• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Gun Registration in Nazi Germ...I Mean CT

We didn't "miss it"......


oh...by the way....

SUCK IT MALLOY!!!
 
yeah suck it you bastard.....


love the comment section as well, I support them all the way !
 
Amid concerns about gun owners who failed in their last-minute attempts to register now-illegal assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines, lawmakers are considering granting an amnesty period for people who missed the registration deadline.

In other words, we've realized there are a lot of people out there not doing what we told them.
 
cant believe they expected any less from the Constitution state.....stupid, delusional......death wish
 
I wholly support the 90%.

Those are a lot better numbers than the 3% who fought to create this great nation to begin with.
 
And he thinks we wanted it? 90% say Take the regs and shove it.
 
Here's some more on CT. Resistance to the registration sounds formidable. Hang together guys!

Connecticut legislators think these new gun laws will somehow make their state safer. But now the state has a whole new problem: lack of compliance.
Governor Dannel Malloy and the government of the state of Connecticut are having their own “Oh, poop” moment, now that they’ve tallied the number of citizens who have registered their “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines” required by the state’s unconstitutional gun laws, compared that to the estimated number of applicable weapons and magazines in the state, and realize they’ve been ignored.
Historically speaking, 90-percent or more of those required to comply with gun registration laws in the U.S. refuse to do so, and there is no reason to suspect that this registration attempt in Connecticut is any different. I’ve seen estimates of 1,000,000 firearm magazines that should have been registered under the law, but the state reports registering only 40,000… just 4 percent.
A quick glance at these numbers leads me to believe it’s not unreasonable to think there are at least 100,000 Connecticut residents who are in violation of the new gun laws, and are therefore, technically, misdemeanor criminals or even felons.
If the gun laws were actually enforced, Connecticut’s prison population would explode and the so-called “justice system” would be overwhelmed.
It will be interesting to watch what the state of Connecticut decides to do… and… how the gun-owning public responds.
 
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ju4Gla2odw[/youtube]
 
carbinemike said:
Here's some more on CT. Resistance to the registration sounds formidable. Hang together guys!

Connecticut legislators think these new gun laws will somehow make their state safer. But now the state has a whole new problem: lack of compliance.
Governor Dannel Malloy and the government of the state of Connecticut are having their own “Oh, poop” moment, now that they’ve tallied the number of citizens who have registered their “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines” required by the state’s unconstitutional gun laws, compared that to the estimated number of applicable weapons and magazines in the state, and realize they’ve been ignored.
Historically speaking, 90-percent or more of those required to comply with gun registration laws in the U.S. refuse to do so, and there is no reason to suspect that this registration attempt in Connecticut is any different. I’ve seen estimates of 1,000,000 firearm magazines that should have been registered under the law, but the state reports registering only 40,000… just 4 percent.
A quick glance at these numbers leads me to believe it’s not unreasonable to think there are at least 100,000 Connecticut residents who are in violation of the new gun laws, and are therefore, technically, misdemeanor criminals or even felons.
If the gun laws were actually enforced, Connecticut’s prison population would explode and the so-called “justice system” would be overwhelmed.
It will be interesting to watch what the state of Connecticut decides to do… and… how the gun-owning public responds.

A Duty to Protect: A good article from MS.

Since the passage of House Bill 2 earlier this year many cities, counties, municipalities, etc. have adopted ordinances and policies that restrict or prohibit firearms in buildings and on property they control. The state is declaring these areas “sensitive places,” and justifying these policies on the basis that the state must act to protect its employees and citizens from criminals carrying firearms. Under this rationale, the state is foreseeing a danger to its employees and citizens and is assuming a protective role by taking positive action in the form of policies restricting firearms. Unfortunately, these policies remove a person’s ability to defend themselves against criminal violence. If the state were to provide a reasonable substitute for an individual’s right to self-defense in the form of armed guards and metal detectors the state’s policies would be constitutionally supported. However, the lack of such measures coupled with the foreknowledge that sensitive places must be protected from criminal use of firearms, demonstrates the state has acted with a high degree of indifference to the safety of individuals under its protection.

This argument follows from the belief that self-defense in public places is a fundamental right protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the belief a state cannot deprive an individual of that right without due process. To affirm this belief, we look to the recent Supreme Court of the United States cases, Heller and McDonald, and an Illinois Supreme Court case, People v. Aguilar.

Continued: http://www.mississippigunnews.com/duty- ... f-defense/
 
This is going around today. Keep an eye out for more details including content of the letters CT is sending out.

Gun confiscations is one step closer in Connecticut. The mainstream media spins it as “one more chance” for non-compliant gun owners who failed to register their scary guns before the January 1 deadline.
In reality, these letters - 106 to rifle owners, and 108 more to residents with standard capacity magazines – are the first step in the Connecticut State Police beginning to round up guns arbitrarily made illegal last year in that state. These guns include America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15 and magazines over 10 rounds, which include the standard capacity magazines made for that America’s favorite rifle.
 
@carbinemike I haven't heard of any letters being sent out. Anyone else hear anything? Links, etc?

If the state were to provide a reasonable substitute for an individual’s right to self-defense in the form of armed guards and metal detectors the state’s policies would be constitutionally supported.

While I am alright with armed guards and metal detectors, it is NOT a substitute for our Constitutional rights.

Period !

And I am becoming more biased against states that try to pull this kind of crap. One of these days, I may be forced to step foot into that state. And I want all my freedoms anywhere in this country that my feet are on.
 
Here's a link. Most of what I found seems to link back to this which makes me wonder if it's real. Keep an eye out guys for anything on this either way.

http://americanlibertyriders.ning.com/m/discussion?id=3899508:Topic:551747

Edit: it looks like the letters are how they are dealing with registration paperwork that arrived to late. Those that followed the requirement but were late now have the attention of the government which has their names, addresses and list of non-conforming guns and mags.
 
Last edited:
http://www.ammoland.com/2014/02/con...=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter#axzz2uMlB5LmE

du5a3y5y.jpg
 
Back
Top