The editorial Board of the Hartford Courant wants the state to enforce an unenforceable law, because it's the law, inasmuch as it is an Unconstitutional law on its face. Now they throw a temper tantrum.
Connecticut has a gun problem. More importantly, it has a legislation and law enforcement problem: Overreach.
It's estimated that perhaps scores of thousands of Connecticut residents failed to register their military-style assault weapons with state police by Dec. 31.
That's the deadline imposed by a tough bipartisan gun-safety law passed by the legislature last year in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. Oooh, BI-partisan. I guess that means when you're BI Partisan you can run over my rights without consequences. It usually means 50 Donks and one Pub...
Widespread noncompliance with this major element of a law that was seen as a speedy and hopefully
effective response by Connecticut to mass shootings such as the one at Sandy Hook creates a headache for the state. Non compliance with an unconstitutional law, a headache the state government of Connecticut has created for itself, with the Hartford Courant cheering it on. And I would change the characterization of the new law as "effective". Y'all are a little short in the "effective" department.
The dimensions of the unregistered guns problem were outlined in a Tuesday column by The Courant's Dan Haar.
Guns defined in state law as assault weapons can no longer be bought or sold in Connecticut. Such guns already held can be legally possessed if registered. But owning an unregistered assault weapon is a Class D felony. Felonies cannot go unenforced. Rifles which were last year legal are now illegal if they are not registered. The state cannot do what the federal government also can't do when it comes to basic rights. Besides, a governor's aide committed a felony that went unenforced, because he had the right credentials. To be fair, that was a New York governor's aide. A Connecticut governor's aide would never do such a thing, nope, nope...
First, however, the registration period should be reopened. It should be accompanied by a public information campaign. Unlike the first six months of near haranguing about the original registration period, this time it'll work, we swear.
Although willful noncompliance with the law is doubtless a major issue,
Doubtless, indeed...
it's possible that many gun owners are unaware of their obligation to register military-style assault weapons and would do so if given another chance. Open the registration period back up. This time say, we really mean it this time. Then they'll register those EBRs by a factor of five. We just know it.
That possibility having a probability somewhere between zero and one that doesn't stir the meter off the zero peg.
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. State officials are already doing that which is in violation of federal law, not that this federal government would enforce that law. They won't. What new law will the state pass if its citizens, en masse, invade state police buildings and destroy all those firearms records, the existence of which are illegal under federal law. What then? Another tantrum? Another unenforceable 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. A pistol permit. Not a pistol. You need one, but the other is an option.
If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences. If you pass unconstitutional law be prepared to face the consequences when you try to enforce them. Connecticut has at least 10,000 gun owners who would think nothing of meeting state sanctioned force with their own force. And remember: there are no lines; there's only the battlefield if Connecticut persists.
So, scores of thousands of scofflaws and a five year prison sentence. Speaking practically for a moment, d'you suppose the good citizens of Connecticut would vote you the funds to build and staff scores of new prisons to house them?
Too much regulation?
Gun laws that don't make sense?
Better than thou legislation?
Pick one.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
02/16/2014 5:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
military-style assault weapons
Let's start with this. First show me the milatary organizations that use, for actual combat, "assault rifles" that are NOT capable of full auto, that meet all the criteria of this "law" and I'll think about it.
#3
So, scores of thousands of scofflaws and a five year prison sentence. Speaking practically for a moment, d'you suppose the good citizens of Connecticut would vote you the funds to build and staff scores of new prisons to house them?
Far fewer editorial writers than gun holders. Cheaper to throw them in prison as advocates for unconstitutional actions violating the civil rights of its citizenry. Since they have no need for Second Amendment protections, why worry about First Amendment protections?
#4
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.
The authors appear ignorant of both State and Federal laws. Or perhaps theyre advocating expansion of Connecticuts gun registration. (I suspect both) First, there is no such thing as a Federal background check database. The NICS must destroy all the applicants identifying information by the next day. Second, there is no such thing as a Connecticut background check database period. But FFL dealers must register information of all weapons purchased and are required to hold onto these records indefinitely. Currently, authorities must prove a compelling reason to access those records. By allowing authorities to search for a particular firearm purchase, based on type, would certainly open the door for indiscriminate government access to ALL firearm purchases.
#5
Door-to door searches. Let the brave editors and "journalists" of the Hartford Courant lead the door breaching!
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/16/2014 14:44 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The reason for Sandy Hook was highly advertised "Gun Free Kill Zones". In other words, people who do such atrocities are looking for unarmed groups to shoot up.
Couple years back a guy walked into a church thinking it was an easy gun free kill zone. He got dropped real quick by a heat packing righteous dude.
[Newsmax] When Margaret Thatcher was elected England's first female prime minister in the spring of 1979, I was 12 years old and my father had been a congressman for less than four months. To me, it seemed as if it would be only a short while until my own country followed suit and elected a woman to serve as president.
Of course, in my mind, it would be a conservative woman, strong willed, committed, determined and articulate. Like Thatcher.
Thatcher served as prime minster for more than 11 years, stepping down only after a power struggle within her own Conservative Party. By then, I had just received my graduate degree, was working as a consultant, and was studying for the CFA exam, which I subsequently passed.
While I was neither a citizen nor a resident of Britain, Thatcher was ever dominant and prominent in my formative years. Along with President Ronald Reagan, she stood against the Soviet Union and shook the very foundation of communism, which resulted in the final collapse of the symbol of a divided world, the Berlin Wall.
This was a time where unlike today, arguments were clear, alternatives were known and faith in people rather than faith in governments or institutions won out.
While Reagan was known for his quick wit and self-depreciating humor, Thatcher was known for being strong-willed and determined. She reminded me of my mother: determined and results-oriented.
Thatcher was serious, her convictions were solid, and she had a clear moral compass but was still able to connect with everyday people. She was clear about her purpose: to save Britain from moral corruption and thereby change the course of history.
Change history she did indeed.
The least of her accomplishments was, perhaps, becoming the first woman to serve as prime minister. She went on to become much more -- she was the Iron Lady. Many of her beliefs ran counter to what is accepted as standard today.
"I came to office with one deliberate intent," she said in a speech in 1984, "to change Britain from a dependent to a self-reliant society -- from a give-it-to-me to a do-it-yourself nation. A get-up-and-go, instead of a sit-back-and-wait-for-it Britain."
She understood and labeled the enemy of her nation, "socialism itself -- in all its incarnations, wherever and however it was applied -- was morally corrupting." It was corrupting because of what it did to people, she said. "Socialism turned good citizens into bad ones; it turned strong nations into weak ones; it promoted vice and discouraged virtue . . . transformed formerly hard-working and self-reliant men and women into whining, weak, and flabby loafers."
She was not concerned about making friends or handing out olive branches. Instead, she was focused on what she believed was best for Britain.
Her theory on where money comes from was practical rather than theoretical. "Pennies don't fall from heaven; they have to be earned here on earth," she said.
In the end, Thatcher was elected because she spoke the language of everyday people. "My policies," she said, "are based not on some economics theory, but on things I and millions like me were brought up with: an honest day's work for an honest day's pay; live within your means; put by a nest egg for a rainy day; pay your bills on time; support the police."
Thirty-four years after Britain elected Thatcher, her core arguments are at odds with how we operate. We argue not for self-reliance, but how much government should help. Redistribution, once the code word for socialism, is now condoned under the guise of social programs. The process of politics is watched on a daily basis, and the means are more important than the goal -- which often is never met.
Instead of worrying about earning pennies, we simply print more money in an attempt to stimulate the economy. Instead of fiscal restraint, we delude ourselves into thinking that declines in growth rates of expenses are cuts in fiscal policy.
It's as if we live in a totally different time, where instead of faith in our people, their drive and their self-determination, our faith is in government.
Possibly we are at the end of an era where the values were clearer, the arguments more forceful, and faith in people won out over faith in government and institutions.
#5
"Possibly we are at the end of an era where the values were clearer, the arguments more forceful, and faith in people won out over faith in government and institutions."
"Possibly"? Gee, ya think????
Not only were the American people stupid and gullible enough to elect a blatant Commie to the White House in 2008, along with sending a gaggle of Donk parasite pimps to Congress, they RE-elected the lying sonofabitch in 2012.
"It's as if we live in a totally different time, where instead of faith in our people, their drive and their self-determination, our faith is in government."
No shit, Sherlock.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/16/2014 10:19 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Along with President Ronald Reagan, she stood against the Soviet Union and shook the very foundation of communism, which resulted in the final collapse of the symbol of a divided world, the Berlin Wall.
The Unforgivable Sin.
Posted by: Matt ||
02/16/2014 10:58 Comments ||
Top||
#8
THanks to OWG Globalism + 1990's Clintonian Unitarianist "Fascism-for-Communism" + related the Reagan-Bush-era "Vanishing Liberal" is now the "Vanishing Conservative" along wid "Vanishing JudeoChristian", "Vanishing Free Market Capitalism, etc.
History says the Commies-Socialists will use of these Alternatist agendas + sub-cultural, political issues to get into power - once entrenched in all-but-absolute power, they will remove same in the name of simple Socialist = Capitalist costs economies [Debt, Deficit leveraging]. Hitler may get the high-profile, singular media blame, but the truth is Stalin + Mao were much harder + bloodier on the Alternatists + Sub-Cultures, etal. than the Nazis or Fascists ever were.
[DAWN] FOR the foreseeable future, the curtains have come down on Beautiful Downtown Peshawar ...capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (formerly known as the North-West Frontier Province), administrative and economic hub for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. Peshawar is situated near the eastern end of the Khyber Pass, convenient to the Pak-Afghan border. Peshawar has evolved into one of Pakistan's most ethnically and linguistically diverse cities, which means lots of gunfire. 's cinemas in the wake of two deadly attacks targeting movie theatres in the KP capital. While the banned TTP may have officially denied involvement in the attacks, it is highly likely individuals influenced by the bully boys' ideology were involved in the incidents, zeroing in on 'immoral' targets. Cinema owners say they'll keep the movie houses closed as police are unable to provide adequate security. The KP police authorities, on their part, say they have their hands full tackling militancy and don't have men to spare to guard cinemas. While fear of bully boy attacks had already reduced the number of cinemagoers, the indefinite closure of movie houses could spell the end of cinema business in Peshawar. This would be a resounding victory for the forces of Evil and their war on culture -- all sorts of entertainment businesses, including CD shops and music stores, are under threat. If the cinema industry were to permanently pack up, it would embolden the bully boyz to take their crusade one step forward and clamp down on all entertainment activities.
The state's response has been minimal in reassuring the cinema owners that their establishments will be protected. This needs to change, for while the law enforcers in KP are indeed on the front line, efforts need to be made to protect vulnerable targets that are particularly in the terrorists' crosshairs. Having said that, cinema owners must also chalk out plans to improve security at their establishments and plug the loopholes. It is clear that if Peshawar's movie theatres don't reopen soon, it will send the message that a few grenades can shut down the entire cinema industry. Today it is cinemas; tomorrow it can be shopping centres, restaurants or other public places the bully boyz assume are dens of 'immorality'. And there is no guarantee the myrmidons' campaign will remain limited to a specific geographical area. Caving in would be a complete admission of defeat on the cultural front.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/16/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
[DAWN] PAKISTAN is facing an existential threat and our confused leaders seem to have lost their ability to understand and process the information being given to them by national security institutions. Or so it seems at least.
PTI leader Naeemul Haq's tweet immediately after the all-party conference, which was briefed by the army chief then and the ISI chief last year, that his party had been told there was only a 40pc chance of success of any military operation in North Wazoo, didn't trigger much controversy at the time.
But when the same statement was repeated by PTI chief Imran Khan
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
02/16/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[DAWN] PAKISTAN is facing an existential threat and our confused leaders seem to have lost their ability to understand and process the information being given to them by national security institutions. Or so it seems at least.
