Connecticut governor signs sweeping gun measure

www.cnn.com...

Here we go again, another state jumping on the Sandy Hook bandwagon...

With the governor's signature, Connecticut became the third state to pass such tough measures since the December rampage in Newtown. New York and Colorado passed gun-control legislation limiting magazine capacity, among other provisions.

I especially love this part...

Connecticut's measure sends a message to the nation, Senate President Don Williams said Wednesday, before lawmakers approved the final draft.

Yeah, the message to me is, buy it from a private owner and pay cash...otherwise, you sign up for a list that will make it easy to confiscate..... Have you seen these stories lately, where people who attend anti-government rallies are then arrested on drug charges, which of course then removes all their guns?

I have to say, I used to think all the "they are going after our guns" crowd was a bit paranoid.... Now, I think they are right on the money.

The most important part of the article:

Critics have argued the legislation will do nothing to stop someone like Adam Lanza, who carried out the Sandy Hook school killings December 14 with an assault-style weapon and high-capacity magazines.

"In his case, he stole the guns and went on a murderous rampage," Scott Wilson, president of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, previously has said. "Limiting magazine capacity or mandating registration will only affect law-abiding persons, not criminals bent on murder."

So, the legislation they were SO emotional about...wouldn't have even prevented the crime...



Nope, all it does is affect good, honest, law-abiding citizens.... Way to go lawmakers!

A lot of otherwise innocent people are going to be royally #ed by this mess when the ridiculous registration schemes come in.

Hopefully by then NK will have nuked MA, CT, NJ and NY off the face of the earth.

What they are proposing is not going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, no matter what they try and pass. The fact is, people will get guns, even if there is a "registry". Just like you said, people will just pay off the record in cash.. I mean that's usually how arms deals go down.

No amount of laws that they push will stop shootings from happening, until all of the guns in the world are completely removed, and we all know that's not going to happen. So clearly, they will keep continuing to infringe, and people will keep stocking up.

Ok Connecticut Im going to be listening to police scanners I best not her about any shootings.

Let's hope Colt and any other gun related manufacturers are packing up to leave as we speak.

reply to post by Gazrok


Good for the governor of Connecticut ! It takes guts to stand up to the gun nutters... A brave man making a stand.

There are some decent folk out there.....It's a start.

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


Putting provisions on an inalienable right?

You're right. It really IS the start.

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


Gun nutters?

Look, I get the drive to ban military style machine guns....but this measure bans the standard pistol carried by your average cop....

Not to mention, the main thing of it is...the crime that inspired the law would NOT have been prevented by it. It's BS legislation meant to appear to be doing something about it...disguising the fact that they are circumventing the Constitution and reducing citizen's rights.

Just wait until you see the financial impact when ranges have to shut down, major ammo manufacturers no longer sell to the state's law enforcement for a good price, and the entire gun industry goes elsewhere, to friendlier states.

I'd like to see one, just one thread on a state or federal law that imposes harsher penalties on criminals that use firearms in the commission of a crime.

Every law so far has been to impose or impede law abiding gun owners rights!

I just wanted to add, isn't this a little like a pre-crime law?

Isn't this a little like indicating potential guilt (potential abuse using a firearm)?

Isn't THAT being guilty before proving innocence?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

en.wikipedia.org...

So wouldn't laws restricting firearm ownership on the presumption of guilt be illegal?

reply to post by Gazrok


Our elected representation does not respect the will of the people anymore. Popular opinion has no bearing. Government has an agenda that has nothing to do with those who voted them the job.

All we can do is to draw a line in the sand and swear we will not cross it. We have to make this choice from within our hearts and minds and understand the possible ramifications for our loyalty to our country and its constitution.

reply to post by beezzer


Beez, there is no more law, only force.


Authoritarians don't give a damn about law. It no longer offers any protection.