GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2014, 23:25   #1
Prometheus77
GOA - RWVA
 
Prometheus77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 634
CT: confiscation looming...

Registration always leads to confiscation and for some CT residents that day is almost at hand...

Confiscation of Registered Weapons About to Begin in CT

One must wonder... will LEO's in CT enforce an unconstitutional law with door to door raids? How will this look for the 'we aren't coming for your guns" crowd?
__________________
"You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe."
John Adams.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Prometheus77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 23:35   #2
Revvv
Senior Member
 
Revvv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,155
I can hear the officer at the door now; "I have a warrent for your arrest, and for the search of your home as well as the siezure of any and all illegal weapons that you legally registered one hour/day late".

Your defense; "but I had it in the post office on time".

The officer's only able response at that moment is that he/she is only following orders. This is not a matter in which they have disgression. You will have to jump through legal hoops, be treated as a criminal, and possibly be forever marked as a felon.

Even if you don't have any of the "illegal" weapons in your home, prosecution can and likely will take place due to your admittance of having said weapon one day after the deadline.

If you ask me, this makes for a bad situation all around.
Revvv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 10:20   #3
WT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 1,550
I saw a picture today of the Ukrainian police on their knees begging for forgiveness.
WT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 10:44   #4
Line Bore
Senior Member
 
Line Bore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus77 View Post

One must wonder... will LEO's in CT enforce an unconstitutional law with door to door raids? How will this look for the 'we aren't coming for your guns" crowd?
I know a lot of LEOs in CT, and I think many of them will do just that. Part of the reason I left.



Caught somewhere in time.
__________________
"The freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right-- subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility."

L. Neil Smith
Line Bore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 13:35   #5
Prometheus77
GOA - RWVA
 
Prometheus77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revvv View Post
I can hear the officer at the door now; "I have a warrent for your arrest, and for the search of your home as well as the siezure of any and all illegal weapons that you legally registered one hour/day late".

Your defense; "but I had it in the post office on time".

The officer's only able response at that moment is that he/she is only following orders. This is not a matter in which they have disgression. You will have to jump through legal hoops, be treated as a criminal, and possibly be forever marked as a felon.

Even if you don't have any of the "illegal" weapons in your home, prosecution can and likely will take place due to your admittance of having said weapon one day after the deadline.

If you ask me, this makes for a bad situation all around.
Pretty much.

For that to happen a DA then a judge and then the police officers all have to ignore their Oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution.

In a true Constitutional Republic, at least one of them would say "Are you out of your freaking mind?!?!?! That's against our Oath."

When a government oversteps it's authority granted to it by the people, it ceases to be a legitimate government.
__________________
"You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe."
John Adams.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Prometheus77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 14:07   #6
Booker
Senior Member
 
Booker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,179
I'd like to see the State Police go door-to-door!

I'd bet a dollar that the overwhelming majority of people will turn over their guns and magazines with just a whimper!

Unlike people in other countries, who take to the strrets at the drop of a hat, We, in the USA, just flap our lips! It's uncomfortable to defend liberty!
Booker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 19:39   #7
KY Moose
Senior Member
 
KY Moose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Republic of Northern Virginia
Posts: 2,750


Edited,

After reading some online newspapers from Connecticut, it seems this problem is true.

Sad day for freedom.
__________________
The concentrating [of powers] in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, and not by a single one. - Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by KY Moose; 02-25-2014 at 19:53.. Reason: Googled this, and it's in the news
KY Moose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 19:47   #8
janice6
Platinum Membership
NRA
 
janice6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: minnesota
Posts: 18,890


Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal. Janet Reno (b. 1938)





"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty." -George Bernard Shaw




__________________
janice6

"Peace is that brief, glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading". Anonymous

Earp: Not everyone who knows you hates you.
DOC: I know it ain't always easy bein' my friend....but I'll BE THERE when you need me.
janice6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2014, 21:48   #9
Prometheus77
GOA - RWVA
 
Prometheus77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by janice6 View Post
Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal. Janet Reno (b. 1938)





"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty." -George Bernard Shaw

Exactly on both quotes.

The letter is out-
Updated: A letter being set out is now available.
__________________
"You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe."
John Adams.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Prometheus77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 14:41   #10
SJ 40
Senior Member
 
SJ 40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 7,047
Connecticut's licence plate is a False advertisement,it's not the Constitution state it's Trample the Constitution state. SJ 40
SJ 40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 14:42   #11
hunter 111
Senior Member
 
hunter 111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: TRAVEL -
Posts: 1,677
There will be blood
__________________
"The law isn't necessarily justice nor is justice necessarily lawful "
hunter 111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 14:56   #12
volsbear
Lifetime Membership
IWannaBeSedated
 
volsbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus77 View Post
Registration always leads to confiscation and for some CT residents that day is almost at hand...

Confiscation of Registered Weapons About to Begin in CT

One must wonder... will LEO's in CT enforce an unconstitutional law with door to door raids? How will this look for the 'we aren't coming for your guns" crowd?
Have you called your local chief law enforcement officer to ask what his/her plans are? Is there CT case law that defines a police seizure of firearms to be unconstitutional? I see a lot of people rip LEOs on what they might or might not do if ordered to engage in confiscation, but nobody really seems to know what they're asking.

You're asking if a LEO would engage in an activity that YOU consider to be unconstitutional. But this is the wrong question. The LEO took an oath to faithfully defend federal/state constitutions and applicable laws. So what you SHOULD be asking is if the LEO KNOW that confiscation is unconstitutional, would they enforce it. To do this, certain conditions must exist. Most importantly, the LEO officer must KNOW that the activity they are being asked to complete is unconstitutional as well as the legal foundation for that belief. In other hands, the LEO can't just say "I'm not doing this because I think it's unconstitutional." They must ethically rely upon some authority to make that determination. In other words, their belief must be founded in specific law or common law. I doubt this exists since SCOTUS, as far as I know, has never granted cert on the confiscation issue.

The better questions to ask are -
1. Is police confiscation of firearms pursuant to a state law unconstitutional?

2. What is the statutory or common law basis for the answer to question number 1?

3. If there is no statutory or common law basis for believing confiscation is unconstitutional, what ethical obligations does a police officer have for either complying or refusing to comply with his/her superior's order to engage in gun confiscation?

People are always so quick to throw cops under the bus. But police can't refuse to comply with an order from the chain of command because they disagree with a policy. They must ETHICALLY be able to justify their refusal to comply with some basis in fact, statute, or common law. If they can't do that, they're just insubordinate. Believe it or not, we really DON'T want a police force that can arbitrarily refuse to obey orders based upon a difference of opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revvv View Post
I can hear the officer at the door now; "I have a warrent for your arrest, and for the search of your home as well as the siezure of any and all illegal weapons that you legally registered one hour/day late".

Your defense; "but I had it in the post office on time".

The officer's only able response at that moment is that he/she is only following orders. This is not a matter in which they have disgression. You will have to jump through legal hoops, be treated as a criminal, and possibly be forever marked as a felon.

Even if you don't have any of the "illegal" weapons in your home, prosecution can and likely will take place due to your admittance of having said weapon one day after the deadline.

If you ask me, this makes for a bad situation all around.
You should work on your spelling.
__________________
"Fast is fine. But accuracy is final."

"He'd look better with lividity" - BlueIron

Black Rifle Club - RRA-PSG
S&W Club - 22227
volsbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 16:56   #13
hunter 111
Senior Member
 
hunter 111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: TRAVEL -
Posts: 1,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by volsbear View Post
Have you called your local chief law enforcement officer to ask what his/her plans are? Is there CT case law that defines a police seizure of firearms to be unconstitutional? I see a lot of people rip LEOs on what they might or might not do if ordered to engage in confiscation, but nobody really seems to know what they're asking.

You're asking if a LEO would engage in an activity that YOU consider to be unconstitutional. But this is the wrong question. The LEO took an oath to faithfully defend federal/state constitutions and applicable laws. So what you SHOULD be asking is if the LEO KNOW that confiscation is unconstitutional, would they enforce it. To do this, certain conditions must exist. Most importantly, the LEO officer must KNOW that the activity they are being asked to complete is unconstitutional as well as the legal foundation for that belief. In other hands, the LEO can't just say "I'm not doing this because I think it's unconstitutional." They must ethically rely upon some authority to make that determination. In other words, their belief must be founded in specific law or common law. I doubt this exists since SCOTUS, as far as I know, has never granted cert on the confiscation issue.

The better questions to ask are -
1. Is police confiscation of firearms pursuant to a state law unconstitutional?

2. What is the statutory or common law basis for the answer to question number 1?

3. If there is no statutory or common law basis for believing confiscation is unconstitutional, what ethical obligations does a police officer have for either complying or refusing to comply with his/her superior's order to engage in gun confiscation?

People are always so quick to throw cops under the bus. But police can't refuse to comply with an order from the chain of command because they disagree with a policy. They must ETHICALLY be able to justify their refusal to comply with some basis in fact, statute, or common law. If they can't do that, they're just insubordinate. Believe it or not, we really DON'T want a police force that can arbitrarily refuse to obey orders based upon a difference of opinion.


You should work on your spelling.
Yeah call them and get on the to do first list
__________________
"The law isn't necessarily justice nor is justice necessarily lawful "
hunter 111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 17:14   #14
G-34
Senior Member
 
G-34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 805
this is not good at all, how far will the people let this go till they are forced to fight fire with fire?
__________________
"I'm back and ready to do battle with the dark forces that infest this forum." - JBnTX

"There is nothing so terrible as ignorance in motion.."
-Skyhook
G-34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 17:21   #15
Dawgfan165
Senior Member
 
Dawgfan165's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 114
I hope CT citizens take up arms against those attempting to take their guns away. This country is headed toward anarchy,,,quickly
Dawgfan165 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 17:23   #16
G-34
Senior Member
 
G-34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgfan165 View Post
I hope CT citizens take up arms against those attempting to take their guns away. This country is headed toward anarchy,,,quickly


i hope they do too. how many "LEO's" and citizens have to be hurt/killed before the goobermint gets it and backs off?
__________________
"I'm back and ready to do battle with the dark forces that infest this forum." - JBnTX

"There is nothing so terrible as ignorance in motion.."
-Skyhook
G-34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 17:34   #17
eb07
Sharkin'
 
eb07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Third Rock From the Sun
Posts: 2,343
The constitution state. Lol
eb07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 18:17   #18
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-34 View Post
i hope they do too. how many "LEO's" and citizens have to be hurt/killed before the goobermint gets it and backs off?
Government doesn't care how many get hurt or killed. All government cares about is control. Government will push to the point it feels The People will rise up and take down those doing the controlling. In-other-words...

"When the government fears the People, that is Liberty. When the People fear the Government, that is tyranny." --Thomas Jefferson

Until those in Government get to the point they "FEAR" for their own safety they will keep pushing for more and more CONTROL. When they are allowed to disarm The People they will have nothing left to fear. History has proven it again and again.

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." [Patrick Henry]

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. . . . From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. . . . The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."
--George Washington, Address to the second session of the First Congress
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 02-26-2014 at 18:19..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 18:34   #19
G-34
Senior Member
 
G-34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
Government doesn't care how many get hurt or killed. All government cares about is control. Government will push to the point it feels The People will rise up and take down those doing the controlling. In-other-words...

"When the government fears the People, that is Liberty. When the People fear the Government, that is tyranny." --Thomas Jefferson

Until those in Government get to the point they "FEAR" for their own safety they will keep pushing for more and more CONTROL. When they are allowed to disarm The People they will have nothing left to fear. History has proven it again and again.

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." [Patrick Henry]

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. . . . From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. . . . The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."
--George Washington, Address to the second session of the First Congress



first off, good posting..


second of all, lets just say they have ABSOLUTE control, you cant fart without their permission,


what do they benefit from total control? i have thought and thought about it but i dont understand what they can gain from total control
__________________
"I'm back and ready to do battle with the dark forces that infest this forum." - JBnTX

"There is nothing so terrible as ignorance in motion.."
-Skyhook
G-34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 18:36   #20
J.ThaddeusToad
On The X
 
J.ThaddeusToad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kingwood, TX
Posts: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by volsbear View Post
Have you called your local chief law enforcement officer to ask what his/her plans are? Is there CT case law that defines a police seizure of firearms to be unconstitutional? I see a lot of people rip LEOs on what they might or might not do if ordered to engage in confiscation, but nobody really seems to know what they're asking.

You're asking if a LEO would engage in an activity that YOU consider to be unconstitutional. But this is the wrong question. The LEO took an oath to faithfully defend federal/state constitutions and applicable laws. So what you SHOULD be asking is if the LEO KNOW that confiscation is unconstitutional, would they enforce it. To do this, certain conditions must exist. Most importantly, the LEO officer must KNOW that the activity they are being asked to complete is unconstitutional as well as the legal foundation for that belief. In other hands, the LEO can't just say "I'm not doing this because I think it's unconstitutional." They must ethically rely upon some authority to make that determination. In other words, their belief must be founded in specific law or common law. I doubt this exists since SCOTUS, as far as I know, has never granted cert on the confiscation issue.

The better questions to ask are -
1. Is police confiscation of firearms pursuant to a state law unconstitutional?

2. What is the statutory or common law basis for the answer to question number 1?

3. If there is no statutory or common law basis for believing confiscation is unconstitutional, what ethical obligations does a police officer have for either complying or refusing to comply with his/her superior's order to engage in gun confiscation?

People are always so quick to throw cops under the bus. But police can't refuse to comply with an order from the chain of command because they disagree with a policy. They must ETHICALLY be able to justify their refusal to comply with some basis in fact, statute, or common law. If they can't do that, they're just insubordinate. Believe it or not, we really DON'T want a police force that can arbitrarily refuse to obey orders based upon a difference of opinion.


You should work on your spelling.
Translation: A cop's family gotta eat too!...now hand over the guns...
__________________
We have been a most favored people. We ought to be a most generous people. We have been a most blessed people. We ought to be a most thankful people. -Calvin Coolidge
J.ThaddeusToad is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:30.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 816
171 Members
645 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42