Connecticut already considering an amnesty

"What,exactly, do you think the gun owning public would do, though?" - Pond James Pond
I think some would choose to meet violence with violence. My statement is not without precedence, as this country exists because of a similar situation. The majority will cave in to the request of gov. to registed their rifles. If history holds true, which it usually does, there will be around 3% that will most certainly resist, and that is still a lot of people.
"The very mentality also undermines the argument that we're a law-abiding bunch as well." - Tom Servo
Generally, we are, but only to a point. The Declaration of Independence recognizes it, and leaves it up to the people to decide when the grievances have reached the point of breach of contract. Both the Revolutionary and Civil Wars were fought because of this principle and, oddly enough, because of the same cause; unjust taxes.
CT is a crucible and will reveal just how far gov., and the general public, will go in regards to their particular beliefs in the area of firearms ownership. Make no mistake about it, gentlemen, there is a war out there. Those of you who continue to deny the existence of it should extract your heads from the sand and wake up. If the Second Amendment falls, as it has in NY,CT,MD, etc., then every other freedom guaranteed by our Bill of Rights is subject to the same scrutiny and fate.
 
I think some would choose to meet violence with violence.
Click to expand...
...and that would utterly destroy our cause. A Ruby Ridge type of situation right now would be the tipping point in what is already a risky political atmosphere.

Before we wax all romantic about the idea of killing people, let's remember that this law was passed legally, by politicians who were elected legally. Resorting to violence because we're not happy of the outcome is not what civilized people do.

Let's stop with the revolutionary nonsense.
 
I think some would choose to meet violence with violence.
Click to expand...

Firstly, I would ask which violence is it that they are meeting? There is a law they don't like, but no violence has been committed against the Cn public as far as I know.

In any case, I don't believe this would never happen in the modern day, regardless of whether it happened before.

Times have changed and, I would wager, so has the national psyche of the US.
If there were armed resistance you would have martial law in the affected area before you could say "Perhaps this was a bad idea" and any resistance would meet the full force of both LE, judiciary and possibly even the military.
In addition all the anti-terrorist legislation that exists and the powers it accords those in office would be brought to bear. Hello Gitmo...

Any such resistance would be crushed, whether thought to be in the right or wrong and a lot of the rest of the population would doubtless support that action. With or without media input.

In this respect, I think the 2nd A is more effective in the principles it enshrines rather than the actual actions it would seem to allow. It's the courts that really govern which freedoms will be retained and which will be forfeit. I think the days of armed rebellion are long gone. And if the rule of law still stands, so they should be.
 
Last edited:
I'll tread lightly as this conversation seems like it could quickly turn for the worse, but I tend to agree with James Pond in part. The courts and elections (i.e. actually getting off their butts and voting!) are a far more effective means of fighting laws like this. I'm not saying people should be a one issue voter, but 2A issues should be considered.

Any sort of violence as described would VERY quickly extinguish the already dwindling light of the second.
 
It looks like compliance rates for the gun and magazine registry in Connecticut are much lower than expected. Given the lack of success for such schemes in Canada, the UK, and Australia, that comes as little surprise. As such, the government is already considering an amnesty and a second chance at registration, less than a month after the original deadline
Click to expand...
They have had amnesties for illegal firearms in the UK in the past, but I can't remember amnesties for registering of firearms. ( possibly in the distant past but not that I can remember ) All legal firearms in the UK are registered and put on your firearms certificate, and police database. Not magazines. As for Connecticut it will not work unless the police enforce it, if they have the will to do that is another matter.
 
Last edited:
Ruby Ridge and such...

I suspect if the government started to lay seige (like Ruby Ridge) on those who didn't turn in their guns, for example, because they were suddenly illegal due to having a pistol grip or some other silliness, I doubt that would garner much public support.
 
Tom Servo said:
Before we wax all romantic about the idea of killing people, let's remember that this law was passed legally, by politicians who were elected legally. Resorting to violence because we're not happy of the outcome is not what civilized people do.
Click to expand...

Tom, I believe the legality of the law's enactment is the subject of at least one of the lawsuits against it. The CT legislature passed it without running it through the committee process or allowing any public hearings and comment. (Just like the NY SAFE Act.) They did this by invoking some "emergency measure" clause in their rules, but there wasn't any emergency. The law was written in back rooms, and the vote came approximately four MONTHS after the event that triggered it. There was clearly (to any objective reviewer) no valid basis to the "emergency" designation.
 
I suspect if the government started to lay seige (like Ruby Ridge) on those who didn't turn in their guns, for example, because they were suddenly illegal due to having a pistol grip or some other silliness, I doubt that would garner much public support.
Click to expand...
It would if they were successful in making the gun owners in question look like knuckle-dragging renegade stooges. Do you have political stickers on your car? Go to any rallies? Post on gun forums? It'll all be twisted to paint a picture, and it'll sell to the public.

What was Randy Weaver's crime? Failure to file a form and pay a $200 tax. And that was just one incidence.

As it is, they don't have to go out and round people up. They just have to bust someone they catch at the range, a gun show, or a traffic stop who's got the wrong hardware. A few such busts will have a chilling effect on everyone.

There was clearly (to any objective reviewer) no valid basis to the "emergency" designation.
Click to expand...
I have to admit, I need to do more research on the parameters and limits of the "emergency" provision. I know the law was passed in haste and without much of a chance for public comment.

If so, that's wrong. Such malfeasance can be addressed in the courts or at the ballot box. Violence is not warranted, and it would only make things so much worse.
 
I wish to say that my opening statement was based on the pretext that it was indeed the gov. that had initiated the initial violence, not the public. Tom, I certainly did not wax romantic about war, as only fools and those who have never experienced it do so. James, you say times have changed, and certainly they have, but human nature has remained stagnant. Once again, I will use an historical perspective to illuminate my statement. If we have attained an enlightenment of any type, it is only in these last few moments of human existence. The past century was the bloodiest in the history of mankind, and more died in that 100 years than all the years before combined, and this present one shows very little sign of slackening. If, as you have posited, we are beyond the desire to do violence to ensure the furthering of our rights, then there are none left to stand up for the ideals of freedom, liberty, and justice. If such is the case, then we justly deserve whatever it is we get.
I would like to change the direction just a little, if allowed. What if the gov. does absolutely nothing? There are now somewhere between 100-200,000 citizens walking around in CT guilty of a Class D felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $5000 fine. I'd be interested in hearing some possible scenarios.
 
What if the gov. does absolutely nothing?
Click to expand...
That's a possibility, and not a remote one. Canada's long gun registry went into effect in 1998. Within a few years, the cost of administering the registry ballooned to over 3000% of the original estimated cost. The registry failed to deter crime, and it wasn't much use as an investigative tool. In 2012, it died with a whimper. Gary Mauser has some excellent commentary here.
 
In a state as left as CT, the courts are ineffective for this, this would have to go to scotus. Likewise are the elections for the most part. That's a reality.
 
Getting back to the subject of the original post (amnesty), I saw an article yesterday (which now I can't find, so no link) indicating that by executive fiat the governor of Connecticut has decided the State Police will accept and process those registrations that were postmarked between January 1 and January 4. Supposedly there was some kind of problem with people having dropped their paperwork in the mail by the December 31 deadline but the USPS didn't postmark it until a later date.

I haven't seen anything beyond that as regards any broader amnesty. And I believe this limited window of "amnesty" only affects a few hundred people.
 
It will be very interesting (possibly scary) to see how the state of CT goes with this. They have at their disposal a VERY detailed database of what we have purchased for many many years. They can easily cross reference current registry with the DP3 forms. This whole deal has forced me to move all of my scary guns out of state.
 
As has already been mentioned, CT has a detailed database of guns purchased thru an FFL for quite a few years. The data is there if/when they wish to use it to cross reference against legally registered (reregistered?) evil guns.

The thought of armed resistance is not only ridiculous but it would do more harm to the cause than anything else. If even one zealot locks himself in his house, screaming Molon Labe, it will affirm what the antis are saying and this would be paramount in any future gun legislation.

The only answer is thru the courts and elections. Vote OUT all the NY Wannabes who voted for this bill. The 2014 and 2016 elections have to become single issue elections to right the ship. We have to show anyone running for office that if they wish to be anti-gun zealots then their chance of election is nil. Every pro-gun voter needs to get out to vote this November. We need 100% turnout. Sitting on our hands will allow those who want to take our guns the courage to continue trying. The time to say "enough" is right now... this year... this election.

We have to have faith in the judicial system and the patience for it to run it's course. Every victory elsewhere in the country will give precedence to lawsuits at hand. Yes, it sucks, but anyone who is caught in the crossfire with an "illegal" evil rifle will pay the price for the others. I doubt they want to be martyrs and just wish to stick it to Big Brother but the choice they made of not registering may end up costing them the freedoms they expect.

If someone wants to be "the" test case then good for them. For those who are thumbing their noses "just because"... well, I hope they don't pay the ultimate price. They may be stubborn enough to resist registration but aren't smart enough to understand the consequences. I wish these people well.
 
I can't imagine anyone I know would register their guns. I don't think I would either. Are the law enforcement folks really going to enforce it? Are they really going to go door to door looking for them?

I hope the folks in Conn stand strong and refuse to comply. I know where I live(a southern state) most of the local law enforcement folks said they would never go gun grabbing, even if it was federal law. The local sheriffs dept here are the ones with the power and they pretty much say they will tell the feds to go pound sand.
 
As a resident of CT, I'm going to play devil's advocate.

The state makes a list of people who were known to purchase an evil rifle but didn't register (reregister?) it. These people are fed into a database somewhere as "suspected" violators of the registration laws. (Yes, these people could have sold their gun, lost it in a boating accident, etc., but their name is on this list.)

So, Gunowner Sam is stopped for running a yellow light. All stops are run thru whatever databases are available and it's found that he MAY have an unregistered AR. The officers are instructed to search the vehicle (probable cause?) for any illegal weapons. They find a mag with 15 rounds in it (never "registered" mag). If Sam didn't register his AR, I doubt he registered his "hi-cap" mags. So, they get a search warrant for his residence (probable cause?) and find his "cache" of "illegal", unregistered "assault weapons" and hundreds of "illegal" "hi-capacity" magazines. They also find a "cache" of ammo totalling over 20K rounds.

So, Gunowner Sam is villified on the local 6:00 news and shown as a "gun nut" who has an "arsenal" of illegal weapons and enough ammo to raid a small country. He is brought up on charges, 1 for each unregistered evil rifle and 1 for each hi-cap mag and faces 200 years in prison. This is plastered all over the media to show the other "resistant" "civil disobedient" felons how it works.

So, Sam is pulled over for running a yellow light and is charged with multiple felonies and faces losing his rights to own as well as all of his assets, to defend himself, and all of his weapons and ammo are seized, all because he wanted to stick it to "the man". Do you think this is hyperbole or is it very possible? No one went door-to-door to confiscate anything. It started with an innocent traffic stop and a database. The govenor wants to send a message.

Think this can't happen?
Really?
 
Last edited:
Larry, that is pretty much how it will happen and those that think their Local LEO and LEO friends will not do exactly what you just described are dreaming.

That said, I think your scenario will not be limited to those that did Not register their firearms and Mags. I fear the same thing will happen to those that did register. The cops may not find the "Illegal" stash you described, but these gun owners may be targeted as "Potential" threats, searched and harassed just the same.

I see it as lose-lose situation for all concerned.
 
Violence is seldom the answer. I definitly foresee a lot of unfortunate boating accidents.

The big problem is, though violence is seldom the answer, what would you do if you KNEW they were going to take your firearms and imprison you? MOLON LABE!!
 
It is truly sad that as americans we are having this conversation. This alone is a sign that they've gone too far. "Lost my guns in a boating accident" Why should I have to lie in order to protect myself from jail against an unjust law??

We all get on here and talk about how great the constitution is and what awesome things our founders did to ensure our God given rights and now the ball is in our court and how were gonna hand our country down to our sons and daughters and all we can say is "just lie about your firearms" or "just vote them out" tell me how well is that working out for us? they keep giving it to us 1 law at a time and have been for years. Now we sit here at this time no longer in a free country and our only option is telling them it fell off a boat?? Is that what we really reduced ourselves too?? Im all for civility and doing things lawfully but im not built to be a slave either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top