70% of Conn. Police on "didn't register" list

[silicosys4]

Connecticut was recently trying to decide how to fix the problem they created with their "assault rifle" registration.
Of course we know that compliance was extremely low. So do the lawmakers who passed this legislation.
It seems that confiscation was seriously being considered to the point that a list of non compliant gun owners was somehow compiled.
Unfortunately, it turns out that nearly 70% of Connecticut police are on that list.
So the confiscation plans appear to have been scrapped because no one was available to be doing the confiscation.
Reality rears its head for anti gun advocates.
Who to do your dirty work for you?

http://www.callthecops.net/connecticut-halts-plans-round-firearms-finding-cops-state-list/

Edit: unfortunately, it looks like a satirical article, but it does illustrate the issue with forced confiscation often overlooked by those who seek to implement it.

 

[TruthTellers]

If even the police are lawbreakers, who's to enforce this dumb law now?

 

[flphotog]

If even the police are lawbreakers, who's to enforce this dumb law now?

Guess you didn't notice the edit at the bottom

 

[Tirod]

I'm concerned about it's authenticity, but it has been picked up by TTAG.

How was a list of weapons to confiscate compiled? seems to be the first issue. Plenty point to the ATF form but that would take canvassing a lot of printed records, and there seemed to be no reaction from FFL's the state was doing that. If a list compiled from NICS records was handed off, then there will be plenty of questions how that could happen when there can't be any records after the fact.

Those records of sales are simply a dated snapshot of the moment in light of private sales anyway. Legal and otherwise, a list will be tainted with significant inaccuracy.

We are left with questions, then, whether illegal acts were performed to compile a list of weapons to be confiscated. Given this actually happened - the results should be expected. If most the Sherriffs in NY State object to the SAFE act, why then expect them to participate at all? They and their deputies aren't likely to be in compliance there, either. The legislature carved out a post SAFE exemption IIRC anyway.

Interesting to see how much of the story bears up and what legislative reaction comes out of it to substantiate the issue.

It's telling to some degree that if civilian compliance is rated at 15%, then LEO compliance of nearly 30% just shows that people will act to protect their paycheck more than their 2A rights.

If ethical standards were actually applied, the cops who did comply should be the ones fired. There is an obligation to refuse to obey illegal orders and they failed.

 

[sarge83]

If authentic this is very interesting. I would suspect that any attempts like this in the more gun friendly states would result in larger numbers of police non-compliance.

Now for the question I would love to know the answer too, is how did they compile this list of names without registration already in place?????

Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[Sam1911]

NOT authentic. This is from the same site that has article titles like, "Cops ordered to gain weight to “Soften Image”."

It's a humor site, though playing straight. Like Duffelblog or The Onion, but a little less obvious to many.