The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 19, 2013, 02:49 PM   #1
adamc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: Stalingrad Connecticut
Posts: 216
Want something that will make you "Fill your shorts" ? Read our Connecticut Senate

Guns & Ammo magazine posted Connecticut at #45 for bad gun states

our CT leadership wants us to be BEHIND District of Columbia

Want something that will make you "Fill your shorts" ? Read our Connecticut Senate bill SB1076
registering of all guns, permits for rifles for $$$, renewal fees, mandatory safety classes for long gun permits, finger printing at time of sale AND pick up
Assault weapon expanded definitions, mandatory jail sentences for infractions.
all this for on the floor now SCARY

Here in Connecticut, 2A is soon to be extinct please read this scary document it is UNBELIEVABLE !!!!! please read the bill at the link

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/S/201...076-R00-SB.htm

I have been frequently contacting our 'leadership' and they have already done the 'deal'
on the local news about the protests, there was an (obvious) anti-child holding a sign
"NRA KILLS"


I wish I were in a position to move to one of the "GOOD" states

Connecticut was the cradle of the US gun industry ,

now it will be just a pine box :-(
__________________
**** NRA Life Member *****

Connecticut was the Cradle of the Gun Industry, NOW it is just a Pine Box,
Courtesy of our Governor "Chairman MAO Malloy"

Last edited by adamc; March 19, 2013 at 02:54 PM.
adamc is offline  
Old March 19, 2013, 03:26 PM   #2
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2...1256593916.txt

The above link is to a lengthy article on the (Connecticut) governor's task force report recommendations, which they just released. It reads like a gun grabber's wet dream. Connecticut seems to be heading in the opposite direction of most of the country (although in lock step with its neighbors, New York and Massachusetts).

These people don't even comprehend how the legal structure works in the U.S. The Supreme Court already ruled in Heller that requiring guns to be locked in the home is unconstitutional. So? ... They want to require that all guns be locked up in the home.

It's beginning to appear that New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts need to separate from the United States of America and form their own little banana republic.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 19, 2013, 04:50 PM   #3
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,479
I've seen some people posit that HOW its required to be locked up cold make a difference in their interpretation. For example, if you're not actively toting it around.. or if you can have one out, and the rest must be locked up etc. Not saying it's right or wrong, just that the idea is out there.
JimDandy is offline  
Old March 19, 2013, 05:22 PM   #4
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDandy
I've seen some people posit that HOW its required to be locked up cold make a difference in their interpretation. For example, if you're not actively toting it around.. or if you can have one out, and the rest must be locked up etc. Not saying it's right or wrong, just that the idea is out there.
The Heller decision did not get into nuances of how guns must/should/might be locked up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCOTUS
3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. ... Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.

...

We must also address the District’s requirement (as applied to respondent’s handgun) that firearms in the home be rendered and kept inoperable at all times. This makes it impossible for citizens to use them for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 19, 2013, 05:30 PM   #5
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,479
Which still doesn't implicitly disallow a law requiring SOME firearms be locked up as long as SOME firearms are allowed to be accessible. In other words, if you can only carry one AR-15 around the house, they could mandate any beyond the number of non-prohibited persons in the house be locked up, etc.
JimDandy is offline  
Old March 19, 2013, 05:41 PM   #6
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
That would have to be tested in court -- and it has not been. I live alone, so your guideline would be that I can have ONE firearm that's unsecured. My preference might be to have multiple, loaded firearms rather than to have to reload in the event of a confrontation. Or I might prefer to keep a firearm in each of several rooms rather than carry a gun from room to room. That's my plan for self-defense.

If self-defense is a "core right" (which the SCOTUS has now deemed it, in both Heller and McDonald, then any law infringing on HOW an individual elects to provide for his/her self-defense in the privacy of his/her home is going to have some high hurdles to overcome.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 19, 2013, 11:06 PM   #7
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 7,717
Quote:
My preference might be to have multiple, loaded firearms rather than to have to reload in the event of a confrontation. Or I might prefer to keep a firearm in each of several rooms rather than carry a gun from room to room. That's my plan for self-defense.
Mine, too. Currently, multiple loaded handguns, a shotgun with rounds in the tube but not chambered, and an AR-15 located in close proximity to a loaded 20-round mag. As the fella' said, "If I get killed, it won't be for lack of ammo."
__________________
Jim's Rules of Carry: 1. Any gun is better than no gun. 2. A gun that is reliable is better than a gun that is not. 3. A hole in the right place is better than a hole in the wrong place. 4. A bigger hole is a better hole.
KyJim is offline  
Old March 20, 2013, 08:27 AM   #8
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,479
Quote:
That would have to be tested in court -- and it has not been.
That was the point I was making. That was not my guideline, but it was the subtle distinction I've seen in relation to the gun lock portion of the Heller ruling. And that it hasn't been tested in court. Which for now, would make it legal.
JimDandy is offline  
Old March 20, 2013, 11:46 AM   #9
Come and take it.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 999
I know they had a committee which included sandy hook parents who among other things suggested registration of ALL firearms.
Come and take it. is offline  
Old March 20, 2013, 04:42 PM   #10
Nick S.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 4, 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 138
I feel your pain. I'm from NY. Good luck.
Nick S. is offline  
Old March 20, 2013, 05:03 PM   #11
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Looks like CT is also proposing mandatory insurance if you even want to own a firearm.

Where's that :barf: icon when you really need it?
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 21, 2013, 08:28 PM   #12
Crankgrinder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 24, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 761
I was just looking this one over. One mentioned that a comitee was held (another one) which included parents of sandy hook victims. For that i am compelled to say that police, firefighters in some places, judges, lawyers among others are legally barred from being involved in certain things such as legal cases/ emergencys and such when personal involvement is evident due to the nature of emotional involvement and resulting bias. I cant say i blame these parents for their outcry, but does their emotional involvement not cloud their judgement and thus produce the obvious bias that we seem to see not to mention that which the media chooses to portray?
Crankgrinder is offline  
Old March 21, 2013, 10:20 PM   #13
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,591
Perhaps more interesting, I read today that the CT State Police have so far refused to brief the legislature or the Governor's task force on the findings of their investigation, but the head of the CT State Police attended a national conference of state police commanders and had no problem briefing them on what has been discovered.

One of the attendees spilled the beans to a reporter, who reported it -- and the CT commandant is upset because he said the attendees weren't supposed to talk about it.

Being a dedicated conspiracy theorist, I have to wonder: WHY keep it a secret from the very people who are trying to craft laws to address it?

Here's the article that got the Colonel so upset: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1291408
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 21, 2013, 11:54 PM   #14
scrubcedar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2012
Location: Southwestern Colorado
Posts: 478
Well I guess the whole "The video games made no difference" theory is out the window.
They're quite effective training simulators, aren't they.
I only had one of my kids interested in these games. I watched once, felt sick and tossed them all, told him "new rule, no games that have you shoot anything that looks like a human."
__________________
Gaily bedight, A gallant knight In sunshine and in shadow, Had journeyed long, Singing a song, In search of El Dorado
scrubcedar is offline  
Old March 23, 2013, 08:33 AM   #15
Come and take it.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 999
This needs to cause a lot of outrage by the parents of the sandy hook victims (first person shooter games).

Why doesn't it?

Because a lot of these parents either play these games or probably had their tiny tots playing them or at the least watching their older siblings or parents playing them.

They would have to actually change their lifestyle so they wouldn't be a hypocrite...... and we can't have that can we.

But yeah they do make excellent trainers so far as increasing reflexes, desensitivity, and shot placement. However no substitute for marksmanship.

The US military toyed with computer simulators before the first gulf war and we all know what happened there. So to say they don't increase your ability to kill would be a denial.

Than would come to the question of hard core action films. Once again citizens of Connecticut would have to drastically change their lifestyles to help reduce the influence of these films on their kids.
Come and take it. is offline  
Old March 26, 2013, 08:00 AM   #16
adamc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: Stalingrad Connecticut
Posts: 216
update
On Friday 22 March CT Gov Malloy
issued statements to the press that he was 'Upset' that his committee
wanted further information about the Newtown killings, and he just wants them to hurry up and make decisions..

There have been several local news stories and blogs

Shouldn't all the information be reviewed BEFORE any decisions or rulings be made ?
__________________
**** NRA Life Member *****

Connecticut was the Cradle of the Gun Industry, NOW it is just a Pine Box,
Courtesy of our Governor "Chairman MAO Malloy"
adamc is offline  
Old March 26, 2013, 11:23 AM   #17
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 1,332
scrubcedar
Quote:
I only had one of my kids interested in these games. I watched once, felt sick and tossed them all, told him "new rule, no games that have you shoot anything that looks like a human."
Bingo! Parents need to shut down the assumptions that go with this "entertainment" early and hard. Well-socialized kids are not an accident!

My 6 year old daughter knows the four rules of safe shooting and to always first unload any weapon she encounters. However, when we visit my in-laws house (serious anti-gunners), they let their kid play FPShooter games and shoot airsoft pistols at other kids. It astounds me.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old March 26, 2013, 11:47 AM   #18
adamc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: Stalingrad Connecticut
Posts: 216
Paint ball and Airsoft get my goat also...

IMO don't shoot/point anything at ANYBODY. Muzzle safety ? 1st rule ?

My son's friends all paintball & Airsoft , but their parents have fits
if I suggest the kids take a Hunting or shooting course..
all play assassins creed, etc. as you can tell I'm not much on
the violent video games.

"ANTI" hypocrisy
__________________
**** NRA Life Member *****

Connecticut was the Cradle of the Gun Industry, NOW it is just a Pine Box,
Courtesy of our Governor "Chairman MAO Malloy"
adamc is offline  
Old March 26, 2013, 12:53 PM   #19
Kimio
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2011
Location: Utah
Posts: 923
I will not argue that violent games do to some extent desnesitize children. I'm and advent fan of these games (Please don't judge), however, I was taught from an extremely young age that life is important and how to discern fantasy from reality.

Each child will handle things differently. I dare ask those of the more mature generations that grew up with old western movies and so on why it is we didn't have all the problems of mass shootings back then if violent media plays such a strong role in degrading a persons moral fiber and ability to control their actions that they would willingly and easily take someones life.

Why? I say it's because we had parents that were actually parents, there was a time in this country where people cared for each other, looked out for each other. Society has become very self centered and selfish, it's all about what "I" want.

IMO it's not that guns or video games have become more prominent in society, it's that the value of family and morality as decayed to the point that society has become deeply ill. This is a social problem that did not exist 30-40 years ago.

That's my take on it, playing video games does not make you a murderer, it does not entice me to go out and shoot someone. It still horrifies me even after over a decades worth of playing "violent" games and watching "violent" movies when something like Sandy Hook occurs, let alone when someone meets their end too soon period.

IMO blaming the media and video games is almost as bad as blaming the gun for the evils that man commits, ultimately it's the individual who decides to pick up that weapon. Children these days are left to their own devices and the TV and video games have become the new nannies of modern day families. It's no wonder that these kids grow to be messed up, especially those that are not taught how to handle stress and the problems they encounter in life responsibly.

Just my two cents (or couple dollars worth)
Kimio is offline  
Old March 26, 2013, 01:32 PM   #20
adamc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: Stalingrad Connecticut
Posts: 216
Doofus..

A Huge A+ for your Daughter :-)
__________________
**** NRA Life Member *****

Connecticut was the Cradle of the Gun Industry, NOW it is just a Pine Box,
Courtesy of our Governor "Chairman MAO Malloy"
adamc is offline  
Old March 26, 2013, 05:18 PM   #21
scrubcedar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2012
Location: Southwestern Colorado
Posts: 478
Kimeo, I don't think my kid would have turned into a school shooter.
I do think that repeatedly shooting something that looks like a human is simply not good for you.
If there is a kid with the potential they could, and obviously have in this case, use these to hone their skills increasing the body count once they act.
IMHO it would be far more effective to take away this training tool than to limit magazine size available for instance.
I'm not sure as much as I dislike these games I would be ready to do that but, if our opponents were anything but bald faced liars and hypocrites they would be all over this angle.
__________________
Gaily bedight, A gallant knight In sunshine and in shadow, Had journeyed long, Singing a song, In search of El Dorado
scrubcedar is offline  
Old March 27, 2013, 07:43 AM   #22
Kimio
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2011
Location: Utah
Posts: 923
I understand your angle Scrubcedar, I don't agree with it, but I see your point.

The way I see it, no matter how many games I played, when I actually got my hands on a real rifle, it didn't help me one bit in terms of marksmanship. It was practice and training. Sure the video games allow you to practice hand and eye coordination, but ultimately IMO it has little if any actual affects on the individuals ability to actually harm someone. The concern I see people having is the psychological desensitization of young adolescent children to young adults and how they become numb to the idea of the loss of life.

The way I see it, in the end, regardless of what kind of media that is placed before our children, if they are so disturbed and inclined to handle their problems violently (It's not always that transparent by the way) with or without the influence of video games, movies, literature violent or otherwise, that individual needs to make the concious decision to pick up that rock, bat, knife, gun etc. and actually carry out their horrific acts.

The average individual whom is raised in a stable family and is not mentally defunct does not go off the deep end. Such anger and angst is born from somewhere be it in the home or elsewhere, it is up to the parent to be their for the child and try to instill into them a sense of morals and set an example on how to handle their frustrations and problems responsibly.

Of course there are those cases where the parents did everything by the books and really did try, but each child is different and their personalities play just as big of a role. They will choose to do what they want to do regardless of what others tell them, such is the ways of free will.

There is no easy answer to this, but IMHO, blaming something like movies and video games is just a cop out to escape the responsibility for poor parenting (or not in some cases, again free will). Take responsibility, own up to your actions (or lackthereof) that's how I was raised. I just hope I can instill these beliefs into my future children someday (after I meet a woman who shares them all the same of course).
Kimio is offline  
Old March 27, 2013, 09:06 AM   #23
overhead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
If one has raised a child or is raising a child and doing such a god awful job at it that exposure to violent video games, violent movies or firearms will turn them into a mass murderer I would say the game, movies and guns should be the least of their worries.

Like many I had access to guns as long as I can remember. I also watched violent movies and played some pretty violent video games, though they did not start getting very realistic until my late teens. That did not convince me that the morals or ethics I was taught by my parents were wrong and that I should go shoot everyone the bullied me or angered me in some way.

I was hoping all of this gun control nonsense would lose some steam by now. I suppose it has in many places, but not up in the NE.
overhead is offline  
Old March 27, 2013, 10:16 AM   #24
adamc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: Stalingrad Connecticut
Posts: 216
Some good news
CT SB1078 has been temporarily shelved....there are still lots of other anti bills
in discussion.
The Gov. Malloy I'm sure will soon loose patience, (His own committee has stalled and has asked for more information.) and will institute his own agenda under the guise of emergency powers and the like.

The antis here are still in full swing
__________________
**** NRA Life Member *****

Connecticut was the Cradle of the Gun Industry, NOW it is just a Pine Box,
Courtesy of our Governor "Chairman MAO Malloy"
adamc is offline  
Old March 27, 2013, 05:56 PM   #25
scrubcedar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2012
Location: Southwestern Colorado
Posts: 478
I think in the end you and I do agree Kimeo.
I'm just not in any way shape or form willing to think that trying to stop this behavior through legislation will work.
There is, as you have stated, free will involved. People with mental illnesses that become obsessed with something are nearly impossible to stop. Listen to the grouchy old nurse on this.
I was pointing to the hypocrisy of our opponents rather than trying to urge action against these games.
__________________
Gaily bedight, A gallant knight In sunshine and in shadow, Had journeyed long, Singing a song, In search of El Dorado
scrubcedar is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13304 seconds with 9 queries