• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53:127]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Crimefree

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
2,623
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
[h=1]Officials in Connecticut Stunned by What Could Be a Massive, State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[/h]
On Jan. 1, 2014, tens of thousands of defiant gun owners seemingly made the choice not to register their semi-automatic rifles with the state of Connecticut as required by a hastily-passed gun control law. By possessing unregistered so-called “assault rifles,” they all technically became guilty of committing Class D felonies overnight.
Police had received 47,916 applications for “assault weapons certificates” and 21,000 incomplete applications as of Dec. 31, Lt. Paul Vance told The Courant.
At roughly 50,000 applications, officials estimate that as little as 15 percent of the covered semi-automatic rifles have actually been registered with the state.

Officials in Connecticut Stunned by What Could Be a Massive, State-Wide Act of

I love people with balls and the willingness to tell government hands off our rights.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

I love people with balls and the willingness to tell government hands off our rights.

And I predict, the state will prosecute those people, plead them down to lesser offenses, and then stick them with hefty court costs and fines. The state still wins. Don't like a law, change it.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

And I predict, the state will prosecute those people, plead them down to lesser offenses, and then stick them with hefty court costs and fines. The state still wins. Don't like a law, change it.

No one asked them to pass the law in the first place. What makes you think they can change it?
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

No one asked them to pass the law in the first place. What makes you think they can change it?

By getting other people in there to change it. Duh.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

That doesn't seem to be working these days.

It works as well as it always did what we have today is more apathetic people who don't care about their rights and are willing to give them away.

Where are the people with BALLS and some common sense?
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

No one asked them to pass the law in the first place. What makes you think they can change it?

Not a single person supported the law? I find that hard to believe.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

It works as well as it always did what we have today is more apathetic people who don't care about their rights and are willing to give them away.

Where are the people with BALLS and some common sense?
And a FedGov that is more than willing to push the agenda or make laws against the wishes of the individual states.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

Not a single person supported the law? I find that hard to believe.
There wasn't a vote by the public so who knows how many actually support it.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

And I predict, the state will prosecute those people, plead them down to lesser offenses, and then stick them with hefty court costs and fines. The state still wins. Don't like a law, change it.

That's what they should have done, had they any decent leaders to organise opposition to the law. They don't have a single leader in the country with enough smarts to do that. These organisations just abandon members to the wolves and tell everybody to comply you can still own a gun.... Useless gun control helpers the lot of them. What about OUR RIGHTS?
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

There wasn't a vote by the public so who knows how many actually support it.

I didn't ask for an exact number. You made the claim that no one did. Do you think that's accurate or were you just being emotional and said something that's not true?
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

That doesn't seem to be working these days.

That's the fault of the people then, blame them.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

What about OUR RIGHTS?

That's the responsibility of you and others like you to elect people to represent you. If you cannot get enough of you together to do so, I would suggest that state is no longer to your liking then and you should either move or realize that is what you have and to either deal with it or keep working to change it LEGALLY.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

That's the responsibility of you and others like you to elect people to represent you. If you cannot get enough of you together to do so, I would suggest that state is no longer to your liking then and you should either move or realize that is what you have and to either deal with it or keep working to change it LEGALLY.

the genius of the incremental malignant gun ban scheme is to slowly and gradually strip away the right and its hard to get sheeple to support active or even passive resistance to the creeping form of confiscation. What the scumbags who support gun bans worry about is something that would cause massive noncompliance, a crack down and then resistance that turns the public against the gun banners.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

That's the fault of the people then, blame them.

If this law was put to a vote by the people I might agree with you. It wasn't.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

If this law was put to a vote by the people I might agree with you. It wasn't.

Elections have consequences. Most laws are not popular referendums.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

If this law was put to a vote by the people I might agree with you. It wasn't.

It was put to vote by those people THEY ELECTED. So come next term, if those people are in the office still, it's the fault of the people. The officials acted, now it's time for the people to act. If they choose not to, it's on them.

I agree the BLAME for the law is on the officials (I see your point on that), however, if those same officials stay elected that is the fault of the people then.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

I didn't ask for an exact number. You made the claim that no one did. Do you think that's accurate or were you just being emotional and said something that's not true?

I skipped the minutia and got to the guts of the argument. You are the one who's being picky.

Fact is the nanny state struck again and now they are 'STUNNED' that few are complying.
 
Last edited:
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

It was put to vote by those people THEY ELECTED. So come next term, if those people are in the office still, it's the fault of the people. The officials acted, now it's time for the people to act. If they choose not to, it's on them.

I agree the BLAME for the law is on the officials (I see your point on that), however, if those same officials stay elected that is the fault of the people then.

My point is our 'system' is no longer working. There are massive changes that need to be made.

Direct voting on issues this important would be a start.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

the genius of the incremental malignant gun ban scheme is to slowly and gradually strip away the right and its hard to get sheeple to support active or even passive resistance to the creeping form of confiscation. What the scumbags who support gun bans worry about is something that would cause massive noncompliance, a crack down and then resistance that turns the public against the gun banners.

I agree which is why I blame the people that keep electing those officials.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

I agree which is why I blame the people that keep electing those officials.
Can you blame the 85 percent [of weapons owners] who are ignoring this BS?
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

My point is our 'system' is no longer working. There are massive changes that need to be made.

Direct voting on issues this important would be a start.

I agree, but the system is only "not working" because of the people. If the people that keep electing these individuals outnumber the people that don't want them in. You can either move to another state or deal with it then while still working.

It is STILL ON the people to make the system work and it is the people that ALLOW the system to not work.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

Can you blame the 85 percent [of weapons owners] who are ignoring this BS?

Yes, I can. If 85% of the people pissed off can't get someone elected they need to leave the state then if they don't like it. That's how the system works. I don't like what Kansas does so I don't live there. There will ALWAYS be unpopular laws, it's up to the people.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

[h=1]Officials in Connecticut Stunned by What Could Be a Massive, State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[/h]
On Jan. 1, 2014, tens of thousands of defiant gun owners seemingly made the choice not to register their semi-automatic rifles with the state of Connecticut as required by a hastily-passed gun control law. By possessing unregistered so-called “assault rifles,” they all technically became guilty of committing Class D felonies overnight.
Police had received 47,916 applications for “assault weapons certificates” and 21,000 incomplete applications as of Dec. 31, Lt. Paul Vance told The Courant.
At roughly 50,000 applications, officials estimate that as little as 15 percent of the covered semi-automatic rifles have actually been registered with the state.

Officials in Connecticut Stunned by What Could Be a Massive, State-Wide Act of

I love people with balls and the willingness to tell government hands off our rights.

The government has no business knowing where the gun owners are. That would be partially counter productive to owning the gun.
 
re: State-Wide Act of ‘Civil Disobedience’ by Gun Owners.[W:53]

I skipped the minutia and got to the guts of the argument.
Getting things wrong isn't skipping minutia.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom