Connecticut LEO says will go door to door to confiscate guns,,, interesting

[RobertNashville]

I think there is. It is called making the legislative bodies adhere to the US Constitution and quit passing these emotionally

charged laws. If that can't be done, follow what the Fathers intended. Pretty easy decision to me.

 

Sometimes, pragmatism is a disease worse than the West Nile virus.

How exactly do you "make them adhere to the U.S. Constitution if they don't want to OR if they just don't believe they are violating the Constitution?

Voting them out is all I can see that is a peaceful solution but...I don't know that they are but it may well be a safe assumption that the majority of the citizens of Connecticut want these laws (and therefor, voting in lawmakers who will rescind them would be extremely unlikely)...given that, do you really think that armed rebellion, when you are not only fighting the military power of the State but also a majority of the citizens' opinions would have any chance of success?  I don't.

 

I just simply see a lot of dead gun owners

I suppose that if that's the hill you decide you are willing to die on then you do it but I'm not sure anything good would come from it.

Edited March 3, 2014 by RobertNashville

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The Fathers didn't say all solutions were easy when they conspired to write those old dead documents, Robert.

You may put your shackles on any time you wish.

Edited March 3, 2014 by 6.8 AR

[RobertNashville]

The Fathers didn't say all solutions were easy when they conspired to write those old dead documents, Robert.

You may put your shackles on any time you wish.

I'm just suggesting that people understand the likely consequences of their actions because it probably won't end well for those who try to resist. In any case, what I wold do personally is a decision I alone will make and likely won't make until they are on my doorstep...if you want to assume that means I'm putting on my "shackles" you can do so.

Let's not forget that the this situation in CT or that we see brewing in other parts of the country wasn't created by some King an ocean away over which the people had no say in what happened like we did in the 18th century...WE the people are 100% responsible for where we are now as a country...if they come for our guns it will be because the majority of the people voted for it (or at least don't have a problem with it)...this isn't 1776 no matter how much some try to equate the two periods in history.

Edited March 3, 2014 by RobertNashville

[Guest semiautots]

There is another option that is so reprehensible, it probably should not be discussed here.  I will simply state that sometimes you must go to the head of the beast.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm just suggesting that people understand the likely consequences of their actions because it probably won't end well for those who try to resist. In any case, what I wold do personally is a decision I alone will make and likely won't make until they are on my doorstep...if you want to assume that means I'm putting on my "shackles" you can do so.

I think they will if or when something like that happens, Robert. It's not as sensational as you think because I don't see it happening, but it could because of events like this. This won't be the modern day flash mob. I have concerns about things like that, also, but if or when something happens because of some government's actions, I think those affected people will have figured out the reasoning without you or I worrying for them. It may even become you or I within the affected crowd of angry people who may have just had enough, don't you think?

 

Let's not forget that the this situation in CT or that we see brewing in other parts of the country wasn't created by some King an ocean away over which the people had no say in what happened like we did in the 18th century...WE the people are 100% responsible for where we are now as a country...if they come for our guns it will be because the majority of the people voted for it (or at least don't have a problem with it)...this isn't 1776 no matter how much some try to equate the two periods in history.

 

No, it isn't, but it is the sentiment of the King's that caused the Fathers to be wary of future tyrants and it was reflected by the documents. We, the people have a duty to do the best we can to preserve this country and everything associated with its success and continuance, and that doesn't mean we should rationalize our lives into oblivion by rewarding tyrants by allowing such unjust laws and blindly obeying them, also. The further success of our republic depends on our continued diligence, up to and including all remedies against those who wish to harm it. We shouldn't blindly obey unjust laws. Just because a law is passed doesn't make it just, only legitimate in some eyes.

 

Now, if you wish to sit around while you lose that right, whether God given, or acknowledged by the Constitution, that's entirely up to you, but there are those of us who think this is a reason to fight over. Personally, and some may have heard this and think once too many, I think the battle should have been over the very first gun laws, which were and still are unreasonable and unjust.

 

It's very easy to sit back and quarterback on a forum. It's when you put it on the line that counts. I think everyone thinks it was an atrocity when those children were murdered in Connecticut, but that just goes to show unjust laws are made from emotion. And when emotion is used as a tool by those who wish to disarm We, the people, that government is extremely suspect. In other words, some things are worth fighting over until the problem is fixed.

Edited March 3, 2014 by 6.8 AR

[RobertNashville]

Sit around and lose my rights?
 

Okay...so if you think I'm just sitting around how about helping me out and tell me what 10 things I can do right now to keep from losing my rights?

 

Maybe there are some actions I can take that I'm not already taking.

 

[Chucktshoes]

Mark your calendars here folks as I wouldn't expect to see this happen again. It is no secret that Robert and I don't exactly see eye to eye on most matters and a good chunk of the more heated flare ups occur between him and I. I've never been one to hold my tongue when expressing my opinion to and of him, but in this case I think going after him is barking up the wrong tree. For the most part he has just stated simple facts and laid out the different options that face the citizens of CT.

 

Where I would disagree with Robert's assessment is on one specific point. I wouldn't say that this law is the will of the majority of the citizens. The simple truth is that most folks are indifferent on guns and the laws, good or bad, are lobbied for and passed by small minorities at either end of the spectrum. It is within those small minorities where the opportunities and the dangers lie.

 

In this case there is a majority of a minority that has taken a stand and that stand can have far reaching, national repercussions regardless of what some may think. The majority of owners of the now banned weapons have chosen to no longer allow the title of "law abiding citizen" to be used against them. They have instead chosen to ignore this law and become criminals, felons in the eyes of the state. This is no small step and its magnitude should not be overlooked. Tens of thousands of CT citizens (possibly 100,000 or more) have taken that step. The question that must be considered is (as Robert put it) how many of them really are willing to die on that hill? If even only a very small percentage of those who are now felons according to the state are willing to use violence in defense of their rights it is still likely several thousand who will exercise their right to engage in an unfair gunfight. The CT state police only number 1300.

 

If they do start stacking officers and kicking in doors it will change the game nationwide. The gun grabbers will have crossed the Rubicon and the consequences will be severe for all sides. I'm far from the only person who thinks in terms of targeting the political class. They asked for this fight and they will have it brought to their front door. I think some of them have realized the vipers nest they stepped in. There are reports of CT state Reps and Senators who voted for this law asking for security details after their names and home addresses were circulated in a nice easy to use list.

 

 Some want to pretend that this is CT's problem and we have our own in TN. I guarantee that if shots get fired and gun owners and politicians start dying over this law that the consequences will be felt everywhere. The state won't be able to back down after that and every gun owner or activist in every state will suddenly have a giant bullseye on their back. The federal government will say that they have all the proof they need that we really are the potential terrorists they said we are. It only goes from bad to hell from there. We are standing on the brink here and Lord willing, the CT state government will pull us back because only they can right now.

Edited March 4, 2014 by Chucktshoes

[sigmtnman]

W.O.T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edited March 4, 2014 by sigmtnman

[Chucktshoes]

[quote name="sigmtnman" post="1119752" timestamp="1393896425"]W.O.T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/quote] Que?

[sigmtnman]

Que?

 

wall of text.  :D

 

ETA.  although wide open throttle could apply as well!

Edited March 4, 2014 by sigmtnman

[Chucktshoes]

[quote name="sigmtnman" post="1119759" timestamp="1393896878"]wall of text. :D ETA. although wide open throttle could apply as well![/quote] Haha. I'm on my phone, did it not break it into paragraphs?

[sigmtnman]

Haha. I'm on my phone, did it not break it into paragraphs?

 

ah, no.  :D

[bersaguy]

maybe I am being a little too harsh but I can't help but wonder - if the firearm owners of Connecticut had the intestinal fortitude to perhaps make another shot heard round the world (i.e. resist with force) then perhaps they should have had the intestinal fortitude to not put such low life anti-constitution legislators in their state legislature.

 

I can't agree with your last statement in this post. When they elected these people they probably had no clue what their true views were regarding the 2nd Amendment was and they surely were not expecting a Sandy Hook Situation when they voted. I think they just need to begin filing lawsuits against the law makers to either force a recall or take their cases in a class action to the Federal courts to try and have the laws removed as being unconstitutional. ........................jmho

[RobertNashville]

I can't agree with your last statement in this post. When they elected these people they probably had no clue what their true views were regarding the 2nd Amendment was and they surely were not expecting a Sandy Hook Situation when they voted. I think they just need to begin filing lawsuits against the law makers to either force a recall or take their cases in a class action to the Federal courts to try and have the laws removed as being unconstitutional. ........................jmho

You may be right or I may be; neither of us can know since we weren't there and we didn't vote.

[sigmtnman]

Here is a recent article from the Examiner regarding the letter in the other thread.

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/crisis-connecticut-confrontation-looming

[A.J. Holst]

I've actually thought about the big WHAT IF; a young man or woman, about my son's or d-i-l's age, in LE or the Guard, comes a-knockin' for my gunz.

 

Will I pull a Heston?.."out of my cold, dead fingers"..." or maybe surrender them one bullet at a time?...lie?..I have very few bought through a retail establishment (which is why I love FTF and guv'mint hates it)

 

Personally I like "lie" It's like all those empty trucks that crossed into Syria - if you know they're coming...

 

What about the resources required to go door-to-door and conduct a search of a private residence? Huge tax increases to to pay for the labor and hire more LEOs to combat crime while millions of officers are working in the seizure dept.

 

Continue to vote, continue to write letters and continue to conduct yourself as a gun owner with a brain.

[Guest copperhead_1911]

We tried to warn those Yankees about big government and they just would not listen. Well now they are having it come home to roost.

[Oh Shoot]

We tried to warn those Yankees about big government and they just would not listen. Well now they are having it come home to roost.

 

Predictions from the Scruffy Little City Prophet:

 

Nothing "big" is going to happen. The law is passed, and will likely stand for many years if not "forever".

 

Folks will be charged one at a time when the illegal firearms are discovered due to incidental investigations and arrests for mostly unrelated matters. There is I suppose the possibility that those who turned in applications late might have their homes searched via warrant, but I rather doubt it.

 

Over time, most will be turned in as they are inherited by children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren who grow up educated in the truth that they are evil.

 

- OS

Edited March 5, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Guest copperhead_1911]

Predictions from the Scruffy Little City Prophet:

 

Nothing "big" is going to happen. The law is passed, and will likely stand for many years if not "forever".

 

Folks will be charged one at a time when the illegal firearms are discovered due to incidental investigations and arrests for mostly unrelated matters. There is I suppose the possibility that those who turned in applications late might have their homes searched via warrant, but I rather doubt it.

 

Over time, most will be turned in as they are inherited by children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren who grow up educated in the truth that they are evil.

 

- OS

"illegal firearms" with all the democrats up there why are they not known as "undocumented"

[gregintenn]

You know, thinking about it, If everyone in Connecticut decided to turn decided to turn in their rifles and magazines at the same time, not to speak of the ammunition for them, wouldn't it be quite a logistical problem to store them all until they figured out how to dispose of them? I expect there are a lot of them in circulation.

[JayC]

They're breaking their oath, period.  But, it's not like that isn't uncommon today.  They also break their oath anytime they perform a search based on exigent circumstances, or attempt to prohibit video taping in public..  The list is a mile long... :(

 

I've called both my state representative and senator about the constitutional carry law...  but, I think we need to focus on pressuring our legislators to stop supporting Beth Harwell as speaker, because she is the road block to getting better firearm laws passed.

 

If you want to play “What if” let’s look at something close to reality. Carrying a loaded gun in Tennessee is a crime. What about the Officers enforcing that?

We have a bill right now to remove that unconditional law from our state. But what do we do? We write letters and we listen to the forum members tell us why this bill can’t pass; politics and usual. We accept that and do nothing. Yet we want to whine and cry like babies because the state can’t force gun rights down the throats of businesses. They can’t do it because they are rights you do not have.

We have a Constitutional Carry bill submitted. But apparently we will stand by quietly and watch it die. So we don’t get to judge the people in Connecticut.

 

[JayC]

You missed one...  Or you can resist with violence before they show up on your doorstep.  Take the fight to the tyrants and their henchmen in their homes and in the streets, like they would do to you.

 

Not that I'm suggesting anybody do that...  but it's a valid option at that point.

 

 

I'm not sure there is a correct course of action.

• Trying to vote out the idiots is one approach but that can take a long time assuming it ever happens at all.
• You can get the petroleum jelly and comply like good little servants.
• You can continue to be a felon and hope they don't arrest you
• You can leave the state and try to find someplace where the legislature doesn't have their heads up their nether regions.
• You can resist with violence when the show up on your doorstep wanting to confiscate your "illegal" weapons and arrest you which may be the most heroic thing one could do although I suspect it will end very, very badly for the hero and his family.

 

 

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You know, thinking about it, If everyone in Connecticut decided to turn decided to turn in their rifles and magazines at the same time, not to speak of the ammunition for them, wouldn't it be quite a logistical problem to store them all until they figured out how to dispose of them? I expect there are a lot of them in circulation.

What problem? Make a pile, get a big cutter or torch. Those people would be glad to do that, just like every other regime that has

done it.

[RobertNashville]

You missed one...  Or you can resist with violence before they show up on your doorstep.  Take the fight to the tyrants and their henchmen in their homes and in the streets, like they would do to you.

 

Not that I'm suggesting anybody do that...  but it's a valid option at that point.

For me, the fact that someone could chose to do that doesn't mean it a valid option.

 

Let's not forget that the firearm owners in CT who are now facing this issue are facing this issue because they and the other citizens of CT voted for the legislators who passed this law and I would suggest that this process stretches back decades and decades of people choosing, either actively or passively, to allow their rights to be taken away.

 

If that is an accurate assessment then I have a hard time feeling sorry for them at this point and I'm not at all sure that engaging in a violent confrontation (whether on the offensive or defensive) is justified. And...if it isn't justified I don't consider it a valid option...a possible option but not a valid one.

 

If things really come to that I think it will turn out badly, not just for those firearm owners who resist with violence gut perhaps for all of us. I don't remember if I've said it here or not (as I've been discussing this on other sites as well) but once they show up on your doorstep to collect your "illegal" weapons you've pretty much already lost no matter what you do at that point...these CT folks should have been more awake and concerned years or decades ago.

Of course, that's just my $0.02

 

Edited March 6, 2014 by RobertNashville

[Chucktshoes]

For me, the fact that someone could chose to do that doesn't mean it a valid option.

 

Let's not forget that the firearm owners in CT who are now facing this issue are facing this issue because they and the other citizens of CT voted for the legislators who passed this law and I would suggest that this process stretches back decades and decades of people choosing, either actively or passively, to allow their rights to be taken away.

 

If that is an accurate assessment then I have a hard time feeling sorry for them at this point and I'm not at all sure that engaging in a violent confrontation (whether on the offensive or defensive) is justified. And...if it isn't justified I don't consider it a valid option...a possible option but not a valid one.

 

If things really come to that I think it will turn out badly, not just for those firearm owners who resist with violence gut perhaps for all of us. I don't remember if I've said it here or not (as I've been discussing this on other sites as well) but once they show up on your doorstep to collect your "illegal" weapons you've pretty much already lost no matter what you do at that point...these CT folks should have been more awake and concerned years or decades ago.

Of course, that's just my $0.02

 

I've made that very point in support of the option you don't recognize as a valid one. I would say that it is actually one of the strongest reasons to exercise that option and to make the originators of the violence face its consequences.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Chucktshoes