Connecticut gun owners line-up to register firearms

I think it might be time to start buying some 80% lowers...

"If they were trying to make them illegal, I'd have a real issue, but if they want to just know where they are, that's fine with me."

Click to expand...

People aren't called Sheep for nothing.


I don't really see people like this storming the beaches at Normandy.

M2 said:

People aren't called Sheep for nothing.
I don't really see people like this storming the beaches at Normandy.

Click to expand...

Like "Gunny" says, they would all be calling for their "MAH!! MAH!!"

Canadian news anchor decries gun registration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03XEUPfD0qM

Connecticut residents, please pay attention.

What is the attitude of most people who go to register their firearms? Is it "I have nothing to hide," or is it, "This is wrong, but it's the law and I have to"?

Click to expand...

A bit of both, I'd say.

Perfect example of how incrementalism works, though. We all know the next step, and the extreme majority of those registrants will comply with it, too.

I know the clowns in our state legislature would have loved to push registration through, but judging by the poo-storm they created with mag capacity and UBC, I'd wager things would have been completely untenable for this congress with a registration act. Mass non-compliance would have been a given (just as it is with the two peices of horsehockey they did ram through), and only the beginning.

Is it "I have nothing to hide," or is it, "This is wrong, but it's the law and I have to"?

Click to expand...

A bit of both; "I have nothing to hide, so my privacy is worthless"

No one ever said a person can't operate in a world based in contradictions

"I know the clowns in our state legislature would have loved to push registration through, but judging by the poo-storm they created with mag capacity and UBC, I'd wager things would have been completely untenable for this congress with a registration act"
UBC's always were/are registration; just see the reports dribbling out about the ATF's very own brand of "large scale information gathering" regarding transfer forms. We just don't know enough yet what they're doing with the agglomerated info to truly define it as a registry. But the info is certainly out there to tie individual guns to owners, so it stands to reason somebody is trying to catalogue it.

TCB

MACHIVSHOOTER - " ... Perfect example of how incrementalism works, though. We all know the next step, and the extreme majority of those registrants will comply with it, too."

Click to expand...

You're 100% correct.

When the Conn. Marxist Socialist inspired politicians pass the law banning their rifles, the registrants will be marching in lock step down to the police stations carrying their firearms to turn in to the police.

L.W.

Idiots who believe that our government is good and honest, and only concerned about the safety and best interests of us all. Baaaaa......

UBC's always were/are registration; just see the reports dribbling out about the ATF's very own brand of "large scale information gathering" regarding transfer forms.

Click to expand...

It's a shoe-in, but definitely not the whole ball. I'm not suggesting that I'm OK with it, but between the millions of firearms already in this state, the transfer exemptions, and the flat-out non-compliance, they really can't do anything with this. I know for a fact that a significant number of private transfers are taking place without BGC in spite of this law, would even venture to say the majority. It would take decades to even have a half-@$$ed "list", and that's assuming that the 55 out of 62 sheriffs currently opposing this law have successors that are more "yes men" on enforcement, and somehow garner the manpower to chase down a misdemeanor offense each and every time they even become aware of it. As of this moment, you'd have to deliberately and overtly conduct the transaction right in front of a deputy for them to pursue it.

Basically, it's as unenforceable as it is unconstitutional. The Sheriffs have made that as clear as can be, as well as their unwillingness to waste resources trying to make a case that, in all likelihood, couldn't be proved, even if they agreed with the statute.

We'll have it struck soon enough anyway. If not by the federal lawsuits, then by the voters next year. It's already basically nullified by the sheriffs.

We just don't know enough yet what they're doing with the agglomerated info to truly define it as a registry. But the info is certainly out there to tie individual guns to owners, so it stands to reason somebody is trying to catalogue it.

Click to expand...

I have no doubt that they've been trying to compile some sort of registry for a long time now, despite it being prohibited by Volkmer-McClure. Still not getting any traction. Heck, they can't even keep the NFA records straight, and that's a pretty intense process, not an instant background check that does not submit make, model, caliber or serial number.

Ok so these people are sheep because they are choosing to register their guns and obey the law instead of facing felony charges for possession of their guns if they don't register.

These people have but three options from what see.

Option 1: Obey the law and register their guns.

Option 2: Don't register and face felony charges of illegal weapon possession and loose their 2nd Amendment rights all together for life.

Option 3: Move to a free State.

The simple fact is that every State has it's own laws and those who choose to live in the State they do should obey the law regardless of how stupid the law may be, that's what it means to be a law abiding gun owner and what separates us from the criminal gun owners.

If I were a resident of CT, while the rest of the state would be standing in line at registration, I will be standing in line at the DMV. In another state. Getting a new driver's license.

For many here, it's not as simple as refusing to register a rifle and hoping they never have PC to search your home. All firearms purchased locally are already recorded on a DPS Form 3. It is not beyond reason to think that they can and will cross-reference those with weapons that are registered under the new law. If you bought an AR-15 in state and don't register it as an "assualt" weapon then it stands to reason they will find out.

And since the burden of proof is on you to show that you sold or transferred it, they can still charge you with a felony even if no rifle is actually found.

nwilliams said:

Ok so these people are sheep because they are choosing to register their guns and obey the law instead of facing felony charges for possession of their guns if they don't register.

These people have but three options from what see.

Option 1: Obey the law and register their guns.

Option 2: Don't register and face felony charges of illegal weapon possession and loose their 2nd Amendment rights all together for life.

Option 3: Move to a free State.

The simple fact is that every State has it's own laws and those who choose to live in the State they do should obey the law regardless of how stupid the law may be, that's what it means to be a law abiding gun owner and what separates us from the criminal gun owners.

Click to expand...

Option 4 : Tell the politicians that if they don't repeal this legislation, they will be subject to recall and thrown out of office.

Option 5 : The people rise up and protest in the streets and refuse to comply. The government has no choice but to repeal the unpopular law.


(I don't see options 4 or 5 being viable, just remote possibilities. If it was another state, perhaps one of these two options would work.)

Option 4 : Tell the politicians that if they don't repeal this legislation, they will be subject to recall and thrown out of office.

Click to expand...

We could say this, but there are just not enough of us who actually genuinely care about our 2A rights in this state for it to make a difference. We get people all riled up but ultimately when they are in the ballot boxes they look at all the other issues and forget about 2A. They have become complacent.

We have to comply while it's fought in the courts.
Failure to comply for some macho reason threatens your right to own in any state.
Moving is an option for some but is not for everyone.
Voting out the offending politicians is the next step.
This legislation has awakened a sleeping giant.
We'll find out in the next election if it's all talk or if we back up what we say.
In the mean time we comply until the courts sort it out.

Two comments:

1. I heard the same arguments about not complying (with registration) around the time of the 1968 machine gun amnesty. Those that complied, now have guns worth fortunes, while those that didn't, now have contraband that can never see the light of day.

2. The people crowing the loudest about not complying, by that fact alone, put themselves on the radar of the authorities. Knowing this, when push comes to shove, they'll be the first in line at the registration desk.

The time for noncompliance is when the confiscation edicts actually come down. Until then, fight tooth and nail in the political arena.

The way I see it is the gun industry and most gun owners seem to worship anyone with a uniform. They seem to be just waiting to obey another order from the authorities no matter what it is.

I think Katrina showed us the shape of things to come when firearms were confiscated and not one person resisted.

It's not whether the gun is contraband or worth a fortune to someone who's making a decision based on their Constitutional rights.

It's whether they have one when they need it.

"They will certainly find out and come to take it away" seems to be happening in NY, hence the lines. Apparently when you live in a society that restricts your freedoms, you get used to doing what you are told and complying.

While many may line up to get their guns registered, many will not. With their guns securely stored in an undisclosed location, someone searching for them at the address still won't find them - regardless of the potential tens of thousands of dollars of damage they might cause dismantling the house. The .gov can't really afford to do that too many times, as it's unreasonable, and lawsuits will occur. It will get out, the video on youtube will be something to see and get circulated.

If Conn residents allow it, well, like it's said, you get the government you deserve. If they need to go thru a period of oppression and restriction because they made no effort to remind the government that they are servants of the public will, not directors of it, then they are getting exactly what they voted for.

What should be done is to publicize it to the fullest extent so others can see their collective mistake. Same as CA - the current circumstances only exist because people there accept it.

Many businesses started moving out 25 years ago, and it was certainly the right decision. The Coast states are now starting to experience it, too. People immigrate from despots - entirely the foundation of America. When better situations exist, the pioneers move on, leaving those less capable behind.

Puts a whole new twist on, when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns, don't it ?

Look long and hard at what is occuring in CT. That is our future if we don't stand up and let our postions known to our elected officials at the local,state and ederal level.

Its time for everyone of us to become actively involved in the process.
Run for office
Work on campaigns
Provide money or in kind services for a campaign
VOTE

We need to do at least 3 of the 4 actions I've laid out. The time is now.

Leanwolf said:

When the Conn. Marxist Socialist inspired politicians pass the law banning their rifles, the registrants will be marching in lock step down to the police stations carrying their firearms to turn in to the police.

Click to expand...

And those that don't turn them in or never registered them in the first place can never let them see the light of day again. Can never use them. Can never speak of them to anyone. They end up hidden in walls found 30 years later during renovations. (or the people move out of the state, ceding it's national votes forever)

By the time the laws are passed it is too late. This is being fought in the courts in CT, good luck to em.
This can only be effectively be prevented by voting and if gun rights are not a persons first priority they get thrown under the bus. (voting for someone you agree with on one issue is not the proper way to vote)

MErl said:

And those that don't turn them in or never registered them in the first place can never let them see the light of day again. Can never use them. Can never speak of them to anyone. They end up hidden in walls found 30 years later during renovations. (or the people move out of the state, ceding it's national votes forever)

By the time the laws are passed it is too late. This is being fought in the courts in CT, good luck to em.
This can only be effectively be prevented by voting and if gun rights are not a persons first priority they get thrown under the bus. (voting for someone you agree with on one issue is not the proper way to vote)

Click to expand...

Ok, theoretical question: Candidate John Q Citizen believes gun control laws are wrong and want Constitutional Carry -- but on every other issue you and Mr. Citizen disagree.
Candidate Will B. Nutz is an antigun zealot but stands right with you everywhere else -- and in fact has many good tactical ideas for implementing his ideas.
For whom do you vote? Curious minds wanna know.

I spent over thirty years living in Connecticut. I sure am glad I am not living there now. It's a shame because in many other ways Ct. is a nice place to live.

Moving ????

I left NJ in 1972 for many reasons. The gun laws were one.

Nothing is stopping or illegal moving yet!

Nothing is illegal about renting a place to store your guns to my knowledge.
This could be a temporary solution while the courts battle out how to subvert our constitution.
I would move my possessions to another state.
Then leave later myself.