search
top

They’re Just After “Common Sense” Gun Laws

The Hartford Courant is just fine with the idea of sending hundreds of thousands of fellow citizens to the gulags. In fact, they embrace the idea:

But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law. Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers who might not have registered those guns in compliance with the new law.

A Class D felony calls for a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Even much lesser penalties or probation would mar a heretofore clean record and could adversely affect, say, the ability to have a pistol permit.

If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

If you’re a gun owner in the Courant’s market, and you still subscribe, you’re part of the problem. They want you in prison.

31 Responses to “They’re Just After “Common Sense” Gun Laws”

  1. mike says:

    “But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law.”

    I wonder what their position is on Obama enforcing such things as immigration, Obamacare, drug laws, the Bill of Rights, etc. You know, consistency and all that..

    • jerry says:

      I’m sure they’re all over it. We all know the press is fair and calls it right down the middle. My tongue would snap off its rollers if I tried to speak those words.

    • Jay F says:

      What do you think the Courant’s position would be on the state enforcing firearms pre-emption laws?

  2. Stacy says:

    This is actually a good example of the value of the First Amendment. These guys say what they really think, without fear of official persecution, and the rest of us no longer need to wonder if we’re just being paranoid…

  3. Hank Archer says:

    The Hartford Courant – that’s the paper that’s been running all the editorials about how Obama should quit delaying the ACA and enforce the law as passed isn’t it? I think I remember that they had a strict “the state must try to enforce the law” policy.

  4. Hank Archer says:

    And I notice the Courant has implemented “Reasoned Discourse” as well – no comments!

  5. borekfk says:

    Ironically enough I was reading an old Hartford Courant article today that was lamenting the closure of the old Marlin plant. Quite the strange newspaper, but then again I guess that’s why they’re dying off. Good riddance I say.

  6. DogFace says:

    Yes, and I bet the Courant thinks Rosa Parks should have been imprisoned for violating the Montgomery, Alabama bus segregation law.

    • Braden Lynch says:

      Exactly, and there were laws to return run-away slaves to their masters that were ignored and jury nullification put an end to those prosecutions. Unjust/unConstitutional laws must be resisted.

      What’s different here is the the Second Amendment is clear that we do not have to put up with these infringements on our right to keep and bear arms and the good people in CT are armed and I hope ready to make the authorities pay for any attempts to attack them. LEOs, if you ignore your obligation to the Constitution do remember that at the Nuremberg trials the “Just Following Orders” defense was not an excuse.

      Too extreme a viewpoint? Answer me this then…what is the point of registering these firearms, if not to make it easy to demand their surrender and confiscatation at a later time?

      Registration is the most efficient means for enabling confiscation and the blood of literally millions of disarmed people demands that we not repeat the stupidity of submitting to it. Registration does nothing to inhibit violent criminal behavior since they will never do so and cannot be compelled (per Fifth Amendment court rulings).

  7. Jay F says:

    I am surprised that there has been no comment on this line from the Courant editorial:

    “Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers who might not have registered those guns in compliance with the new law.”

    Is that even possible? Isn’t there a law requiring the rapid destruction of background check records in order to prevent the creation of a background check database and the use to which the Courant would like it put? I look forward to the reaction from the Courant when they find out about that.

    On the other hand, I almost regret not knowing what the Courant wanted the state to do with a list of thousands who had background checks for an “assault weapon” purchase but did not register one. Police visits? Searches?

    If that occurred and the story inevitably went national, can you imagine the NRA new member signups and new fundraising records set?

    (Cue Obi-Wan Kenobe death line)

    • Akatsukami says:

      Isn’t there a law requiring the rapid destruction of background check records in order to prevent the creation of a background check database and the use to which the Courant would like it put?

      If they want to disobey the law, they should be prepared to face the consequences.

      • ruralcounsel says:

        If the state and the local news outlets want to back an arguably unconstitutional law, shouldn’t they be prepared to face the consequences?

    • Sebastian says:

      CT requires all gun sales be reported to the state on a state form, that they’ve been compiling into a registry record of sales for years now. So they do have a mechanism to go person to person. This is one reason universal background checks are such a problem. Once they have everything tracked, you don’t have any plausible, legal way of denying you have the gun they’ve come knocking at the door for.

  8. Oldradartech says:

    Hartford is a sanctuary city for illegals. They only support laws they like.

  9. Ish says:

    But the bottom line is that King George III must try to enforce the law. Colonial authorities should use the tax records as a way to find colonists who might not have paid their stamp taxes, tea taxes, and so forth in compliance with the new laws passed by Parliament.

    If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.

    Get some copper wire. The inhabitants of Hartford’s older cemeteries must be spinning fast enough to generate enough energy to power all of New England.

  10. PhilaBOR says:

    Let’s see…estimated 500,000 gun owners, times 3% three percenters = 15,000 really bad days for Connecticut State Police SWAT. And the Hartford Courant editorial board, who I’m sure will insist on taking point. Gee, too bad they don’t have some milsurp MRAP’s. And incindiary grenades. And sniper teams. What’s Lon Horiuchi doing these days?

    • Cornholio says:

      “Kill all they send… and they will stop coming.”

      • mikeb302000 says:

        Yeah, tough talk. Let’s see how much bloodshed there is when confiscations begin. I predict none. That’s because the proverbial molon-labe-minded gun owner is total bullshit. You guys are not that. You’re more like school-yard bullies who whimper away when your bluff is called.

        The other thing that won’t happen is people going to jail for failure to register their guns. Tough talk and bizarre exaggeration, that’s what you guys do.

        • Calling MikeB on his bullshit says:

          So what’s YOUR address MikeB?

          If we’re nothing but “bullshit” you’ll have no problem telling us where to find YOU, right?

        • Akatsukami says:

          Gotten tired of trolling TTAG, have we?

        • Jay F says:

          “Let’s see how much bloodshed there is when confiscations begin. I predict none.”

          So groups like the CSGV and SPLC are full of crap when then they warn of violence by 2nd A supporters?

          “The other thing that won’t happen is people going to jail for failure to register their guns. Tough talk and bizarre exaggeration”

          Yet it was the Hartford Courant that first implied that people would be going to jail. So that was also “tough talk and bizarre exaggeration” which we all should ignore?

          • mikeb302000 says:

            No, the Courant said people should go to jail for this. I’m saying no one will.

            • Alpheus says:

              Mike, if no one is going to go to jail for this, then what is the point of having the law in the first place? The most it will do is snag otherwise innocent people, capriciously, at random, often with no warning whatsoever (because I particularly wonder to what degree the “non-compliant” are so because they are making a statement, and to what degree it’s simply because of ignorance of the law, even if it’s a simple “I was certain that my gun didn’t fit the law!” I’m guessing there’s much more of the latter than the former).

              For that matter, if the three-percenter bravado is dependent on a tiny percentage of gun owners shooting back when government officials come to collect guns…and those government agents never come…then you’ll continue to claim that the gun owners are the bullies who back down when their bluff is called, when in reality, it’s the State that’s doing the bullying and tough-talk, and then backing down when called on their bluff.

              Seriously: if a law is going to be next to useless in preventing crime if it’s enforced, and if it’s not even going to be enforced, what’s the point of having it? Why are you so eager to advocate for such pointless laws?

  11. Heather from AK says:

    But.. But.. I thought registration Definitely Didn’t lead to Confiscation!

    You aren’t paranoid if they really are out to get you.

  12. As I suggested in response to a letter to the editor in the Courant from a lady insisting on arrests, deputize those who are demanding immediate arrests and then place them in the front of the stack as they raid homes of suspected gun owners. It isn’t fair to the law enforcement officers to expect them to do the heavy lifting to enforce this stupid law.

  13. Kevin Highland says:

    I’m a frequent RSS reader…I found a link to this article Facebook from the Illinois State Rifle Association.

    It will be interesting to see how this pans out in CT. Enough civil disobedience and some intelligent judges might iron this out.

  14. Brad says:

    “They want you in prison” — neatly summing up the core objective of the anti-gun movement.

    Okay then. I think they will be unpleasantly surprised should they succeed in sparking a new civil war.

    • Jay F says:

      Upon reflection. I wonder if MikeB might be partially right – the Courant may be engaging in the tough talking bluster and bluff that MikeB attributes to gunowners. When the opportunity comes to imprison an otherwise clean gunowner, or even search his home, the Courant may have second thoughts when the story inevitably goes national along with stories of record NRA new member signups and new NRA fundraising records set.

  15. jirdesteva says:

    The elected elite have time and money they will continue to take OUR rights away little by little. No give on our part will ever satiate their desire to have power over US. The decisions WE make now will dictate the lives WE and the generations that will come after US will live. Who’s boot will WE place on our necks?
    Why would anyone who legally purchased property without having to register that property now do so? The very people who want the registration CAN’T be trusted to manage their responsibility to their constituents. They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Now they know where the guns are and who they can take them from. Politicians always lie so why would you believe them when they say its not for confiscation! Oh, I’m sure that the criminals that actually have real ASSault weapons have run to register their illegally acquired guns. YEAH ! RIGHT!

  16. Rich says:

    CODE WORDS for gun confiscation: “Reasonable” “Common Sense”

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Another Reason Against Schummer’s Universal Background Checks | Gun Free Zone - […] Hat tip to Sebastian. […]
  2. The Daley Gator | Your Rule 2 Link a Round - […] Shall Not Be Questioned: I got your “common sense” right here gun grabbers! […]
  3. SayUncle » CT paper wants to jail gun owners - […] The Hartford Piss-ant wants the state police to go through their supposed database of background checks and find anyone …
  4. Round Em Up | doubleplusundead - […] link. O’Brien explains what happens when Big Brother doesn’t love you, this is a safe gunblogger link ) For …
  5. We’re Going to Need More Cages at A Geek With Guns - […] Shall Not Be Questioned I came across an opinion piece from a guy who wants Connecticut to strictly enforce …
top