It's for their own good

Help prevent violence using guns in America. Sign this petition to register the troublemakers!

Illegal acts by the New York State Police

New York passed the "SAFE Act" in a knee-jerk reaction to the Sandy Hook shootings. It is blatantly un-Constitutional, but when has that ever stopped a state?



The abuses will continue until someone in New York brings suit to have the law voided. Fat chance those who already have been victimized will see their property returned, or be compensated.

This is registration

Connecticut recently banned a myriad of rifles and "ammunition feeding devices". Current owners are graciously allowed to keep their property - IF they register with the state.

Well, about 10% of the gun owners targeted by this illegal act actually responded by registering.

And some of them possibly are getting their award for their stupidity:

Connecticut Tells Gun Owners, Destroy or Hand Over Rifles & Standard Capacity Magazines

Manasquan, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- Two hundred and fourteen Connecticut residents who tried to comply with the new state laws but were late sending in their state designated “Assault Weapon” and “High Capacity Magazine” registration paperwork are now or will be, getting letters from CT State Police (CSP).  If it is the one above their options will be few… they need to destroy, turn in, sell or remove their personal property from Connecticut or face the law.

Those who fail to do so could face serious criminal penalties. Once people realize they can’t keep the guns and magazines, they’re going to get rid of them, Michael P. Lawlor, the undersecretary for criminal justice policy and planning to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, says.

Image of the purported letter at the link.

This is what happens if you blithely assume that your civil servants are acting in your best interests and simply do as they tell you. You get screwed.

Kudos to the 300,000-odd Connecticut gun owners who ignored this blatant infringement.

I have to wonder about the reality of that letter they show - it would be so easy to say you "removed" the offending gun or magazine from the state.

Like many Canadian gun owners supposedly "lost" their guns out of boats...

Thoughts

Front page story in the Beloit Daily news today about a gay couple who married in Iowa hoping the Supreme Court somehow finds Constitutional reasons to force Wisconsin to recognize their union.

Now, I couldn't care less if two people - or twenty people - want to get "married". It's nobody's business but theirs, and unless there's force involved, the government should have nothing to say about the matter.

Marriage was a contract between consenting adults, perhaps with the approval of a church - up until the states started sticking their noses in. As in the case of "gun control", they could care less about marriage, and a whole lot more about licensing. From Wikipedia:

The requirement for a marriage license was used as a mechanism to prohibit whites from marrying blacks, mulattos, Japanese, Chinese, Native Americans, Mongolians, Malays or Filipinos. By the 1920s, 38 states used the mechanism.

The Constitution says nothing about marriage, as is proper and correct. Any decision the Supreme Court makes either validating or invalidating any such private contract is an overstep. They should have refused to hear the case.

It got me thinking about registration and "licenses". The Nazi government would have had a much easier time rounding up and exterminating homosexuals if "gay marriage" had been recognized in Germany in the 1920's.

I have to wonder if any modern gays agitating for state sanctioned "marriage" have considered that putting their names on a "list" might not be the smartest thing they could do...

Shotgun vs. AR15

Pay attention especially to the last five minutes.

The truth

Do what he says.

If you need more proof, here's an NIJ document from New Jersey.