search
top

Sheep to the Slaughter

Some folks in CT are gluttons for punishment:

“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,” said Charles Gillette, who was registering magazines.

Ask some folks in New York City what happens when they “know where they are.” If they can find a pretext they will be back. You can take that to the bank.

“I understand why they’re doing it, but I don’t think it’s constitutional,” said Scott Boccio, who was registering guns.

I can understand why they are doing it too, and the link above is the problem with that why. Maybe some folks in Connecticut might offer up a sacrificial shooter, knowing full well at the next available pretext, you’d have to turn it in. If you were doing that, you’re not going to blab to a reporter about the 5 or so ARs you’re not registering. But I’m not too keen on the “thank you sir, may I have another,” tone of some of the folks in this article.

“Unless you change everything, and make it England and take everything away, I don’t see how they’re going to stop it,” Boccio said.

Yes, they know that. And they thank you for taking part in this first phase of their scheme. It’s important to have a plan if something like this comes to your front door. I would strongly discourage commenters from speaking about their plans here (or anywhere, really), but it’s a good idea to have one.

41 Responses to “Sheep to the Slaughter”

  1. Andy B. says:

    “I would strongly discourage commenters from speaking about their plans here. . .”

    I would strongly recommend that everyone should have been a terminal cynic and pessimist and had a plan 40 – 50 years ago. The GCA ’68 certainly provided a wake-up call, though I have to admit things have not played out as swiftly as I believed they would at the time.

    • HSR47 says:

      Not all of us were around 40-50 years ago in order to formulate such a plan. Some of us weren’t even old enough to vote (much less purchase handguns) until years after the sunset of the federal AWB.

      I can certainly agree that gun owners who were around prior to the 1968 GCA should have been better prepared and more politically active, but not everyone who is in the shooting community today was around then. You can’t blame the son for the sins of his father.

      • Andy B. says:

        I was of course being more than a little tongue-in-cheek. But I wasn’t referring to political activism so much as preparing for, that what is fine and legal and acceptable today is very likely going to be a go-to-jail offense tomorrow — for when (not if) the politics is no longer good enough.

      • Bryan S. says:

        But the son can be restricted and enslaved by the vote of his father and grandfather.

    • ramrodd says:

      Certain people stand on the graves of dead children..
      My right is more important than your dead because i fought for it first hand.. I washed the blood of my dead friends from my humvee..

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh1zornUVv8

  2. If I lived in CT I’d have a three year (or less) plan to GTFO.

    Even if it meant moving my family to a free state like NH, VT, or PA and commuting to an apartment near my work. Joe Huffman seems to do that to get to downtown Seattle, for example. Freedom is only a uhaul ride away.

    I always realize when seeing these things that the media is going to hunt out good sheep who are registering properly and setting the Right Example for the rest of the people. For every person registering I’m guessing there’s several more who are not. And I’d be shocked if those registering are declaring everything they have.

    • The Jack says:

      Selection bias is a powerful tool.

      And given the ratio of potential data collection to published article length there is plenty of opportunity.

      It also helps that the line is a selection bias in and of itself.

      Only gun owners are gonna be in that line, and that line will also only contain those willing to register something.

      • I suspect they would manufacture a line if they needed to. They need to get out the narrative that all good Jews wear their star all good gun owners will register.

    • Zermoid says:

      Exactly why I left NJ in 1990…….

  3. Shootin' Buddy says:

    Lots of morons on the East Coast who would comply with the feckless law but lots of morons everywhere.

    For every fool the media finds registering anything, there are 99 that are not there.

  4. Perhaps they wouldn’t be so eager to comply if they had read Stephen Halbrook’s recent book on Jews in Nazi Germany and the use of gun control by the Nazis to disarm them. It made it much easier to ship the Jews to the death camps as they were disarmed and couldn’t fight back.

    • Jeff says:

      And yet most American Jews are anti gun. My Jewish shooting buddies are as dumbfounded by that as I am.

      • It is a very curious thing. I used to work with two guys with very different views on gun control. Allan was from Britain, and immigrated to America at least in part because of gun control. His family had to flee Austria after the Anschluss because they were anti-Nazi, and never managed to get their castle back after the war. Gary was Jewish, and very supportive of gun control. When Allan and I pointed out the long history of disarming minorities before slaughter, not just in Nazi Europe, but Turkey, in the Balkans in the mid-1990s, of the Ukrainians in the Soviet Union — his only response is that Americans are different from every other country in the world.

      • I just had another reminder of the cognitive dissonance you mention. Many years ago, my wife worked as a substitute teacher at the elementary school where our kids attended. The principal was Jewish, and a big supporter of gun control because when she was growing up in Southern California, her family was subject to anti-Semitic threats by a guy with a gun: a Los Angeles police officer. Perfect logic there, isn’t it? Only government officials should have guns…like the one threatening them.

        Some years ago, Professor Bernstein over at Volokh Conspiracy pointed out that in most respects, it did not make sense for Jews to be so wildly pro-Democrat, especially as the Democratic Party has become so aggressively anti-Israel, and Republicans, especially social conservatives, have become Israel’s greatest supporters. His only explanation was that American Jews are terrified of people that think of America as a Christian nation (although obviously, this is now history), enough so that they find it easier to support their enemies.

        • HSR47 says:

          “His only explanation was that American Jews are terrified of people that think of America as a Christian nation (although obviously, this is now history), enough so that they find it easier to support their enemies.”

          Actually, it’s a bit more involved than that. The issue is that a significant percentage of America’s (in indeed the world’s) Jewry has replaced the religion with leftist politics.

          For the most part, the only Jews who today have issues with Christianity and it’s holidays do so due to their leftist beliefs, not because of Judaism.

          • I confess that pro-gun Jews I know are distinctly more religious than the anti-gun Jews that I know.

            • Neon says:

              My anecdotal experiences say the same thing. Growing up in the Westside of Los Angeles a majority of my friends were Jewish. Most of them rarely if ever saw the inside of synagogue. Some went once a year, not unlike a lot of Catholics at Easter. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong but it is curious. And I would agree that in many religions the idolization of the State has supplanted religious beliefs.

      • HSR47 says:

        I remember being in shul with my father one Friday night when the subject of discussion turned to gun control; My father expressed that he couldn’t understand how any Jew would be in favor of gun control especially in light of how the Nazis used such laws against our people.

        A significant portion of those in attendance were shocked by this statement.

        • Zermoid says:

          Forgetting of history, it bites every race in the ass sooner or later…..

          • HSR47 says:

            Race implies fundamental breeding incompatibility. Such does not exist, therefore it is far more correct so say that differences are purely tribal.

    • Andy B. says:

      I find people of all ideologies are remarkably capable of seeing ominous parallels (to borrow an Objectivist book title) in one set of Nazi practices or tactics, that they oppose, but just as incapable of seeing similar parallels in other Nazi practices or tactics, that they oppose. “It can’t happen here” becomes a compelling argument when you are a supporter of what is actually happening.

  5. Patrick H says:

    I think we all have a plan- of that line we are not willing to cross. That line definitely includes registration.

  6. Braden Lynch says:

    Registration = Confiscation
    Maybe not today, but probably tomorrow.

    Ask one simple question…Why do they need to know this?

    It does not stop or deter crimes and it ensnares only lawful gun owners. If a computer system is hacked, it is a shopping list for criminals. It does create a great targeting list for SWAT and ATF raids on people suddenly declared felons for the mere possession of a firearm they may have had for decades.

    Answer: TOur government is jealous of its power and wants to make sure that no one can oppose them. That is the only logical reason and hence why you should do everything you can to stymie their efforts.

    …LOUD pounding on my door by ATF agents in 3…2…1…

  7. skinnedknuckles says:

    Unfortunately for those of us who have to stay in CT for one reason or another, de-facto registration was already a fact of life prior to this latest steaming pile of horses–t passed in April. Unless you moved to the state with guns or purchased long guns in-state via a private sale, your guns were already registered with the state via a little thing called a DPS-3-C which you filled out for every retail purchase and every private purchase of a handgun. So there may be some AR’s out there that the state doesn’t know about, but not very many in “law abiding” hands. So the knock can come for those who don’t re-register because they know we own them. I’m sure there are plenty of judges who would consider it “probable cause” and issue a no-knock warrant, even. Sad situation that will not be reversed by the legislative process, so we support the various court challenges. But who wants a felony conviction while waiting for the courts?

    • Those who saw the writing on the wall would have wisely done some private sales while they were still legal, then, right?

      I hope those outside CT are taking notes. :-\

      • skinnedknuckles says:

        Yes, they would have, and according to the state’s web site (and the person who answered the phone at state police HQ) you can still do long gun private sales without state approval, at least until April when the new long gun permit becomes required. And it is still legal to purchase long guns from an FFL out of state without notifying CT (with a Fed background check, of course).

  8. Eck! says:

    What the need is for everyone (ok more than a majority) to say
    NO I WON’T. Then the arrests will start and the various public building will house all while filling to the max. They will have to be fed, provided sanitation, clean clothe, and medical care.

    Add to that those that pack and leave and CT will be very interestingly empty. And likely have more crime, much more.

    Care to posit how long that might last?

    Some would say fantasy but it only takes enough people saying NO to make it happen and that number is not that large.

    Eck!

    • I really wish that I believed this. The problem is that there are two categories of gun owners out there. Category 1 are people like most Americans: we have decent jobs; we have never been arrested, much less convicted; we have enough assets that we are not going to get a public defender. The civil disobedience approach (as opposed to quiet refusal to obey) means being locked up in jail, at least for a few hours; it likely means losing your job when your employer finds out that you are facing criminal charges; it means spending thousands to tens of thousands of dollars fighting the charges in court — and then almost certainly losing. These are the vast majority of gun owners — and it is almost always easier to move somewhere gun-friendly than to stay in a place like Connecticut.

      Category 2 are Americans who have long criminal histories; are not afraid of jail because they have been there many times before; have no assets to speak of, so they will get a public defender (who will likely do a bad job); and are likely to be going to jail in the next year or two anyway.

    • Sebastian says:

      I’m not necessarily speaking about civil disobedience. That is not for everyone.

  9. Carl from Chicago says:

    The logic of gun control and religious belief both escape me …

    • HSR47 says:

      The logic of religion is generally that there is an all-powerful creator (read: God) from whom we derive our rights, and indeed our very lives.

      The ‘logic’ of gun control is that government is God.

  10. Magnafan says:

    Canada, 1989: A Muslim male slaughtered several women in a Montreal technical college. The men, cowards, fled. The police refused to enter until the shooting stopped. The gunman’s rifle jammed–the surviving women, who knew nothing about firearms, waited until he un-jammed it and were then murdered. These facts have been buried by the leftist Canadian media.
    1992-93 a woman with connections to George Soros, and a few Liberal politicians with communitarian leanings, jam through Parliament a gun control package Bloomberg would adore. The Libs said that crime control, not confiscation, was the goal. Soon after passage, hundreds of thousands of previously legal firearms were confiscated with no compensation.
    To this day, the RCMP can arbitrarily decide what firearms are prohibited and then confiscate them.

    • Arnie says:

      Thank you, sir! I shall bookmark this for future debates!!!

    • Kirk Parker says:

      Horrifying. The first guy to make a move might likely have sacrificed his life for the others. The second or third? The scumbag shooter could have easily been overpowered with less loss of life. Men without chests, bah…

  11. Ceefour says:

    It should be noted that the British army get pretty good (at first) with locating hidden IRA arms and published many a pamphlet on the subject but those Irish guys got better at hiding them than the Brits did in finding them. To those Upstaters in NY and those patriots in Ct….THINK TWICE.

  12. J says:

    There are plenty of detailed open source documents concerning how the USG finds hidden arms in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is not difficult to extrapolate several means of caching firearms once the most common means of detecting them are understood.

  13. John Winston says:

    I see you deleted my comments, including 2 references to directly relevant reason magazine articles (one of which you yourself noted), plus a quote and 2 brief movie clips from author Matt Bracken.

    Likewise you also conspicuously fail to answer HappuWarrior6’s” question.

    Your blog claims (at least by inference) to be on the side of freedom; however, what you have done by cowering in fear is to aid and abet the tyranny. You have lost this reader. You must be very proud of yourself (sarc).

    • Sebastian says:

      I didn’t delete your comments. They got caught in the spam filter. But since you were so quick to jump to conclusions, and since your comment is longer than many novels, in the spam filter is where it will remain.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Second Amendment Holiday Round Up | Walla Walla TEA Party Patriots - […] Sheep to the Slaughter   […]
top