This is B.S.

[Miles42]

So there is a real nut case heading the State Police in CT?

 

[squirrelhntr]

If you lose either way, you might as well fight and make the victory as costly as possible for the other side.

I could never obey such an asinine order.....I wouldn't care where it came from. I am ultimately responsible for my actions not some lunatic politician. definitely think of another way to" skin" the taxpayer. collect his garbage instead of his arms. simple

 

[IrishSon of Liberty]

Connecticut residents need to follow the lead of Colorado and immediately start the process of recalling any/every politician who was involved with passing this ridiculous law. Likewise, the governor should be petitioned and issued a Writ of Grievance to replace Col. Stebbins & Lt. Vance of the Connecticut State Police. All legal recourse must be exhausted expeditiously.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You'd still need a warrant. I suppose you could go door to door asking consent, but that seems like a huge waste of time and unlikely.

There's always options for the CT officers. "Hi, I'm here to ask you for your consent to search for guns, and if I find any your a felon. My boots are also really muddy and I have terrible gas from Taco Tuesday, like paint peeling gas. I may have leprosy. You really don't want to let me come in do you? No? K, thx, bye." If you are dumb enough to not take the hint, I don't see colors real well. I'd probably miss a lot of guns. My memory's not the greatest either. Did we already search the basement? We did, right? I'm pretty trusting. That's an airsoft gun, right? I thought so.

Intentional incompetence is pretty tough to prove. Those of you who whine about civil service protection will do well to remember that, as without it cogs that don't fit the machine are very easily gotten rid of. Merit protection isn't to keep bad cops, its to keep cops that wrote the Sheriff's family member a ticket and was targeted for retribution or the like.

 

[Mark 1911]

You'd still need a warrant. I suppose you could go door to door asking consent, but that seems like a huge waste of time and unlikely.

There's always options for the CT officers. "Hi, I'm here to ask you for your consent to search for guns, and if I find any your a felon. My boots are also really muddy and I have terrible gas from Taco Tuesday, like paint peeling gas. I may have leprosy. You really don't want to let me come in do you? No? K, thx, bye." If you are dumb enough to not take the hint, I don't see colors real well. I'd probably miss a lot of guns. My memory's not the greatest either. Did we already search the basement? We did, right? I'm pretty trusting. That's an airsoft gun, right? I thought so.

Intentional incompetence is pretty tough to prove. Those of you who whine about civil service protection will do well to remember that, as without it cogs that don't fit the machine are very easily gotten rid of. Merit protection isn't to keep bad cops, its to keep cops that wrote the Sheriff's family member a ticket and was targeted for retribution or the like.

BBB, I believe you're a good man. But why didn't it go down like this in Boston when an army of police searching for Tsarnaev barged into so many people's homes as if there were no such thing as a constitution. People forced out of their own homes by armed men following orders. We all watched. That was not a good precedent. So what now? Hope that state police in CT are like you? Sit and hope?

 

[danielson]

Cant remember for sure, but I feel like those people were willing to let police in to search for him.

 

[Mark 1911]

Cant remember for sure, but I feel like those people were willing to let police in to search for him.

For the most part. But for those who were not, there were those who were forced out of their own homes with no choice to say no. I will see if I can find them.

 

[Ryninger]

What is also of concern is that if cops were to retire on the grounds of refusing to partake in the confiscation, how drastically the hiring process could change to favor those that would be "yes men." Willing to blindly following orderings with no regard.

 

[Trooper]

Official CT State Police spokesman says that state police would participate in door to door gun confiscations | Breaking Deception

So are they going to violate the civil rights of democrat voters, especially minorities? When they drag blacks out of their homes, force them to lie face down then trash the house, I will believe that they are serious about gun control. Otherwise it is just more political soap opera.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So are they going to violate the civil rights of democrat voters, especially minorities? When they drag blacks out of their homes, force them to lie face down then trash the house, I will believe that they are serious about gun control. Otherwise it is just more political soap opera.

Sainte? Someone check that IP address.
I'm assuming you'd be ok with the above?

 

[Trooper]

Has no one in this state sued over this law? It is clearly a nonlegal law. It steps all over the second amendment. I can't see how the supreme court could let this stand if it was brought before them. This could get really bad.

Federal Court Says Connecticut's Aggressive Assault Weapon Ban Is Constitutional - Hartford Courant

It has made it to federal district court.

 

[6mm Shoot]

That is not the Supreme Court. That is just a federal Judge and he isn't the last word. The Supreme Court is the one that decides what is and isn't in violation of the Constitution. The federal Judge and state Judges can be over ruled by the Supreme Court and have been many times. It just takes a lot of time and money to get a case heard buy them. It could take up to five years or better and it will be law till they hear it in less they suspend it till they hear it. They can do what ever they want, they are the Supreme Court.

 

[Trooper]

That is not the Supreme Court. That is just a federal Judge and he isn't the last word. The Supreme Court is the one that decides what is and isn't in violation of the Constitution. The federal Judge and state Judges can be over ruled by the Supreme Court and have been many times. It just takes a lot of time and money to get a case heard buy them. It could take up to five years or better and it will be law till they hear it in less they suspend it till they hear it. They can do what ever they want, they are the Supreme Court.

No one is in disagreement. This is just the current status. A federal district judge has ruled. The media is making it look like that is the end of it. We know better.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

BBB, I believe you're a good man. But why didn't it go down like this in Boston when an army of police searching for Tsarnaev barged into so many people's homes as if there were no such thing as a constitution. People forced out of their own homes by armed men following orders. We all watched. That was not a good precedent. So what now? Hope that state police in CT are like you? Sit and hope?

I think there was a lot of hype stirred up about Boston. There's a contingent that makes their money and takes moral authority from that sort of thing. If those people were herded out against their will and without exigent circumstances, sue, profit. We just saw where a guy got $200k for having his camera taken from him, so where are the lawsuits in Boston? I know the 'police state' narrative is compelling for many here, but do police states pay out $200k for lawsuits? Same people who made hay because some of the police were in BDUs, and thus "militarized". Of course that ignores the fact that police uniforms have been modeled after military uniforms from the beginning of professional police organizations, but again that sort of historical perspective doesn't fit with what they are trying to insinuate.

So, what do you do? If this happened today in Indiana I'd move my now illegal items out of the state and would then work my butt off to get the politicians who voted it in turned out on the street, more friendly people elected, and get the law overturned. We're winning in the courts, we're winning in more and more state legislatures. Just because it was banned today doesn't mean its banned forever, we're still a nation of laws. Who would have thought Chicago would have to allow handguns? That DC's ban would be overturned? None of us sitting around in the Era of Clinton would have believed it had time travelers informed us of this future. Was that done by violence? No, quite the opposite, it was done through the courts and through political action. THAT is the true glory of America, we don't have to use violence for 'regime change'. How many countries can claim such an unbroken chain of peaceful transfers of power? Why? Because the system had its flaws, but as a whole it has worked for us.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What is also of concern is that if cops were to retire on the grounds of refusing to partake in the confiscation, how drastically the hiring process could change to favor those that would be "yes men." Willing to blindly following orderings with no regard.

That's another area your civil service protection/merit board comes in handy. If you try to implement a political test for employment, that won't fly.

 

[birdhunter55]

Is it beginning?

When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state".
Love your country, but never trust its government.
-- Robert A. Heinlein

Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws."

-- Edward Abbey, "Abbey's Road", 1979​

That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms...

-- Samuel Adams, in "Phila. Independent Gazetteer", August 20, 1789​

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."

-- Abraham Lincoln, 4 April 1861​

"To disarm the people... was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

-- George Mason, speech of June 14, 1788​

 

[Trooper]

That's another area your civil service protection/merit board comes in handy. If you try to implement a political test for employment, that won't fly.

You mean that the police do not have to swear loyalty to the democrat party? And to enforce the will of the party?

 

[Bunnykid68]

I think there was a lot of hype stirred up about Boston. There's a contingent that makes their money and takes moral authority from that sort of thing. If those people were herded out against their will and without exigent circumstances, sue, profit. We just saw where a guy got $200k for having his camera taken from him, so where are the lawsuits in Boston? I know the 'police state' narrative is compelling for many here, but do police states pay out $200k for lawsuits? Same people who made hay because some of the police were in BDUs, and thus "militarized". Of course that ignores the fact that police uniforms have been modeled after military uniforms from the beginning of professional police organizations, but again that sort of historical perspective doesn't fit with what they are trying to insinuate.

So, what do you do? If this happened today in Indiana I'd move my now illegal items out of the state and would then work my butt off to get the politicians who voted it in turned out on the street, more friendly people elected, and get the law overturned. We're winning in the courts, we're winning in more and more state legislatures. Just because it was banned today doesn't mean its banned forever, we're still a nation of laws. Who would have thought Chicago would have to allow handguns? That DC's ban would be overturned? None of us sitting around in the Era of Clinton would have believed it had time travelers informed us of this future. Was that done by violence? No, quite the opposite, it was done through the courts and through political action. THAT is the true glory of America, we don't have to use violence for 'regime change'. How many countries can claim such an unbroken chain of peaceful transfers of power? Why? Because the system had its flaws, but as a whole it has worked for us.

I would expect every officer in this state to refuse to enforce such laws. I would do like some of Connecticuts citizens are doing and flat out refuse and do it vocally.

 

[Trooper]

I would expect every officer in this state to refuse to enforce such laws. I would do like some of Connecticuts citizens are doing and flat out refuse and do it vocally.

My cop friends in Chicago joke that they are the enforcement wing of the democrat party. You do not get on the department without being backed by the party.

 

[Bunnykid68]

My cop friends in Chicago joke that they are the enforcement wing of the democrat party. You do not get on the department without being backed by the party.

Sounds like they are probably some of the worst cops out there then