Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumOne more chance for gun owners
Time to put up or shut up, law abiders!
One more chance for gun owners
Monday, February 24, 2014
When state officials decided to accept some gun registrations and magazine declarations that arrived after a Jan. 4 deadline, they also had to deal with those applications that didnt make the cut.
The state now holds signed and notarized letters saying those late applicants own rifles and magazines illegally.
But rather than turn that information over to prosecutors, state officials are giving the gun owners a chance to get rid of the weapons and magazines.
http://www.journalinquirer.com/politics_and_government/one-more-chance-for-gun-owners/article_2d8f816a-9d93-11e3-b18e-0019bb2963f4.html
Keefer
(713 posts)Then what?
rrneck
(17,671 posts)mwrguy
(3,245 posts)LOL it just gets better and better
rrneck
(17,671 posts)actually going to create thousands of felons. And if they do, each and every one of their friends and family certainty will.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)CT isn't one of them
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/15/nyregion/felons-gain-voting-rights-in-connecticut.html
You really didn't think about this, did you?
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)The ones that aren't actually in jail can vote.
Big deal. They are a minority of voters, and a majority approves of the assault weapons law.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)Like the NY SAFE Act, it was passed in the middle of the night unread. The majority of the politicians supported it, not the majority of the people. See Colorado.
Attorney General Holder. He wants felons to get their right to vote back.
It is recent history that they don't...pay your debt, get your rights back at some point.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)mwrguy
(3,245 posts)quick ride to jail, or cold dead hands, their choice
All those surplus MRAPs will finally come in handy.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)after people see people getting blown away over victimless crimes. Bad idea.
clffrdjk
(905 posts)Is that I should never let my guns be registered because you are willing to start a civil war to grab them given half an opportunity. And that somehow makes me the bad guy.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)Wow. Advocating state-sponsored terror against Americans for a victimless 'crime.'
This position of yours is insanity. It's also unconstitutional. It also will drive away otherwise sympathetic voters from the Democratic camp.
Nice job, keyboard commando.
-app
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)Settle down, Hannity. Don't the vapors.
clffrdjk
(905 posts)appal_jack
(3,813 posts)'MRAPs' and 'cold dead hands' are your words, not mine. You are living in a fascist fantasy world, and the 'Hannity' moniker suits you quite well, I'd say.
Once you wipe-up the spooge from your little MRAP keyboard kommando dream and catch your breath, I hope that you can think about what you have advocated a little more clearly.
-app
"voter ID" laws were all "democratically passed" too.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Because it will have been "democratically passed", and all that...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014735917
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/22/george-takei-boycott-arizona-if-governor-signs-gay-jim-crow-law/
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)it isn't really Jim Crow, even though the bill is as despicable. AFAIK, there isn't a penalty for not discriminating. Jim Crow laws mandated discrimination.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)gejohnston
(17,502 posts)with penalties stiffer than a pedophile would get for what is really an absurd victimless crime? It would actually crush the system and the backlash against the CT state government would be huge.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=137601
I have a better idea, let's round up all of the bong owners in the suburbs of Chicago, Newark, Camden, NOLA, and Oakland. They actually contribute to gun violence more than these guys. How? By providing the gangs money to fight over. Oh, and the growers that booby trap and pollute national parks, and will nonchalantly blow any wayward hiker while hoping prohibition never ends so they can keep their profits high and their taxes non existent.
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)The other 299,900 will get the message.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I'm sick of this prelude to confiscation.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)the idea that gun control advocates are not really liberals. Faux liberals maybe, but not real liberals. Think about it, Bloomberg is a right wing authoritarian that has disdain for all of the BoR, and the head of MDA is a former Monsanto PR executive.
This "message" won't be what you think it will be. One, crime will not go down. Two, elections are won by the middle.
Your outlook is why every kid in school and prospective citizen should lern all of the writings of Paine, Locke, and Democracy in America.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)rrneck
(17,671 posts)It's surprising how many assholes really enjoy being assholes.
proudretiredvet
(312 posts)Honest officer it was over there someplace in the deep water.
bossy22
(3,547 posts)the authorities are in a real bind in this one
clffrdjk
(905 posts)My guess is. Spend10x's the amount of money they planed.
Offer numerous grace periods and still have abysmal compliance.
Have zero reduction in crime.
A near zero number of crimes solved using the registration.
Oops forgot to add end up funding the NRA for the next 10 years (only 5 if they repeal it before it goes to court) after their loss in court.
bossy22
(3,547 posts)The LE agencies there didn't make a significant effort to enforce the registration laws there. IIRC in the beginning of the long gun registration program there was a proposal to go essentially "gun owner by gun owner" and checking to see if they registered their weapons- it was never tried because the estimated costs were way too high and there wasn't enough manpower to actually accomplish it
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)imho
bossy22
(3,547 posts)See, I'm trying to look at this objectively without interjecting my personal beliefs about the law or what should happen. While it's extremely important for a governmental body to be able to enforce all of its laws I'm not sure that there are enough LE resources in CT to do so in this case. For example, there are less than 1300 CT state police officers- how many would be required to go door to door looking for guns? I don't see the CT state police having large amounts of idle resources at their disposal- I believe like most public safety departments they have been asked to do more with less over the past 5 years.
So whether or not you believe strongly in gun control you have to sit back and look to see if it is truly worth it. How many people are you willing to send to jail? How much money are you willing to spend? These items (and others) aren't unlimited and will require trade offs. Do you take money from education and funnel it to LE efforts to confiscate weapons? These things have to all be worked out and in the end it might not be worth it.
hack89
(39,171 posts)The first questions people will ask is why massive police raids to arrest non-violent gun owners but not for rounding up violent criminals. It will go downhill from there, especially since it is absolutely guaranteed that the police will end up killing someone in the process.
bossy22
(3,547 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)So what's your bright idea when both individual LEO's and town police departments refuse to enforce the law?
Damn sure not all of them will comply and given police unions, you won't be able to fire them either
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Enforcing this would be a huge setback and give the repblicans a majority
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)to get rid of their guns after the dur date, why are they not willing to just register them? These gun owners are attempting to follow the law.
If my state required gun registration, I would follow the law with a frw guns and store the rest with people I know from another state. Of course gun rehistration would not pass in the Minnesota legislature. There would probably be more outrage from Democrats than from Republicans.
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)without subscribing. Regular CT news doesn't mention much.
If true, this will put lie to so many assurances from the GC side e.g. no one is talking about confiscation, lists will not be used to round up guns and owners, you have nothing to fear if you register...
I must point out these dangerous felons that it was suggested face apparently imprisonment w/out trial or summary execution were actually trying to comply with the law but missed a paperwork deadline. I hate to see what is in store for the ones who didn't try to register...
Response to mwrguy (Original post)
Post removed
SkatmanRoth
(843 posts)But my my what a difference an arbitrary few days makes in enforcing a gun registration law. And what a short step it would be to the bureaucrats making a minor change in interpreting the existing law so that previously 'legal' guns instantly transform into 'illegal' guns.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)ileus
(15,396 posts)Hopefully everyone has relocated their firearms to safe quarters out of the reach of the regressives.
I will volunteer safe keeping for any firearm from my Northern oppressed brothers.
Let me know if your safe gets full.
FreeSpirit123
(3 posts)armueller2001
(609 posts)then it's time to dig them up.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Constitution-abiding gun grabber.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Watch this law either not be enforced or be repealed. What a stupid law.
spin
(17,493 posts)Tens of thousands of Connecticut residents refuse to register guns under new law
Published time: February 12, 2014 21:52
Edited time: February 14, 2014 11:49
Tens of thousands of Connecticut residents could soon be considered felons by the state if they continue to ignore restrictive new gun control laws passed last year shortly after an armed rampage at an area elementary school left more than two dozen dead.
***snip***
If the state has received 50,000 registrations by now, Haar wrote, then that could represent as little as 15 percent of the assault weapons now classified by the state as warranting new paperwork under last Aprils law.
No one has anything close to definitive figures, but the most conservative estimates place the number of unregistered assault weapons well above 50,000, and perhaps as high as 350,000, Harr wrote.
And that means as of Jan. 1, Connecticut has very likely created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals perhaps 100,000 people, almost certainly at least 20,000 who have broken no other laws By owning unregistered guns defined as assault weapons, all of them are committing Class D felonies, he added.
http://rt.com/usa/connecticut-gun-law-registration-791/
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)Plus you would devote an enormous amount of police time and work to the effort and tie up the court system for years in order to confiscate the firearms these previously honest citizens owned and send them to jail. You would not even be opposed to killing these gun owners according to your post.
Notarized confession + Google maps + squad cars = quick ride to jail, or cold dead hands, their choice
All those surplus MRAPs will finally come in handy.
An effort to do this would give the conservative press and Fox News an opportunity to paint the Democratic Party as the party of gun confiscation. They would be more than happy to point out that the police were being used to arrest gun owners who had committed no violence with their weapons while allowing the criminal element to rape and pillage at will.
All across the nation gun owners would be infuriated and good Democrats would be unfairly associated with the gun confiscation effort in Connecticut and would lose many seats at the local and national level.
The NRA currently has only five million members but 80 million people own firearms in our nation. Still it is considered to be extremely powerful. Any effort to confiscate firearms and jail owners in Connecticut could easily double or triple NRA membership. Many gun owners would be more than willing to contribute to the NRA-ILA. Imagine how powerful this organization would become if this happened.
It is also conceivable that some police officers would lose their lives and other police officers would oppose the effort as they would not be willing to risk their lives for little reason.
If that is your answer to my question, I fear that it is largely unworkable.
At the most the state should impose a stiff fine on anyone who refused to register their firearms until they chose to do so.
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)I find this whole process to be very revealing of pro-GC intentions.
Sorry for any confusion if I made it seem I agree in any way with the OP or the proposed actions...
spin
(17,493 posts)Response to sarisataka (Reply #49)
hack89 This message was self-deleted by its author.
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)I find this whole process to be very revealing of pro-GC intentions.
Sorry for any confusion if I made it seem I agree in any way with the OP or the proposed actions...
hack89
(39,171 posts)discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,479 posts)- You're thinking those folks that sent the notarized letters are habitual criminals that would be expected to kill or threaten others with their guns? That would be the benefit to prosecuting them; preventing such violence. That's what the pro-control group often says.
- Where there's a will, there's a weapon. The Soviet Union battled capitalism for decades and lost; will Connecticut do better?
- Any chance there's a cop or politician or relative of either in that collection? How's that playing out?
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)I guess they should have followed law.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)made a good faith effort to do so.
Straw Man
(6,625 posts)made a good faith effort to do so.
Their applications were received after the deadline. Now they risk being punished for their attempt to comply. I dare say it's not a strategy that is going to encourage compliance. Post Office misplaced your application form? No gun for you.
sarisataka
(18,656 posts)for any registration to pass or be complied with. All of the CG assurances are proven to be empty promises.
Are you excited for your first MRAP sighting?
clffrdjk
(905 posts)By trying to comply but doing so late all they have managed to do is give people like you the opportunity to fire up the MRAPS and make some cold dead hands.
Or am I miss-reading post #3?
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)It is dated January 2, 2014 BEFORE any letter dropped in the mailbox on 12/31/2013 could have been delivered. There have been NO reliable reports of anyone actually receiving a letter yet.
Because the post offices closed at noon on 12/31/13, the State of CT is already considering a compromise to allow letters that were notarized prior to 1/1/14 or received by the post office by 1/2/2014 to be accepted.
http://articles.courant.com/2014-02-15/news/hc-guns-malloy-compromise-0215-20140214_1_post-office-applications-malloy
The state of CT may also consider legislation to extend the registration period according to the link above.
Massive non-compliance to the law, if the numbers are to be believed, means this has been nothing short of a political disaster for the Malloy administration and some state legislators.