Connecticut democrats (with a small d”, not the Hartford Muggers) might wonder about this

Today our legislators will impose draconian restrictions on a civil liberty protected under both the federal and state constitutions and will do so by enacting a law whose text has never been revealed to the public. Our local Republican representatives have voiced no complaint about this secrecy, proving, if proof were needed, that they serve no purpose other than window dressing. Toss them out.

UPDATE: (9:45) Two hours before its passage, the bill has been released to the public. 92 sections long, it’s the Evelyn Woods school of democracy.

UPDATE II: Yes, they really are attempting to curtail interstate sale of ammunition by requiring an “ammunition certificate” to purchase or possess it; it will require the same background check currently required for pistol and now, rifles. I suspect that ammunition suppliers will do to us what they’ve already done to California residents in response to that state’s stringent gun laws (which have proved so effective in turning gang bangers with illegal guns into law abiding, non-violent, registered gun owners): they just won’t ship it. Which of course is exactly what the gun confiscators and our Greenwich Republican representatives want.

Here’s another fun item in the bill: an anorexic or anyone else suffering from mental difficulties who voluntarily checks into a mental hospital for treatment will be barred from owning a gun. It is a little known fact that anorexics have been responsible for 87.9 % of all mass shootings in this country, so this is a loophole that, now closed, can assure all of us that our children are safe.

By the way, the remaining 12.1% of such massacres have been committed by shooters wielding grenade launchers and bayonets, so you’ll be relieved that our legislators have responded to Sandy Hook by banning those too.

Nothing – nothing in this secret bill will accomplish anything to prevent another Sandy Hook, as anyone with common sense must acknowledge. Start with the idea that there is already a law against homicide on the books, and puzzle it out: if someone is willing to break that basic law, will he really shrink from committing murder using ammunition he is prohibited from possessing? By violating a gun-free zone at a supermarket? By denying him a bayonet? This is all politics all the time, and our politicians, at least, know that.

27 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

27 responses to “Connecticut democrats (with a small d”, not the Hartford Muggers) might wonder about this

  1. Al Dente

    Maybe they outlawed blogs. Don’t answer the door.

  2. Atticus

    Maybe the GOP is letting them have their way with the idea that they can’t stop the unthinking hysterics anyway so let the courts deal with it. If reason prevailed the restrictions would likely prove immune to challenge. The worse the bill the more likely the fail.

  3. It’s not just Connecticut where the GOP has gone deaf mute. Look at Colorado. And New York. I can’t think fast enough on my feet this morning, but there must be a new acronym for GOP – Goofy Old Poops comes to mind but I am sure there are better ones. I agree. Toss them all out.

  4. What is it written in ?
    German ?
    Russian ?
    Chinese ?
    Hollyrude ?

  5. Cobra

    A few days after I emailed our Representative Livvy Floren, respectfully urging her to protect our Second Amendment rights, I received this lame response:
    “After listening closely to both sides of the issue and analyzing the available data, I have reached what I consider to be a common sense conclusion and will vote yes on the bipartisan legislation. While I know that this is not the answer you were seeking, please know I truly respect and understand your position and appreciate your input. — Livvy”

    My “common sense conclusion” is to never vote for her in future elections, but rather to actively support any candidate who is a patriot, not a RINO.

    • Good for you to write to your representative. I hope you wrote her back to say exactly what you said here. I would, for sure. Not that it makes any difference and you’ll get another yada-yada response, but these RINO pols should get a taste of how unhappy some of us are.

    • FlyAngler

      Cobra – Livvy, Scott and the rest have to know that this will hurt no matter how they vote. As they are all saying, no one is going to like this no matter their views.

      What they are doing is a bit of political calculus and concluding that the electoral impact of a Yes vote vis-a-vis gun owners is less than the impact of a No vote vis-a-vis everyone else.

      Some have rationalized it even further that the bird and clays shooters (no evil black rifles or double stack pistols) are sympathetic to this “common sense” bill and will be on their side come the next election.

      So in a blue-purple state where gun ownership is at best 20%, should we be shocked that political expediency trumps principle? But that even assumes that in their heart-of-hearts some of these folks are actually even sypathetic to gun-rights in the first place. Among the Greenwich/Stamford representation, Frantz is the only one I can think of who has acknowledged owning any firearm.

      But it gets worse. Many of us have heard that talks broke down about 12 days ago as the Dems were demanding virtual confiscation with a no-grandfathering demand for rifles and mags. Supposedly, McKinney dug in his heels and said “no way”. That left the Dems with the choice of a more-or-less party-line vote on draconian a “sale, surrender, destruction” no-grandfathering bill which they likely deemed as doable but not palatable. If they went that route, the Dems and Malloy would own a bill that was chock full of potential challenges against both the State constitution’s right to bear arms for self-defense as well as the 2nd Amendment. Did they want to own that lock, stock and barrel? Plus, should Connecticut be visited with another rampage killer event, the Dems would be subject to all the blowback from their confiscatory law being impotent.

      So if I were a calculating Dem leader/strategist, I would “give up” the no-grandfathering demand and get some concessions out of the GOP leaders. Cafero, not a nominally gun-friendly guy and wanting to run for governor sometime soon, likely jumped at the opportunity to appear reasonable and bipartisan, especially since ~80% of the electorate are not gun folks. So he and/or McKinney give up what stuff like rifle permits, ammo purchase permits, severe LCM travel restrictions – I don’t know but I am sure the Dems “got something” for relenting. Then Cafero goes back to his caucuses and tells them they will vote as he wishes, since it “could be much worse”.

      But what have the GOP actually given us? IMLTHO, a crap show since the removal of draconian no-grandfathering and virtual forced surrender/confiscation, they removed the strongest “bear arms” challenges as well as a potential “takings” challenge under the 5A.

      A crap sandwich and no amount of Grey Poupon can mask the flavor of this….

      • Anonymous

        So the tyrants arm-twisted a coalition of traitors and eunuchs.

        • FlyAngler

          Comment from a Patch blog out there:

          “This is what happens when the uninformed electorate hires otherwise unemployable buffoons to run the daily affairs of the state. These are insurance salesmen, real estate agents and bureaucratic administrators who are now ‘experts’ because they garnered more votes than the other insurance salesmen, real estate agents and bureaucratic administrators.

          Democracy is doomed to fail shortly after the first of the elected takes office….and we get to see it up close. Pathetic.”

          Yup, about right.

  6. Anonymous

    Just another reason to mistrust and disrespect a government run by tyrants, National Socialists, and delusional fools.

  7. Chief Scrotum

    Still don’t understand why you folks don’t get together five to ten similar minded pals and each kick in , say $5Gs to $10Gs and then write a letter saying you’re forming a PAC to oppose the pols you don’t like. Somehow I think you’d get more than a polite letter, and maybe they’d listen.

    But for now, no cash = no seat at the table.

    • FlyAngler

      That is coming CS. And it will be state-wide, not just in our local area. But again, they are doing calculus and think 80% in agreement with a Yes vote trumps $50,000 in any action by “the gun nuts”.

      • Chief Scrotum

        I bet you could hire a senator’s (and I mean DC not local) wife, mistress or child for 50Gs to lobby at home.

        And who even makes 10 round magazines? Glocks ship with 15 round magazines, at least in 9mm. And where do you get wholesale ammo? Bulkammo.com?

  8. FlyAngler

    Yes, the dreaded drive-by bayonettings will stop now, for sure.

    As will those grenade attacks on the gatherings of Democrats state-wide.

    There is a way around their pistol-grip language but I will not discuss it here.

    • AJ

      Going into the pistol grip business? I would recommend an extra long one for a “superior stability two-handed grip” . No fuss, no muss, makes having that gun fly out of your hand a thing of the past. All the ladies will love it, and want to be your friend.

    • stedenko

      Is the stock Ruger mini-14 on the list?

  9. AJ

    My 2016 prediction: Hillary vs Christy. Why would any one endorse this sham by voting for either party. I recommend that everyone stay home so that which ever side of the globalist coin wins, they have a mandate of zero.
    But if voting is like smoking for you, and you just can’t resist the urge to do it, then vote third party or do a write-in.

  10. FlyAngler

    As Moe Lane and James Taranto points out, the BGC system is ripe for abuse if just about anyone can request a BGC:

    http://moelane.com/2013/03/25/background-checks-firearms/

    What happens when wiseguys start asking for BGCs on local politicians? Posting a NO answer could make life uncomfortable for such a person.

    Just saying…..

  11. Atticus

    How about background checks on voters?

  12. FlyAngler

    Three cheers for N Carolina, BGC for food stamp and welfare recipients:

    http://www.journalnow.com/news/state_region/article_d07fa36c-9c06-11e2-bce2-001a4bcf6878.html

  13. FlyAngler

    CF – If anyone wants it, here is the “plain English” review of the bill.

    http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/BA/2013SB-01160-R00-BA.htm

    It is still 50 pages long but not in legislative-ese.

  14. weakleyhollow

    “We have to pass the bill so we can find out what’s in it.”