Civil disobedience

Connecticut gun owners refuse to register their “assault” rifles and ammunition magazines. Considering that the first thing New York did after forcing registration was to move to confiscate them, gun owners in the Nutmeg State seem to have learned from their neighbors’ experience.

StupidApproximately 50,000 “assault weapons” were registered and about 40,000 residents declared their large capacity magazine clips by the Dec. 31 deadline, in accordance with the law that Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed in May of last year. Those numbers are far lower than estimates the state received in a 2011 report from the Office of Legislative Research.

“Based on Connecticut’s percentage of National Instant Criminal Background Check System checks in the Unites States, NSSF estimated that the number of firearms owned by Connecticut residents is about three million. About one million of these firearms are handguns, of which 21%, or 231,000 use large capacity magazines. About 1.2 million are rifles, of which 30%, or 372,000 use large capacity magazines. Assuming four magazines owned for every firearm (assuming every firearm comes standard with at least two magazines), NSSF asserts there are over 2.4 million large capacity magazines in Connecticut that originated at the retail level. The NSSF final figure is larger than this because it counts firearms already in the state and those not purchased at the retail level.”


Filed under Uncategorized

8 responses to “Civil disobedience

  1. Cos Cobber

    Malloy will have to build a lot of jails. Of course, jails are ‘stimulus,’ right?

    Btw – Malloy and CO must really be wondering what’s up with the lousy job creation figures.

  2. Anonymous

    Irish Democracy.

    What will Malloy, Fudrucker and the rest of the Hartford National Socialists do?

  3. weakleyhollow

    Good for y’all. What’s a lefty governor to do?

  4. Gnawbone

    Yu think? This makes me smile.

  5. Riversider

    I got a call from the DESPP about my rifle certs (have to admit I was pretty nervous about what they wanted before I talked to them – wondered if they were going to nitpick something as an excuse to try to make my life difficult – but was just an honest clerical issue they were very nice about / cleared up on the phone) – but according to the person I spoke with as of last week they had only processed applications reveived through November… hadn’t even started December yet… so not where those nums came from but seems like we won’t really know what happened in terms of registration for a while as the State sorts through the mountains of paperwork they have to process.

  6. Mark B.

    Chris – I’m the token New Yorker, here, I guess – what confiscation in particular are you referring to? The thing in NYC with the shotguns is the only case of it I know of (and we upstaters don’t consider NYC as part of NYS anyhooo…)

    • I posted on it a while ago but after the passage of the state law, NYC immediately used it to contact registered gun owners and demanded they surrender already-registered weapons that were now illegal. My point is, they knew exactly where to go to get them because of that earlier registration. Of course, he criminals hadn’t registered anything, so they remained untouched. When CT takes the next step and moves to confiscate “assault” rifles and high capacity mags rather than just register their owners, they’ll now know where to start.

      • Mark B.

        Roger. So far NYS seems to be meeting us Evil Black Rifle owners halfway (which is foreboding in itself, I suppose) – we have determined that if we disable the rifle’s ability to eject the mag, meaning it no longer fits the AW criteria, we do not need to register. It will at least buy us some time, and no modification is ever “permanent”.