Connecticut gun owners threaten violence

[TemplarKormac]

You have a lot to worry about, so don't be stupid and try to fight armed men from the government.

On the contrary, why would armed men from the govt want to fight a law abiding citizen?

Learn history.

You know nothing of it.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

If they make trouble, so don't.

Thats the same analogy used a few years ago about emails: If you haven't been looking at anything bad then you have nothing to worry about.

You have a lot to worry about, so don't be stupid and try to fight armed men from the government.

I'm guessing every victim of a totalitarian government has said exactly the same thing.

 

[Darkwind]

People talking about using deadly violence to deal with this issue, makes the law against Assault Weapons seem justified.

If you think the only way to deal with political dissagreements is with deadly violence, you may not be mentally fit to possess a firearm.

I'm sure King George felt the same way.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

You have a lot to worry about, so don't be stupid and try to fight armed men from the government.

On the contrary, why would armed men from the govt want to fight a law abiding citizen?

Learn history.

History is full of repressive governments and very few individual freedom based ones. Where did you learn history from?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Unfortunately, "assault" weapons bans have been upheld by the US Supreme Court as being constitutional.

I am not sure a requirement for grandfathered weapons to be registered has ever been tested in court, though. That is what is at issue here.

ARs have less power than a deer rifle or several handguns. The left has jumped on the term assault without even understanding that particular rifle. Many even think that a .223 is fully automatic.

Look, you can empty a 30 shot clip in under 10 seconds. That is effectively a machine gun. Not good for accuracy, but cleans out a grade school classroom or shopping mall rather effectively. Now as for the power of the .223, with the type of bullet that Lanza used, they do horrible damage.

Now I have a solution for the present owners of the assualt weapons. If you want to take the guns out of the house, you have to have the same license as required for a Thompson Machine Gun. But if you keep the gun in the house, then there is no problem. If you are caught with the gun outside the home or your property without the license, you are jailed, and have a felony on your record, with no right to a firearm for the rest of your life. The second law is that if you store your weapons where someone can easily get them, someone takes them and uses them in a crime, you own that crime. It is called accountability.

Oh yes, and I have been a gun owner since I was 12 years old. And am able with both rifles and handguns.

Accuracy, as you stated, is very low if you just pull the trigger 30 times. A Thompson or any full auto is very different than a semi-auto. You should know that as a gun owner. I have no disagreements with the current law about owning a full auto, class 3 from a FFL, registered before 1986.

 

[9thIDdoc]

If a man kills several Government Agents defending his Right to Bear Arms, you will never find a Jury that will unanimously convict him, not even in New York. The Jury would acquit or hang, most likely the Jury would hang since there will always be some Loyalists like yourself.

Very sad. A good prosecutor will convince the jury to listen to their conscience, and convict the asshole of murder for killing an innocent man just doing his job.

It is nobodies job to violate the civil rights of an American citizen.
Our forefathers made it plain that the 2nd Amendment was in place in case it was necessary to replace a tyrannical government. Who decides when that has happened?
It is not reasonable to assume that the judicial system can make an impartial judgment when it itself is a part of that government. We the people were always intended to be the final arbiters.
There are very good reasons why many LEOs across the country have given notice that they will not attempt to enforce such laws.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If they make trouble, so don't.

Thats the same analogy used a few years ago about emails: If you haven't been looking at anything bad then you have nothing to worry about.

You have a lot to worry about, so don't be stupid and try to fight armed men from the government.

What an Orwellian statement.

Yes, we all have a lot to worry about, namely people like you telling us we cannot resist government tyranny or are powerless to stop it. Don't be stupid and think We the People will lie down quietly and without a fight.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Let's put it in a way a liberal can understand.

1) Murder is the intentional taking of a human life, by another human being. Such an act robs the victim of their right to life. Nowhere does the definition of murder confine this to using a gun to commit the deed.

2) So, as we see it, a person is less likely to be murdered by someone with a firearm if they themselves have a firearm. You liberals often preach of wanting to "level the playing field" we are only trying to see that it happens.

3) When you try to implement gun control, you by your own actions and advocacy are supporting the right of the murderer to use his firearm to take a life, over someone using their firearm to protect it. Thus, the playing field is no longer level, but heavily favors the assailant and not the victim.

4) So when people threaten to take my firearms, I will fight to the death to preserve my right to bear arms. But hey, you can hide and cower in a corner in the waning moments of your existence if you want, when a murderer pulls the trigger.

 

[Victory67]

Unless you have exhausted all legal and peaceful means of resistance, resorting to deadly violence is the act of a psychopath with anger issues.

If CT gun owners resort to violence if law enforcement personnel come to their door to enforce a court ordered warrant, they will look very stupid and very insane.

 

[Victory67]

4) So when people threaten to take my firearms, I will fight to the death to preserve my right to bear arms. But hey, you can hide and cower in a corner in the waning moments of your existence if you want, when a murderer pulls the trigger.

If a police officer comes to your door to act a legal warrant to take posession of your firearms, and you resist his legal efforts with deadly violence, you will be a murderer.

Most juries will convict you of murder.

 

[TemplarKormac]

4) So when people threaten to take my firearms, I will fight to the death to preserve my right to bear arms. But hey, you can hide and cower in a corner in the waning moments of your existence if you want, when a murderer pulls the trigger.

If a police officer comes to your door to act a legal warrant to take posession of your firearms, and you resist his legal efforts with deadly violence, you will be a murderer.

Most juries will convict you of murder.

A small price to pay. Why should I obey laws that aren't firmly rooted in the Constitution? Thus by fiat that warrant would NEVER be legal. Not in a million years.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Unless you have exhausted all legal and peaceful means of resistance, resorting to deadly violence is the act of a psychopath with anger issues.

If CT gun owners resort to violence if law enforcement personnel come to their door to enforce a court ordered warrant, they will look very stupid and very insane.

If the government is coming to take your second amendment rights away forcibly then all peaceful means of resistance have failed and that's exactly why we have the second amendment in the first place. The second amendment wasn't put in there so we could willingly give our weapons to the government and grovel at their feet for some kind of favor. It was put in there to make sure people were armed and could shoot and kill any government agency coming to take that right away.

 

[Victory67]

Here's a fact: You were caught deliberating lying, by claiming that individual citizens have no authority to decide which laws are constitutional. You told that lie several times in several posts. It is your DESIRE to discourage and depress those who read your words, to make them feel powerless and insignificant against the the Raw Power of Big Government.

Goebbels would be proud of you.

You have the right to believe laws are illegal, but you don't have the unilateral authority to declare them illegal and not face penalties for such acts.

If you decide that a police officer has no right to arrest you for murder because you killed a black man and you don't consider it a crime to a kill a black man, and you therefore kill the cop trying to arrest you for killing the black man, you will go on trial for murdering the black man AND the cop.

And most juries will convict you.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What an Orwellian statement.

Yes, that it is. Armed revolution can win, but not armed resistance, not against this kind of capacity. It's not paranoia, it's realizing that shooting the local cops will not get you the government, it will get you very, very dead. And I have the history of the US to prove it.

As for you laying down, don't worry, we have that covered.

 

[KNB]

Sipsey Street Irregulars: An Open Letter to the Men and Women of the Connecticut State Police: You are NOT the enemy (UNLESS YOU CHOOSE TO BE.)

They threaten to respond with violence if State or Local Police enforce new state gun laws.

What is the right, moral, and just thing to do is State or Local Police come to your door to enforce gun laws that you consider to be illegal?

You fully & peacefully comply with all police orders, OR you engage in civil disobedience by chaining the gun to your body or chaining yourself to youe home, or just lay limp on your livingroom floor and force the cops to carry you.

And then you fight it all in court and hope that the jury agrees with you that you committed no crime or that you violated an illegal law and lets you go.

Then what's the point of owning a gun?

 

[Victory67]

If the government is coming to take your second amendment rights away forcibly then all peaceful means of resistance have failed and that's exactly why we have the second amendment in the first place. The second amendment wasn't put in there so we could willingly give our weapons to the government and grovel at their feet for some kind of favor. It was put in there to make sure people were armed and could shoot and kill any government agency coming to take that right away.

You are wrong.

If you live in CT and own an illegal firearm and a cop comes to take it way, it would be an illegal and an immoral act for you to resist this cop with deadly force.

Especially considering all the peaceful and non-violent options you have to resist this action.

Only a mental thug would act in such a way.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Unless you have exhausted all legal and peaceful means of resistance, resorting to deadly violence is the act of a psychopath with anger issues.

If CT gun owners resort to violence if law enforcement personnel come to their door to enforce a court ordered warrant, they will look very stupid and very insane.

Typical you as a liberal would sit there and try to label those of us simply wanting to protect our Constitutionally granted freedoms as "psychopaths with anger issues." There are roughly 142 million gun owners in America. I doubt any of them are what you paint them out to be.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What an Orwellian statement.

Yes, that it is. Armed revolution can win, but not armed resistance, not against this kind of capacity. It's not paranoia, it's realizing that shoot the local cops will not get you the government, it will get you very, very dead. And I have the history of the US to prove it.

As for you laying down, don't worry, we have that covered.

Then we will be martyrs to our own cause. No government can stand up to the collective will of the people. Not one. You want examples? See Ukraine and Venezuela.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

4) So when people threaten to take my firearms, I will fight to the death to preserve my right to bear arms. But hey, you can hide and cower in a corner in the waning moments of your existence if you want, when a murderer pulls the trigger.

If a police officer comes to your door to act a legal warrant to take posession of your firearms, and you resist his legal efforts with deadly violence, you will be a murderer.

Most juries will convict you of murder.

A small price to pay. Why should I obey laws that aren't firmly rooted in the Constitution? Thus by fiat that warrant would NEVER be legal. Not in a million years.

Most of the laws in the US are what's known as "extra-Constitutional". They still apply.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Yes, that it is. Armed revolution can win, but not armed resistance, not against this kind of capacity. It's not paranoia, it's realizing that shoot the local cops will not get you the government, it will get you very, very dead. And I have the history of the US to prove it.

As for you laying down, don't worry, we have that covered.

Then we will be martyrs to our own cause. No government can stand up to the collective will of the people. Not one. You want examples? See Ukraine and Venezuela.

If you can get enough people on board you can sink a cruise chip. You can't do that here, not easily nor under these conditions. It's not impossible, it just might as well be. Work they system, don't plan on fighting it with guns because their guns are bigger and deadlier.