challenged, heard, decided upon individually. Dragging the issue out for decades.

As for people saying they are in support of CT. I think that is talk, nothing more. Here is why. The rest of the nation is sick of hearing "how to live" from the great north east. Which has a habit of pontificating life. How many times have you thought New York City should just shut the fuck up. When it comes down to it, we will see a similar issue as Detroit. Let the region die in its own festering vomit. Those of the more conservative and gun minded liberal persuasion will leave. I know i am hoping to soon, I know one other on this board that is also. Aside from that i can count probably 5 firearms holders who are in the process of relocating. The general thought is, the fight is null and lost here. Better to move to a state when we have a larger minority and better chance of making a large issue out of this.

I don't know why anyone would choose to leave their home state, regardless of how anyone else feels about it, due to illegal laws. I agree with what Dave just wrote far as the law being unlawful. Trouble is I don't see any class action by the People of Ct taking the task to court. I keep a percentage of my income for supporting legal matters on a pro gun scale, simply meaning I put my money where my mouth is. I am fortunate to be able to help support what I believe in, but I never moan and groan and do nothing. Just not in me. a class action by the People of Ct could easily, affordably, put gun Rights back in proper perspective.