• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Prospective prohibition I disagree with, but it would be legally defensible. However, ex post facto?
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

50% sales tax on ammo and mags... hmmmm Thinking they can turn this tragedy into a profitable income for the state? All I can say is you guys voted these Dems in...
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

I want to hear someone explain the logic of how a 50% tax on ammo is going to reduce future crime.

I would never pay $1+ for 40SW ammo for range use, but I don't blink to spend that much buying 1-2 boxes of SD ammo for carry each year. I can't see how a criminal bent on mass murder and committing suicide would care about spending a few extra bucks on ammo.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

look up( bath school disaster ) it happend in in michigan in 1927 i know most havent ever heared of it you can find it in wickipedia and it wasent done with a gun and ask your reps and senators if moor gun laws will stop that also. i think they need to think out of the box if someone wants to do a mass killing there is moor than one way to get it done and if there is a will they will find the way.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ejb</div><div class="ubbcode-body">... if someone wants to do a mass killing there is moor than one way to get it done and if there is a will they will find the way. </div></div>

Unless you arm teacher/staff and eliminate gun free zones. But not even the NRA is standing solidly behind that. I've got a draft letter to my state reps/senators in process to suggest this, however.

Perhaps they would move on to an easier target then...but that would be an improvement of some sort.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Already done.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Free bump, to also remind ya'll that she/it is proposing to do alot of what Canada had done in the past. And recently, Canada has gone and 'undone' so much of it, because it was ABSOLUTELY INEFFECTUAL.

They proposed a 'registry' here that was supposed to cost 1-2 million bucks. Almost 20 years later, the cost was close to 2 BILLION, for nothing.

So much more could have been done, had they spent 1 billion on more LEO's on the street, as well as another (almost) billion on our Healthcare.

That, at least, would have made a difference. Remember, mental health also falls under "healthcare".
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: StanwoodSpartan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">50% sales tax on ammo and mags... hmmmm Thinking they can turn this tragedy into a profitable income for the state? All I can say is you guys voted these Dems in... </div></div>

I doubt very much "GUN OWNERS" voted these scumbags into office.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: herro prease</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Says prohibit possession, but nothing of grandfathering. wonder what that implies... </div></div>

It doesn't <span style="font-style: italic">imply</span> anything.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armorpl8chikn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It MEANS "turn in your shit", pretty sure I am dumber than I look. </div></div>

sackofhammers.jpg
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

All in good fun It's nice to see you have a sense of humor.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Go kick the ugly, dyke bitches front door down. I'll bet she'd be begging for someone with a gun then.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

There have many shootings in the U.S. before and since this CT situation - daily in Detroit...this is the classic don't let a crisis go to waste scenario that these Dems have been waiting for to rid themselves of those evil inanimate objects that they so loathe. they have a fear of arms like some people fear snakes - irrational but can cloud the thought patterns. Millions of guns in America as there are millions of cars and there are far more tragedies with vehicles in the same time period but you can't explain that to a person that is so afraid of these evil objects.

Good luck Connecticut peps...it will all come to a state near us soon too. The battle is here!
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Lord almighty...That beast is as devious as she (?) is ugly. </div></div>

Ugly as can be.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Use this...my data is not from skewed sources, and 2011/2012 sources are about the same. Bottom lie, with all the data concerned, the numbers just do not stack up high enough to warrant further additions of law.
______________________________________________________________

"Gun control advocates argue that a federal assault weapons ban is necessary to curbing gun violence." -Gun Control Advocates, -un named-

The above statement is based on ignorance of raw data fact. It may be based on severely skewed data which would invalidate the claim on it's merit

FACT:
During Bill Clinton's term of office(HE PASSED THE ORIGINAL BAN) there were over 30 such mayhem incidents.

2010 year Firearm murders data, US only
FACT:
Handguns account for over 6000 of the firearm murders

FACT:
Rifles of all kinds accounted for 358 of all firearm murders

FACT:
Shotguns accounted for 373 of firearm murders

FACT:
Unknown firearms accounted for 2035 murders

FACT:
Other weapons to include knives, swords, edged weapons, 1704 murders

FACT:
Other weapons not edged account for 1772 murders

FACT:
Hands, Fists, Feet account for 745 murders

With the above raw data, there is no basis to ban any rifle of any type. This raw data is from crime numbers only, not skewed by lawful defense of self or others(these would be edge outlier numbers such as the Fists, other weapons, rifles, and shotguns.

Using this data, and data that is extremely close to it from both 2011 and 2012, there is still no basis of merit to ban any type of rifle or shotgun, magazine, or other firearm type that could be counted as an 'assault weapon'( These require a Title III tax stamp and background check to purchase due to the fact they fire either full automatic, or burst). Any other rifle or shotgun only fires semiautomatic and is therefore by the actual raw data, not worthy of any ban.

Now lets look at these raw date in perspective by total population percentage. 312.8 million with we will use the large 6000 handgun number to set a higher average here, that is close to .01 percent per 1000 people, or less than one person per 100,000.

Total Perspective of numbers:
More people are killed by Doctor's mistakes during surgery, drunk drivers, negligence at work, or vehicular negligence(I use negligence because nothing is accidental. Some form of negligence always contributes). I have tried very hard to find raw data that would support any form of gun control and have failed each and every time due to the monumentally low percentages per population. The real numbers just do not support any form of firearms legislation. Do yourself a favor and actually try to research this as I have. The results will be the same each time the raw data is used that does not come from skewed sources. This is the way I test all my own theories as well as my friends by playing the Devil's advocate and looking for extremely straight data that has not been biased.

BOTTOM LINE:
There is no basis for gun control over what we currently have. The facts do not support it, the incidents do not support it.

OPINION:
The issue we are having is a severe lack of control on behavior issues and security of our schools. The larger being insecure schools. If all schools were upgraded with points of entry that were controlled, Armed officers in place(911 from Sandy Creek stated Law Enforcement took minutes to get to the scene, not seconds which is required). By removing our schools, theaters, ball fields, and other places from the perspective target list, we take the advantage away from the mentally disturbed individual who wants to attack it.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armorpl8chikn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It MEANS "turn in your shit", pretty sure unless I am dumber than I look.</div></div>

I can't wait to see what happens when they try. Grandfathering was one concession that made it in the last one because the thought of confiscations gave them fits (almost as much as turning several hundred thousand Americans instantly into felons).
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: herro prease</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Says prohibit possession, but nothing of grandfathering. wonder what that implies... </div></div>

It doesn't <span style="font-style: italic">imply</span> anything.</div></div>

Actually, it implies a lot. However, I doubt this bulldyke put much thought into that, this is clearly a throw-something-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks play. Do you really think CT has the resources to do a confiscation? Regardless, they'll be losing some tax revenue over this...
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Well everyone in CT is boned, ironically I believe the 50% tax on magazines and ammo will be contend-able due to a ruling from the supreme court years ago that you cannot pick and choose taxes to discriminate on people one could argue that gun owners are a select group but that may be difficult.

We're reaping what we sow as far as values and who we vote for. Hopefully this is stopped, regardless it will happen again with or without ar's and high cap mags.

A bolt action can be shot just as fast as an ar (accurately).
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: herro prease</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: herro prease</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Says prohibit possession, but nothing of grandfathering. wonder what that implies... </div></div>

It doesn't <span style="font-style: italic">imply</span> anything.</div></div>

Actually, it implies a lot. However, I doubt this bulldyke put much thought into that, this is clearly a throw-something-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks play. Do you really think CT has the resources to do a confiscation? Regardless, they'll be losing some tax revenue over this... </div></div>

http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/imply

It's beyond implying to say "no possession. " Grandfathering would allow specific possession. Get the drift?
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's beyond implying to say "no possession. " Grandfathering would allow specific possession. Get the drift?</div></div>

yes. thanks for the definition.

however, just saying "no possession" _implies_ (see definition that you just sent me) many things:

- that there will now be some penalty for owning an AR;
- that there will have to be a decision on whom (for instance, different .gov offices and constituents when not in official capacity) to apply this penalty to;
- that some party involved may have to have discretionary power over who is in compliance and who is not (this may very likely not be the asshats that came up with the legislation, as they are asshats and don't know anything about it);
- that some legislation will denote when/what timeframe to enact some punitive measures on said compliance;
- that that party doing the enforcement will have to be appointed;
- that that party may or may not already be wards of the state;
- that that party may or may not need additional training if new confiscatory procedures must be created/applied.
- and on, and on...

there's a hell of a lot more to this than just making up some dipshit laws and posting them on your .gov website.

get the drift?
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

I get the drift that you're combative and apparently having a laugh at certain stereotypes ("herro prease," as if), unless, of course, you're championing their application.
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

Dibs on The Snowman!

bSYZM.jpg


laugh.gif
 
Re: ATTENTION CONNECTICUT GUN OWNERS!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Veer_G</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I get the drift that you're combative and apparently having a laugh at certain stereotypes ("herro prease," as if), unless, of course, you're championing their application.</div></div>

not at all. you thought you were being smart by linking me to a dictionary definition, when you were clearly wrong and have very little insight into what you're saying about these laws (and what they imply). I don't see what my screenname has to do with that.

and yes, speaking engrish is hilarious. most stereotypes are, matter of fact. not everyone automatically believes that this makes you some kind of politically incorrect monster - even my chinese friends can agree with me on that (they think we all look like mel gibson).