Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Russia Today)   Connecticut has created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals, because some residents are refusing to register guns under a new law enacted after the Sandy Hook School shooting   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4792 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Feb 2014 at 3:03 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-02-13 03:25:29 AM  
3 votes:
I think the folks in CT experienced an onslaught of tragic boating accidents over the past year, resulting in the loss overboard of untold numbers of "assault weapons."
2014-02-13 09:11:06 AM  
2 votes:
I, personally, cannot even understand why any sane or rational person would possess the "banned" firearms, and I am disappointed that the state continues to allow ownership of these dangerous devices. These deadly assault weapons serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever other than the facilitation of mass murder. For that reason, they have no place in society, except in the hands of law enforcement.
2014-02-13 08:35:34 AM  
2 votes:

imfallen_angel: So many little penises....

pedophile alert!!
2014-02-13 01:42:17 AM  
2 votes:

Pokey.Clyde: TuteTibiImperes: Given the circumstances at the time, the move made sense.

No, it didn't. People, in neighborhoods not flooded, and with plenty of provisions had their means of protection illegally taken away from them. Twist all you want, but nothing will make it right, nor legal.

When the rule of law had essentially broken down, it made sense to take measures to ensure that only those sworn and tasked to uphold the law would be armed.  I'll admit that care should have been taken to record which firearms were taken from each person and every effort made to return all legally possessed firearms to their rightful owners once things had settled down, but the initial idea to reduce violence by reducing the number of guns floating around was a good one.
2014-02-13 02:18:38 PM  
1 vote:

demaL-demaL-yeH: redmid17: demaL-demaL-yeH: Joe Blowme: Counterpoint:

VII. And be it further enacted, That the rules of discipline, approved and established by Congress, in their resolution of the twenty-ninth of March, 1779, shall be the rules of discipline so be observed by the militia throughout the United States,

Those rules of discipline established by Congress on March 29, 1779?
Regulations for the Order and Discipline of the Troops of the United States

This is what the Founders meant by well regulated.

/*spikes the microphone*

And yet.... Georgie himself said "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government. "
/go B rabbit!!

The very same George Washington who, as Commander-in-Chief, saddled up and led troops in the field to crush an insurrection?
//History, facts, and reality are not kind to your views. Mayhap you should change them.

So he knows wtf he is talking about now dont he? Sorta been there, done that kinda way huh?

Sorry. Forgot a link.
//It's like the Zombie Reagan vs. REAL Reagan when it comes to gun control.
Zombie Reagan:
[ image 604x720]

///Here's a nice quiz for you for civics class.

Why do you keep bringing up Reagan?

Aren't Reagan, guns, and money your heilige trinity?

Now but I would love to know why you're using a german word to describe me in a manner which is pretty inconsistent with my comments in the thread. Are you, as a jewish veteran, trying to Godwin me?
2014-02-13 01:11:11 PM  
1 vote:
i141.photobucket.comView Full Size
2014-02-13 11:26:13 AM  
1 vote:

Oblio13: Daemonik:
You want to worship the 2nd Amendment? Fine, how about you remember the part where it says "WELL REGULATED" eh?...

Good idea. You should look up what the Founders meant by "well regulated", as well as what they meant by "militia". If the Bill of Rights isn't clear enough, they also explained themselves in The Federalist Papers. The exhaustive research done for the Heller decision is only a Google search away. Last but not least, the definition is right in the US Code:

... every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age (and) former members of the armed forces up to age 65...

Oh, OH!  You want to talk about what the Founding Fathers MEANT when they wrote "well regulated".. okay, sure.. in that case you can't own any gun that the Founding Fathers didn't own.  Back to muskets & black powder for you sir.  You might as well whine that the right to bare arms means you should be allowed to own nukes and that we should return to state militias instead of having a standing professional army.
2014-02-13 09:29:52 AM  
1 vote:

Thunderpipes: smoky2010: dittybopper: mbillips: Uh, pretty much everywhere in Europe other than the U.K.?

You mean this UK?

In England and Wales there were 1.7 million legally registered 
firearms in 2005; illegal, unregistered guns were estimated as high 
as 4 million.

Many U.S. states? Legal firearms confiscation is pretty clearly barred in the U.S. Some local jurisdictions can force you to sell or otherwise dispose of them in a legal fashion, but they haven't confiscated them.

That's a distinction without a difference.  Just because they didn't show up at your door with a SWAT unit to forcibly take them from you doesn't make it any better:  Either way, they'd be forced by the Fourth Amendment to compensate you.

But cash doesn't compensate you for loss of utility.

So, do you think that a convicted felon should be able to legal possess a firearm? That seems to be the case your making. I have yet to see any cases of people being forced to sell/ or dispose of firearms. CT certainly didn't do that. Generally, the laws are setup so that if you already own the weapon, you can keep it. You just can't buy another one. No one said that you have to get rid of them.

Blah blah blah. This is the problem with slippery slope. We said Democrats would enact registries, you said no they won't. And look what we have. Registration leads to confiscation, period. Look at Canada. They outlaw a 22 rilfe because it looks like an AK-47, then confiscate. Australia did the same thing, and Obama admin has said Australian gun laws are a model.

Wake up.

Next thing will be dropping the 4th amendment so cops can randomly search your house for guns.

Where can I donate to your tin-foil fund? I want to make sure that you don't run out of tin-foil hats and let common sense interfere with logic.

Also, when you want to spout out random crap, please don't piggy-back off of my comments in a thread.
2014-02-13 08:55:01 AM  
1 vote:

dittybopper: smoky2010: The problem is that if you don't register, and you're caught, you are now a felon. You know what that means, you are no longer allowed to own or possess firearms. They will then confiscate ALL of your guns.

Whether you agree with the law or not, the possibility of being a felon is not something I want on my record. I do not want to seriously restrict my future employment because I made a stand over registering magazines (that they state already knows I own anyway because I bought them legally).

You know, if there are a whole lot of those cases where Joe Upstandingcitizen, Boy Scout leader, Little League coach, never been in any serious trouble beyond a traffic ticket, gets arrested for having an unregistered gun, and made into a felon by fiat, not because he hurt somebody, but because he owned something he believed it was his right to own under the Constitution of the United States, and common law stretching back to before the US even existed, how do you think juries and voters are going to react to that?

But hey, that's fine.  You want to register them to avoid legal sanctions now, go right ahead.  May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

You must not live in CT. The juries here would eat you alive! As someone with a professional career, in a highly regulated industry, I cannot afford a felony on my record. If you can, good for you. You can tack your criminal record to your wall next to your tin-foil hat.

Also, don't forget that even if you did win your court case, you would never get your guns back. It would take years to make it to court, and by that time, your guns would have been melted down to puddles years earlier. Also, whenever you went for a new job and someone googled our name and saw that you were arrested for not following the laws, I think your chances of getting that job would be seriously restricted. No, it's not legal and you'll never know about it. Unless, of course, you own your own business or like to work in the service industries (i.e. fast food).
2014-02-13 08:42:46 AM  
1 vote:

OnlyM3: Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon,

You didn't just quote Ayn Rand in a non-ironic fashion, did you? ::facepalm::
2014-02-13 08:11:24 AM  
1 vote:

August11: Connecticutians?

2014-02-13 08:04:31 AM  
1 vote:

Piizzadude: Can you yell fire in a crowded theater or is that illegal?

Well, if it's actually on fire, not only is it allowed, but it's a very good idea and highly encouraged!
2014-02-13 08:02:21 AM  
1 vote:
i976.photobucket.comView Full Size
2014-02-13 07:30:10 AM  
1 vote:

Piizzadude: So much for the law abiding gun owner myth.

Law says register your guns, you register. You deserve the conviction and removal of your 2nd amendment rights.

PS the 2nd says you can have a gun, it doesnt say under what terms and conditions.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
2014-02-13 07:05:37 AM  
1 vote:

Piizzadude: kellyclan: Piizzadude: So much for the law abiding gun owner myth.

Law says register your guns, you register. You deserve the conviction and removal of your 2nd amendment rights.

PS the 2nd says you can have a gun, it doesnt say under what terms and conditions.

It actually says exactly what terms and conditions. It says you can have arms that you can bear; handheld infantry weapons.

And everyone is law abiding. A few hacks with an agenda ignored the constituents and changed the rules.

Thought exercise: What would be some reasonable restrictions on your 1st Amendment rights?

Can you yell fire in a crowded theater or is that illegal?

Can you shoot a random person in the face unprovoked?
2014-02-13 05:40:26 AM  
1 vote:

Boojum2k: Pokey.Clyde: Actually, they were taking people's guns.

Don't worry, Piizzadude will be right there with you. Weather and schedule permitting, of course, and not if there's anything better to do.

Sorry I was wrong, I support the NY ban.

The 2nd also does not say what kind of gun, nor how many bullets. Assault weapons and anything over 6 bullets is too much
2014-02-13 05:35:34 AM  
1 vote:

Piizzadude: All the way up to taking them from you, there is nothing wrong. When they say no one can have a gun anymore, I will be right there with you.

You're heading to New York to protest, I take it?
2014-02-13 04:03:26 AM  
1 vote:

demaL-demaL-yeH: Had the Supreme Court found registration unconstitutional, they would have ruled it just as unconstitutional as the trigger lock requirement.
The court did not. QED.

*pat pat* it's okay, I know this kind of thing is above your level.
2014-02-13 12:51:22 AM  
1 vote:
The best course of action at this point would probably be a public awareness campaign combined with an extension of the registration time limits (with a fine for doing so late).  Run ads listing the characteristics of the weapons that fall under the law, let them know that they have until July 1st to register them and pay a minor fine with no criminal penalty, and that if they're caught with an unregistered weapon after that date they'll be charged with a felony.

Just register your dang guns people, the courts have been pretty clear that they're not going to let a law stand that allows the government to take them away.
Displayed 19 of 19 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.