View Full Version : Gun confiscation letters in CT?
Is my search-fu that bad? I haven't seen any comments on this: http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2014/02/breaking-news-gun-confiscation-letters-sent-out-in-connecticut-2600370.html
http://gunsnfreedom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/CT-gun-owner-is-denied-application-for-assault-weapons-and-magazines.jpg
It can't happen here… Yeah, right.
http://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/untitled.png
Moose-Knuckle
02-27-14, 18:51
http://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/untitled.png
:lol:
Well I can't say what I was going to without being banned from here lol. So instead lets play . . .
Capture that pic:
"I swear your Honor . . . it was this big."
California's letting out "lifers" (murdering rapist) from prisons and CT is trying its damnist to lock up legal gun owners... Ya wanna know how they knew where to send letters??? Because the legal gun owners where trying to follow the law. If the former states of America keeps this up, its going to have a bunch of proud "criminals" to deal with.
California's letting out "lifers" (murdering rapist) from prisons...
CA must release 50,000 inmates due to SCOTUS ruling that the CA prison system was too overcrowded and is considered cruel & unusual punishment.
Under the CA correctional system, convicts must serve 80% of their sentence before being eligible for parole.
http://youtu.be/jUxjuz2o9Gk
Moose-Knuckle
02-27-14, 20:34
California's letting out "lifers" (murdering rapist) from prisons and CT is trying its damnist to lock up legal gun owners...
Proof positive that our civilization/culture is further being pushed to the precipice.
". . . and what is wrong will become right and what is right will become wrong."
Nevermind.... Wouldn't want to get an infraction for speaking my mind.
SeriousStudent
02-27-14, 20:57
It can't happen here… Yeah, right.
http://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/untitled.png
That dude looks constipated, and he's holding that AR wrong to boot.
That dude looks constipated, and he's holding that AR wrong to boot.:lol: I think that's a woman. Hard to tell for sure.
montanadave
02-27-14, 21:01
That dude looks constipated, and he's holding that AR wrong to boot.
That's a dude? :eek:
Belmont31R
02-27-14, 21:04
That's a Pat. Not sure if Patty or Patrick.
That dude looks constipated, and he's holding that AR wrong to boot.
Reminded me of Beaker from the Muppets.
That is somebody's wife. So let's be a bit more respectful for Pete's sake! Hmmm... that could be someone's husband. Hell, I don't know who's who anymore.
SeriousStudent
02-27-14, 21:46
Excellent. I am glad I have not lost my deft touch.
brushy bill
02-27-14, 21:59
Ouch! What has been seen cannot be unseen.
On a serious note, what are the odds this is the straw that breaks the camel's back?
http://topconservativenews.com/2014/02/official-ct-state-police-spokesman-says-that-state-police-would-participate-in-door-to-door-gun-confiscations/
Hmmmm...
my exact thoughts
when some of us said its coming to the US very soon where gov will send out letters and threaten forced confiscation and we were told tin foil !!!!
It can't happen here… Yeah, right.
http://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/untitled.png
ITS PAT !
have to be a older sat night live fan to understand that :)
:lol: I think that's a woman. Hard to tell for sure.
Whiskey_Bravo
02-28-14, 07:42
This is something that we should all be watching with a close eye. How this plays out will have an impact on the entire country.
Pat from the old SNL days.
This is just a beta test to see how it would go over on a national scale... I have no doubt in that.
http://topconservativenews.com/2014/02/official-ct-state-police-spokesman-says-that-state-police-would-participate-in-door-to-door-gun-confiscations/
Thanks for posting that. If people haven't read it, they should. A quick excerpt:
CT State Police Spokesman Lt. Vance says that state police would comply with an order from the state to conduct door to door gun confiscations.
That kind of rhetoric is gonna get someone hurt bad - on both sides....tread lighty, CT....
VooDoo6Actual
02-28-14, 09:07
It's Perry, formerly Pat, formerly Patricia & of course it's a beta test on a national level, while data is collected trying to glean intel off of people's private (errr no longer private) thoughts.
Same back door type attempt as was done @ High River, Canada by using RCMP as divisive pawns to implement the obvious:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBSSGL64Xdc
Sure would be nice & refreshing if politicians would actually fix some issues rather than spend their time conjuring devious ways to make em worst...
I know, let's use an emergency /crisis / disaster / Black Swan event as a back door / way to cross that Rubicon / clear that hurdle into breeching people's fundamental rights.
"...state police would comply with an order from the state to conduct door to door gun confiscations."
Co-worker, after reading this thread, asked if anyone remembers that clip from the Katrina disaster in Louisiana where the truckful of National Guardsmen rolled up on an area to allegedly begin confiscating weapons when they were confronted by a very large group of well-armed civilians who strongly suggested that they move along?
This sure puts every gun owner in CT in a very unenviable position.
4x4twenty6
02-28-14, 09:33
I hope they try to confiscate peoples guns in CT.
I hope that the people of CT come together to peacefully stand up against these tyrants.
I hope the police stand together and refuse to confiscate guns.
I hope that this incident sends a powerful positive message to the rest of the country that we will not let our rights be taken from us.
and if that doesn't work...
I hope that whoever tries to disarm constitution abiding Americans gets what they deserve.
This is coming from a patrol officer. We took an oath to defend the constitution and ill be damned if I follow an order from some d1ckhead in a white uniform shirt or commie judge/politician.
Be Vigilant
MolonLabe
4x4twenty6,
Amen Brother.
It's getting time for "put up or shut up" from people on both sides of the fence.
SilverBullet432
02-28-14, 09:51
On a serious note, what are the odds this is the straw that breaks the camel's back?
No body knows, it's a time bomb. If SHTF there (forced confiscation) then we will see what will happen.
I would like to believe that this simply wouldn't fly on a national level... We had an AWB once before, and the grandfathered provision is probably what kept things civil. Sans that provision, I could see things getting ugly.
montanadave
02-28-14, 10:06
I think the calculus on the part of the anti-gun political class is that most gun-owners, when push comes to shove, have too much to lose by risking a felony charge or open confrontation with civil authorities. In many cases, they are probably right.
However, they fail to take into account the number of folks who feel politically disenfranchised and economically down-trodden with little hope for an improvement of their prospects. And that's exactly the wrong demographic to push to the limit, particularly by assaulting their constitutional rights.
It's a powder keg and TPTB best be real careful about tossing any lit matches about.
Ned Christiansen
02-28-14, 10:09
I would like to believe that this simply wouldn't fly on a national level....
A sandwich is eaten one bite at a time.
I would like to believe that this simply wouldn't fly on a national level... We had an AWB once before, and the grandfathered provision is probably what kept things civil. Sans that provision, I could see things getting ugly.
I don't think that would be the plan. I see a combination of pushing it through at the state level like in California, Illinois, and other like minded states, and the passing of a national "Anti-Violence Bill" that would in essence have the Feds withhold funding for education, infrastructure, social services and the like if states don't enact gun registration. Or the reverse, Feds will fund more law enforcement programs, jobs, prisons, etc. for states that do enact gun registration. Basically it's called extortion! That's the kind of racket that makes the Mafia envious at how well our government beats them at their own game.
Those CT boys need to start Welding the armor to the front loader.
I hope they try to confiscate peoples guns in CT.
I hope that the people of CT come together to peacefully stand up against these tyrants.
I hope the police stand together and refuse to confiscate guns.
I hope that this incident sends a powerful positive message to the rest of the country that we will not let our rights be taken from us.
and if that doesn't work...
I hope that whoever tries to disarm constitution abiding Americans gets what they deserve.
This is coming from a patrol officer. We took an oath to defend the constitution and ill be damned if I follow an order from some d1ckhead in a white uniform shirt or commie judge/politician.
Be Vigilant
MolonLabe
Awesome to hear you say that, brother. More like you need to come forth, and declare their stance...and then be willing to back it up WHEN push comes to shove.
Like I've posted before, I'm ready to Dance. As are many others.
Whiskey_Bravo
02-28-14, 12:46
A sandwich is eaten one bite at a time.
This.
Something everyone should keep in mind. The 10th Amendment allows for states to rule themselves for the most part.
There is plenty of precedence in regards to states ability to pass laws and regulate firearms. We have also seen many of these harebrained laws get overturned. Although the 2nd Amendment shouldn't be in doubt, unfortunately years of bad laws and public media campaigns have planted the seeds of doubt.
Whether we agree with their shitty laws or not we have to remember that the people of CT as well as other states did elect these people and they are now feeling the pain of those choices. Since the law is on the books I fully expect that the CSP would follow the law until it is declared invalid.
JBecker 72
02-28-14, 13:03
That's not what the tenth amendment says with regard to the 9 amendments preceding it.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Heavy Metal
02-28-14, 13:08
The Supreme Court has incorporated the 2nd Amendment.
davidjinks
02-28-14, 13:27
The time for put up or shut up came the day our government decided it was okay to usurp everyones constitutional rights during the designing and signing of the Patriot Act. That of course is for a whole other thread.
But yes, I agree with you, the time is now.
It's getting time for "put up or shut up" from people on both sides of the fence.
davidjinks
02-28-14, 13:39
The worst thing about that whole deal…
"The RCMP officers were acting alone and not on orders of those appointed over them."
It's Perry, formerly Pat, formerly Patricia & of course it's a beta test on a national level, while data is collected trying to glean intel off of people's private (errr no longer private) thoughts.
Same back door type attempt as was done @ High River, Canada by using RCMP as divisive pawns to implement the obvious:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBSSGL64Xdc
Sure would be nice & refreshing if politicians would actually fix some issues rather than spend their time conjuring devious ways to make em worst...
I know, let's use an emergency /crisis / disaster / Black Swan event as a back door / way to cross that Rubicon / clear that hurdle into breeching people's fundamental rights.
I for one hope that cool heads prevail in CT. I'd rather not see people's hurt and lives ruined because people chose to NOT use the grey matter between their ears.
As much as I hate to admit it, the chances is anything good coming from a physical confrontation are nil. No matter what happens the state propaganda agency will twist and turn the story such that they add momentum to their side.
I for one hope that cool heads prevail in CT. I'd rather not see people's hurt and lives ruined because people chose to NOT use the grey matter between their ears.
As much as I hate to admit it, the chances is anything good coming from a physical confrontation are nil. No matter what happens the state propaganda agency will twist and turn the story such that they add momentum to their side.
I'm sure the Founding Fathers thought that and felt that too.
I'm sure the Founding Fathers thought that and felt that too.
Im sure they did, but I'm also pretty sure that they didn't make a "hold my beer and watch this" decision or allowed the "bring it" side of their ego to make their choice.
Kicking off individual action against the CSP will end badly for gun owners in CT and the US as a whole. Kicking off whole sale action against CSP and the "state" as a whole will have far reaching consequences. People need to understand that and make informed decisions.
Im sure they did, but I'm also pretty sure that they didn't make a "hold my beer and watch this" decision or allowed the "bring it" side of their ego to make their choice.
Kicking off individual action against the CSP will end badly for gun owners in CT and the US as a whole. Kicking off whole sale action against CSP and the "state" as a whole will have far reaching consequences. People need to understand that and make informed decisions.
I hope there is no bloodshed. Sometimes, Good People are forced to fight Evil, with Violence. Nature of the Beast. They may very well force our hands. That is on them.
"hold my beer and watch this" nice one....
Here's a few good ones:
"Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here."
- John Parker
"But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever."
- John Adams
"Each individual of the society has a right to be protected by it in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property, according to standing laws. He is obliged, consequently, to contribute his share to the expense of this protection; and to give his personal service, or an equivalent, when necessary. But no part of the property of any individual can, with justice, be taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of the representative body of the people. In fine, the people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent."
- John Adams
"Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it."
- John Adams
"A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader."
- Samuel Adams
"One of the most essential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one's house. A man's house is his castle."
- James Otis
That's not what the tenth amendment says with regard to the 9 amendments preceding it.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
By the same logic, the State of Utah isn't allowed to shutter any publication or medium that doesn't speak they way they wish about Mormon - just find one good counterexample and even the low information voters can grasp the idea that the the first five articles and subsequent 9 amendments all specifically define the federal government, and limit both the federal and state governments.
Moose-Knuckle
02-28-14, 17:35
I for one hope that cool heads prevail in CT. I'd rather not see people's hurt and lives ruined because people chose to NOT use the grey matter between their ears.
As much as I hate to admit it, the chances is anything good coming from a physical confrontation are nil. No matter what happens the state propaganda agency will twist and turn the story such that they add momentum to their side.
Im sure they did, but I'm also pretty sure that they didn't make a "hold my beer and watch this" decision or allowed the "bring it" side of their ego to make their choice.
Kicking off individual action against the CSP will end badly for gun owners in CT and the US as a whole. Kicking off whole sale action against CSP and the "state" as a whole will have far reaching consequences. People need to understand that and make informed decisions.
Life is a two way street. CSP better choose to use the grey matter in between there ears, kicking off door to door confiscation will send a shockwave across the country and ignite a firestorm. One has to go no further than a history book of the last century to see where all this is going.
"A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader."
- Samuel Adams
This, sadly, is the state in which we find ourselves. The majority of our countries citizens no longer care about or respect the constitution. At this point in time, no matter what the government does, armed revolt by gun owners is not going to be popularly supported by the rest of the citizens of our country. They are too busy drinking government purchased lattes, watching their government provided HDTV, and talking on their government provided smart phones. The confiscation of our guns to those people (and don't get me wrong, I like a latte now and then) is something that they have not only been programmed not to worry about but to champion. Make no mistake, I'm on our (the gun owners) side. But if and when an armed revolt over gun ownership happens, it won't be the government alone we will be fighting but a large portion of our brainwashed citizenry.
Don't forget, most of the populace believe the people at Waco and Ruby Ridge got what they deserved.
I'm pretty sure that you and everyone else knew what I meant. I was being Uber simplistic.
That's not what the tenth amendment says with regard to the 9 amendments preceding it.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
What I'd like to know is how they think they can implement such a plan. Even if I know a person has pallets of heroin in his house - I can't make entry without a search warrant. Are they going to find judges who are brave enough and stupid enough to sign those warrants?
If they plan to invoke martial law and put everyone on lockdown, then they risk the gun owners finding sympathy from all the other citizens who are being forced to stay in their homes so the governor can live out his fascist fantasies.
Grand58742
03-01-14, 11:52
What I'd like to know is how they think they can implement such a plan. Even if I know a person has pallets of heroin in his house - I can't make entry without a search warrant. Are they going to find judges who are brave enough and stupid enough to sign those warrants?
If they plan to invoke martial law and put everyone on lockdown, then they risk the gun owners finding sympathy from all the other citizens who are being forced to stay in their homes so the governor can live out his fascist fantasies.
You ask this question knowing how judges act today? And I would be willing to bet the term "domestic terrorism" gets tossed around as a basis for same allowing the Patriot Act to come into play.
Life is a two way street. CSP better choose to use the grey matter in between there ears, kicking off door to door confiscation will send a shockwave across the country and ignite a firestorm. One has to go no further than a history book of the last century to see where all this is going.
This x1000. A stand has to be taken at some point.
You ask this question knowing how judges act today? And I would be willing to bet the term "domestic terrorism" gets tossed around as a basis for same allowing the Patriot Act to come into play.
1) The Patriot Act only applies to the federal govt last I checked.
2) If y'all really understood how the PA is used and the multiple checks in place, then you'd realize much of what people think they know is internet hype/crap. That is for LE organizations. I can't speak for DoD/OGA's.
3) Yes - I know how judges are and I've been the affiant for plenty of arrest/search warrants, Title III's, etc. I can't speak for the NE part of our nation, but where I've worked the judges ask questions, have us rewrite parts if they are ambiguous and take the entire process quite seriously.
So I'll ask you - what's your experience with judges?
What I'd like to know is how they think they can implement such a plan.
If they plan to invoke martial law and put everyone on lockdown, then they risk the gun owners finding sympathy from all the other citizens who are being forced to stay in their homes so the governor can live out his fascist fantasies.
It seemed to work well enough in New Orleans, post-Katrina, and Boston, post-bombing.
It seemed to work well enough in New Orleans, post-Katrina, and Boston, post-bombing.
That's my point. Those were very different circumstances. I don't believe the non-gun owners in CT will tolerate being put on lockdown for such an operation. The only way I believe they could successfully confiscate all those weapons they want is by entering all the names into the system as warrants. An individual gets stopped for speeding or a DUI checkpoint and now they are in custody. Quiet and under the radar. Going door to door is a recipe for disaster.
And while the LT from CSP may be stupid enough to state they would enforce an illegal order - the brass doesn't always speak for the rank in file LEO's in most agencies. I could even see police unions fighting the whole thing in court.
I don't believe the non-gun owners in CT will tolerate being put on lockdown for such an operation. The only way I believe they could successfully confiscate all those weapons they want is by entering all the names into the system as warrants. An individual gets stopped for speeding or a DUI checkpoint and now they are in custody. Quiet and under the radar. Going door to door is a recipe for disaster.
I agree with you and could possibly see it going down in the same manner. I was just trying to point out the mindset of the masses when Big Brother comes knocking.
Grand58742
03-01-14, 17:53
1) The Patriot Act only applies to the federal govt last I checked.
2) If y'all really understood how the PA is used and the multiple checks in place, then you'd realize much of what people think they know is internet hype/crap. That is for LE organizations. I can't speak for DoD/OGA's.
3) Yes - I know how judges are and I've been the affiant for plenty of arrest/search warrants, Title III's, etc. I can't speak for the NE part of our nation, but where I've worked the judges ask questions, have us rewrite parts if they are ambiguous and take the entire process quite seriously.
So I'll ask you - what's your experience with judges?
The Patriot Act might be federal legislation, but it's not entirely on a Federal level to be enforced. The extension speaks of using the basis to take "lone wolf" terrorists out of action and this law could be used as justification for that. Now how far of a stretch is it for someone to make the case that gun owner X has been looking at terrorist propaganda, tactics and whatnot and presents a threat to the population? Most of the media already considers the amount of firearms and ammunition many of the members here appalling as we saw in another thread, so the perception is out there already. Now why would Joe Q. Public really care about the CT State Police going into Gun Owner Joe's house and taking what was already illegal? They won't as long as it doesn't affect them. And especially the way the violator will be portrayed in the media.
But overall, the Patriot Act as extended does give a lot more latitude to lump people into that terrorist category. Let's face it, Lanza is considered to be a terrorist in some circles as is Hasan. It's no great stretch for one to think that gun owners won't be lumped into the same basket by proxy. Because they already are by some.
Now on the judges, these are the same types that upheld D.C. over Heller in lower courts as well as upholding the law in Chicago until it went to the SCOTUS. And for gun confiscations in NOLA after Katrina? It took a judge two weeks to finally make a decision to put a stop to it and only after the lawsuit had been filed. And took another two years in court before a decision was made. Now this was unrelated since it was a unwarranted search, but the fact that a judge even heard the trial was downright sad. If there ever was a clearer violation of the 4th Amendment in our lifetimes, it was there and the case should never have even made it to court.
So you cannot tell me there are not judges out there that would not sign off on warrants based on a violation of State firearms law? As long as the LEO have their ducks in a row, which they always do, having a judge sign would not be difficult. And being that it's the law now in CT makes it even easier. So yes, having a judge in a notoriously liberal State like CT where firearms were already restricted sign off on a warrant to search the house of a suspected assault weapon owner is entirely within the realm of probability.
My point was not to be argumentative or as anti-LEO. Far from it. But the point is there are plenty of justices out there that would have little problem signing off on warrants for State and local LE to search the homes of suspected gun owners. They already interpret the 2A as being a militia based Amendment only, and far be it for the lesser people to own firearms. In time this might change if challenged in the higher courts, but for the moment, it is the law.
Simple. Everyone who filed late and then had their registration denied and hasn't provided proof that the contraband was sold have probably provided enough evidence for probable cause.
How will they determine this for those not in this category? Well I suspect that they may work with the BATF and go through 4473's or for all we know they have some kind of "unofficial database" they will use.
What I'd like to know is how they think they can implement such a plan. Even if I know a person has pallets of heroin in his house - I can't make entry without a search warrant. Are they going to find judges who are brave enough and stupid enough to sign those warrants?
If they plan to invoke martial law and put everyone on lockdown, then they risk the gun owners finding sympathy from all the other citizens who are being forced to stay in their homes so the governor can live out his fascist fantasies.
Moose-Knuckle
03-02-14, 05:35
Well I suspect that they may work with the BATF and go through 4473's or for all we know they have some kind of "unofficial database" they will use.
Yup, just ask Belmont. He had BATFE show up at his house with copies of 4473's on every firearm he purchased.
It seemed to work well enough in New Orleans, post-Katrina, and Boston, post-bombing.
Courts slapped Nagin down for that, Boston residents could have gone into their yards, but I suspect all the unarmed people were afraid to run into an armed muslim terrorist.
Moose-Knuckle
03-03-14, 13:48
Courts slapped Nagin down for that,
After the fact and an NRA lawsuit.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.