Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Connecticut Gun Law Turning Armed Citizens into Criminals?




By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)

What's happening in Connecticut is not only unconstitutional, but downright irresponsible. Following the Sandy Hook shooting in December 2012, the CT legislature decided to ignore the second amendment and restrict gun rights by creating a state registry system that would require every so called "assault rifle" and high capacity magazine in the state to be registered by the end of Dec. 31st, 2013. This draconian law was passed by Democrats under the claim that it would make the public safer.

But there was never any evidence that such a law could ever increase public safety. For years, gun control advocates claimed that the pro-second amendment crowd was 'paranoid' to assume that registration would lead to confiscation. Despite the fact that there's a long list of historical precedents that show that governments often use registration as a perquisite to confiscation, the gun control crowd often lied about the ramifications of government forcing people to register their rifles.

Connecticut Gun Owners Ignore Registration Deadline

In Connecticut, gun owners have been forced to into a corner. The government has made it clear that they have two options: register their firearms or risk being charged with a felony. Remember, the new law requires that every magazine that held over 10 rounds must be registered. The deadline has passed and many people registered their guns. But the registration is very low. Thousands of gun owners were late in registering and therefore received letters from the State Police warning them to turn in their guns. Because the registration letters arrived late, the government now knows that they have unregistered rifles and this puts these particular gun owners into a very bad spot.

What should they do?

This maybe a good time for them to visit an attorney. Some people may choose to hide their weapons. And if the police come looking for these gun owners, we could see the beginning of a very nasty trend. No one wants to see a confrontation at someone's doorstep. The police may decide to go after these people or just ignore the list. Whatever these gun owners do, they shouldn't break any additional laws. For example, although it is legal for the police to lie to you, it is illegal for you to lie to the police. So don't provide false statements to the police.

CT: Those who missed gun registration deadline getting letters from state police

The U.S. Constitution vs. Legislative law

I came across an interesting video on Youtube that featured a citizen of CT calling an officer and asking if he was going to enter gun owners homes and confiscate their weapons if a GUN OWNER REFUSED TO TURN IN AN UNREGISTERED GUN.

The most fascinating aspect of the phone conversation was the officer's declaration that he didn't want to talk about the constitution. the offficer insisted that he would follow the law and would only consider it unconstitutional if the U.S. Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional. This is interesting because officers are sworn to unhold the U.S. Constititution. Here's my question to that officer and any officer: If Congress passed a law ordering the indefinite detaining of all Black Americans and the U.S. Supreme Court declared it constitutional, would you still support such a measure?


It seems to me at some point, the police must decide that protecting the people is a higher priority than serving politicians. I understand that most officers are not psychotic assholes on a power trip. Most are normal people who just want to do their jobs. But I think the law enforcement community needs to have this very important discussion.


Prediction

I doubt the Sate Police will start to target gun owners, but if there's a domestic violence call, the police may have a reason to search a home and therefore use the gun law against a gun owner.


How do you think this law will be enforced?

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Sandy Hook Tragedy Used For Gun Control?



By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)

Days after a mentally unstable man stole an AR-15 rifle and two pistols from his mother and went on a shooting spree that resulted in the deaths of at least 20 children and 6 adults, politicians are calling for gun control. Despite the fact that the man acquired the guns illegally and violated the so called gun free zone to kill innocent people, Democrats are now coming for more gun control.

Currently, the law makes it illegal for anyone (including principals, teachers and parents) to bring firearms onto school property. Unfortunately, the mass shooter decided to ignore that law and therefore enjoyed a target rich environment with defenseless victims.

Instead of Congress acknowledging the failure of the so called no gun zone laws, they have doubled on a new call for even more gun control. Apparently, Obama and the Democrats are convinced that new laws will deter criminal behavior. But I don't think an assault rifle ban is about making people safer. it's about control. The mainstream media and the politicians are looking to restrict liberty. They are not interested in empowering anyone but themselves. And now we're seeing people's true colors.

Fake conservative Joe Scarborough (yeah, one of Mitt Romney's cheerleaders) is now calling for gun control.

"our Bill of Rights does not guarantee gun manufacturers the absolute right to sell military-styled high-caliber semi-automatic combat assault rifles with high capacity magazines to whoever the hell they want."

Read more...
 
 Let's review the U.S. constitution.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The second amendment is not about hunting or sports. It's about making the government recognize the people's natural right to defend themselves from tyranny (i.e. Nazi Germany and Soviet Union.)

Online retailer Cheaper Than Dirt! has suspended sales of firearms.

"Cheaper Than Dirt! has temporarily suspended online sales of firearms. As a long time supporter of the Second Amendment, Cheaper Than Dirt! will continue to promote the safe and responsible use of firearms by law abiding customers. During this temporary suspension, we will review our policies and promotions."

Read more...


They're not the only ones. Look at Walmart and Dick's Sporting Goods pulling certain types of guns off of the shelves in some stores.

Read more...

Here's a message from Dick's Sporting Goods.

“We are extremely saddened by the unspeakable tragedy that occurred last week in Newtown, CT, and our hearts go out to the victims and their families, and to the entire community.”
“Out of respect for the victims and their families, during this time of national mourning we have removed all guns from sale and from display in our store nearest to Newtown and suspended the sale of modern sporting rifles in all of our stores chainwide.”

So their response is to make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to defend themselves, because a psycho shot a lot of unarmed people who couldn't defend themselves. Think it through, Dick!

Gun owners now have an opportunity to see who is really a supporter of the second amendment and who's just lying. A lof of so called pro gun Democrats are revealing their true colors and I think we'll see if the Republican Party really is pro-second amendment. 2012 GOP Presidential nominee Mitt Romney actually signed an assault rifle ban in Massachusetts. So will the House Republicans cave or stand their ground? Will the American people publish law abiding gun owners? I remain pessimistic.


In closing, the same politicians and media types who sold us out with the banker bailout (TARP), are the same ones who supported the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, National Defense Authorization Act and now possibly a new assault rifle ban. So I'll leave you with my favorite quote. And I don't care if it's a perfect quote from Benjamin Franklin or not. True words have never been spoken.


 "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."