Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: No amnesty arrest all who failed to register

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    No amnesty arrest all who failed to register

    On Friday night February 28th, I was asked my opinion regarding a new SUGGESTED AMNESTY PERIOD to allow individuals to register their firearms and large capacity magazines.

    My response was probably unexpected. I VOICED MY OJECTION TO ANY AMNESTY FOR THOSE THAT DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE LAW.

    I then explained the reasons for my position to those who asked, and will attempt to explain here for others to evaluate.

    The legislature passed new laws without knowing what they were doing or the consequences of the law.

    Many elected officials are beginning to realize they are in a social and political hot seat.

    Governor Malloy, Under Secretary for Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Mike Lawlor, CSP Lt. Paul Vance, CSP Lt. Eric Cooke
    have made public statements regarding those that did not register regardless of the reason.

    By suggesting or talking about a period of AMNESTY, Members of the Connecticut Legislature are now becoming increasing aware of the consequences of their actions.

    There are unconfirmed reports, that some members of the Connecticut legislature who voted in favor of the ban on firearms and registration requirements on law abiding Connecticut residents has caused POLITICAL FEAR and possible fear for their safety.

    IF EVERY KNOWN OR SUSPECTED PERSON/FELONWHO FAILED TO MEET THE DEADLINE IS PUBLICLY TRACKED DOWN, CONFRONTED, and ARRESTED ON FELONY CHARGES AND FORCED TO STAND BEFORE THE CRIMINAL COURTS OF CONNECTICUT the issue will get the media coverage, public comment and reaction that should have been allowed during the process to enact the law in 2013.

    Those that enacted the laws are now CLEARLY FEARFUL of enforcing THEIR LAWS for fear of a REAL POLITICAL AND SOCIAL BACKLASH.

    Those that enacted the new restrictive laws DON'T HAVE THE BALLS TO ENFORCE THE LAWS THEY HAVE WRITEN.

    What is the Governor and Commissioner of DESPP waiting for?

    MY OPINION AND POSTION ON ANY FORM OF AMNESTY IS SIMPLE:

    IMMEDIATE ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS OR
    TOTAL AND COMPLETE REPEAL OF THE 2013 LAWS.

    NO EXCEPTIONS





    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-04-2014 at 04:44 PM. Reason: Rule #19

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Well said. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, be it a compromise by either party.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Ffld co.
    Posts
    337
    While I am in agreement, and conversations with state legislators indicates to me that the law was indeed passed because of FEAR of doing nothing after sandy hook, until the law is repealed I can't advocate for a position that would throw people in jail in order to raise a discussion.

    There are thousands of potential felons out there and they should be protected from this overreach in order to preserve their voting AND gun rights. I have indicated to my rep that this law has made me a single-issue voter because I cannot allow thousands of innocent people to be converted into felons by legislation. I think it's important to let them know that this is the ONLY important issue BECAUSE of the devastating impact that criminal charges can have. I don't really care so much that they are corrupt and engaging in cronyism...because it doesn't make the average citizen into a criminal. This new law was intended solely to fill jails with pro-RKBA citizens.

    People need to speak to their reps and and indicate that unless they introduce a repeal and bring it to a vote, they will NOT win the next election. That's the only kind of threat that works. If you have donated money to one of them, and they voted "yes," you are morally obligated to reverse this on the next go-round.
    Last edited by CT Barfly; 03-02-2014 at 10:08 AM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    A carefully chosen single issue is a fine litmus for, at least, red/blue issues, as a principled candidate that tests true-blue on one issue should test consistently well red or blue.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by CT Barfly View Post
    While I am in agreement, and conversations with state legislators indicates to me that the law was indeed passed because of FEAR of doing nothing after sandy hook, until the law is repealed I can't advocate for a position that would throw people in jail in order to raise a discussion.

    There are thousands of potential felons out there and they should be protected from this overreach in order to preserve their voting AND gun rights. I have indicated to my rep that this law has made me a single-issue voter because I cannot allow thousands of innocent people to be converted into felons by legislation. I think it's important to let them know that this is the ONLY important issue BECAUSE of the devastating impact that criminal charges can have. I don't really care so much that they are corrupt and engaging in cronyism...because it doesn't make the average citizen into a criminal. This new law was intended solely to fill jails with pro-RKBA citizens.

    People need to speak to their reps and and indicate that unless they introduce a repeal and bring it to a vote, they will NOT win the next election. That's the only kind of threat that works. If you have donated money to one of them, and they voted "yes," you are morally obligated to reverse this on the next go-round.
    I agree with Peruta (even though I am speaking as one unaffected by the situation in Connecticut). What better impetus for a repeal motion than to begin confiscation and prosecution efforts? As it is, I suspect that the CT police will do nothing of the sort, using the law as an add-on charge if one is stopped for some other infraction and found to be in possession of a banned item.
    Air Force Veteran
    NRA Life Member
    VCDL Member
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Home Firearm Safety, Personal Protection
    Maryland Qualified Handgun Instructor
    Certified Instructor, Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc.
    Member, Mt. Washington Rod & Gun Club
    National Sporting Clays Association Certified Referee

  6. #6
    Regular Member KennyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mountain Top
    Posts
    87
    Our highly partisan legislature will NOT repeal these laws BEFORE many, many CT residents are arrested, jailed and in the process lose everything including their freedoms. YES, some have chosen to take a stand on how they would react to these newly enacted "laws", BUT seriously, Ed you know what's coming as well as most of us. There most likely will be soon "ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS" for failing to register firearms and magazines. Did you hear Lt. Vance's recent telephone conversation posted online recently? Many people who have been law abiding Citizens THEIR WHOLE LIVES will become pawns and made "examples" of what will happen to those who didn't register. So by saying "NO EXCEPTIONS" or no amnesty you know what that means for many people. They will be charged and do time and I believe many already know that this IS a real possibility but I also believe that many DO NOT EVEN KNOW that they are in violation of the law and will be caught up in this web of political bull**** and will do time for doing nothing wrong but OWNING an item that was LEGAL before Jan 1, 2014 and was made illegal with the powerful stroke of a pen.

    So, by saying "IMMEDIATE ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS OR TOTAL AND COMPLETE REPEAL OF THE 2013 LAWS", your basically saying that your willing to see many of your fellow CT Citizens arrested and prosecuted until a "possible" complete "future" repeal of the 2013 laws? Sorry, I would rather see an immediate reversal of the court and see the law overturned before seeing any of my fellow CT Citizens arrested and charged with a felony that will ruin their lives forever. Just my 02 on this complicated and very disturbing situation CT residents now face.
    Last edited by KennyB; 03-02-2014 at 12:42 PM.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    My reply to the law is simple as well:

    Utilize jury nullification and refuse to convict any defendant in this state until gun laws are repealed.

    Then they have a choice:
    a) keep the laws as they are and not being able to convict anyone
    b) repeal gun laws and be able to convict criminals

    If safety is their goal ... the choice is clear.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by CT Barfly View Post
    While I am in agreement, and conversations with state legislators indicates to me that the law was indeed passed because of FEAR of doing nothing after sandy hook, until the law is repealed I can't advocate for a position that would throw people in jail in order to raise a discussion.

    There are thousands of potential felons out there and they should be protected from this overreach in order to preserve their voting AND gun rights. I have indicated to my rep that this law has made me a single-issue voter because I cannot allow thousands of innocent people to be converted into felons by legislation. I think it's important to let them know that this is the ONLY important issue BECAUSE of the devastating impact that criminal charges can have. I don't really care so much that they are corrupt and engaging in cronyism...because it doesn't make the average citizen into a criminal. This new law was intended solely to fill jails with pro-RKBA citizens.

    People need to speak to their reps and and indicate that unless they introduce a repeal and bring it to a vote, they will NOT win the next election. That's the only kind of threat that works. If you have donated money to one of them, and they voted "yes," you are morally obligated to reverse this on the next go-round.
    Interesting. 239 years ago it was furthered along by an attempt at gun confiscation in Massachusetts. It almost seems poetic that the cycle would repeat, with different players, 239 years later in Connecticut.

    I agree with Edward Peruta on this. These "representatives" need to either come to their senses by seeing their similitude to the actions of a King reigning when Connecticut was still a colony, or offer one of the original 13 what is essentially the same ultimatum from so many years ago... although I think we all know what choice they made.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    My position will NOT change

    Agree or disagree, ANY arrests will become the subjects for the main stream media along with the social media no different than the comments made by Lt. Paul Vance. REMEMBER, 2014 is an election yearand those that voted to enact the current laws will while campaigning, claim to advocate and support 'AMNESTY' while still supporting registration which I do NOT agree with.

    As for those that MAY be arrested, a fund should be planned to provide financial assistance with legal defense. I Personally I have advocated such a fund for some time.

    I can assure everyone that there are members of the Connecticut State Legislature and the Executive Branch that are scratching their heads and trying to avoid the fallout that will come if they attempt to enforce the current law on HONEST, HARDWORKING, LAW ABIDING CONNECTICUT RESIDENTS.

    I don't own any Banned Firearms or possess any Large Capacity Magazines, but will support and contribute to any fund set up to defend those who may find themselves arrested for simple possession of UNREGISTERED items.

    My commitment is to pledge no less than $1,000.00 to any transparent organization that can assure the responsible administration of a fund set up and operated to offer basic legal representation to anyone criminally charged with possession unregistered firearms or magazines under the 2013 gun laws without any other violations of the law.


    Quote Originally Posted by KennyB View Post
    Our highly partisan legislature will NOT repeal these laws BEFORE many, many CT residents are arrested, jailed and in the process lose everything including their freedoms. YES, some have chosen to take a stand on how they would react to these newly enacted "laws", BUT seriously, Ed you know what's coming as well as most of us. There most likely will be soon "ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS" for failing to register firearms and magazines. Did you hear Lt. Vance's recent telephone conversation posted online recently? Many people who have been law abiding Citizens THEIR WHOLE LIVES will become pawns and made "examples" of what will happen to those who didn't register. So by saying "NO EXCEPTIONS" or no amnesty you know what that means for many people. They will be charged and do time and I believe many already know that this IS a real possibility but I also believe that many DO NOT EVEN KNOW that they are in violation of the law and will be caught up in this web of political bull**** and will do time for doing nothing wrong but OWNING an item that was LEGAL before Jan 1, 2014 and was made illegal with the powerful stroke of a pen.

    So, by saying "IMMEDIATE ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS OR TOTAL AND COMPLETE REPEAL OF THE 2013 LAWS", your basically saying that your willing to see many of your fellow CT Citizens arrested and prosecuted until a "possible" complete "future" repeal of the 2013 laws? Sorry, I would rather see an immediate reversal of the court and see the law overturned before seeing any of my fellow CT Citizens arrested and charged with a felony that will ruin their lives forever. Just my 02 on this complicated and very disturbing situation CT residents now face.

  10. #10
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    On Friday night February 28th, I was asked my opinion regarding a new SUGGESTED AMNESTY PERIOD to allow individuals to register their firearms and large capacity magazines. <snip>
    Dangerous.

    As I have stated on this topic, the CT citizenry will not be outraged and as such the arrest and conviction of some untold number of his fellow CT citizens is inevitable. CT LE will find these felonious criminals and enforce the law. The OP is OK with this.

    The odds of getting a "fund" set up to "aid" those formally LACs is a pipe dream. The CT citizenry has long ago tossed their liberty seeking way into the trash bin of history.

    It will be interesting to watch.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    You already stated that you have no AW or magazines. But then your organization turns around and encourages others to put themselves in peril. If you don't see a problem with that then it explains alot about your organization ~ an organization I refuse to join due to the inherent hypocrisy that I see exhibited routinely by your organization.
    Some interesting logic being used in your post, between all the personal insults. If your logic is that Ed Peruta has no right to talk about 'assault weapons' and 'LCM's simply because he does not own any, then we all need to ask:

    What is David Godbout (aka DavidMcBeth) doing on opencarry.org when he is unable to carry a firearm lawfully, either concealed or openly in the state of Connecticut in which he resides?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Ffld co.
    Posts
    337
    The fact of the matter is that William Dong is sitting in jail right now on a $500K bail...yes, $500,000.00!!! His offenses (at the time bail was set) were having a loaded AR-15 in his car (violation of an old law) and having more than 10 rounds loaded in the magazine of his glock pistol. A 911 caller reported him as a MWAG and he has been in jail since DECEMBER. They later found out he had improperly acquired the AR from out of state in violation of federal law but that's beside the point...the two original minor violations put him in jail. He's not a flight risk (long time local resident, living with his parents)...and they evidently could not even put up their house to get him out of jail.

    Make no mistake, for even the slightest violation of any old or new law, judges will make sure you stay in jail awaiting trial.

    This college student is just the first life ruined.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Ffld co.
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Dangerous.

    As I have stated on this topic, the CT citizenry will not be outraged and as such the arrest and conviction of some untold number of his fellow CT citizens is inevitable. CT LE will find these felonious criminals and enforce the law. The OP is OK with this.

    The odds of getting a "fund" set up to "aid" those formally LACs is a pipe dream. The CT citizenry has long ago tossed their liberty seeking way into the trash bin of history.

    It will be interesting to watch.

    agreed. nobody has any sympathy for people who run afoul of these draconian laws.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    The odds of getting a "fund" set up to "aid" those formally LACs is a pipe dream. The CT citizenry has long ago tossed their liberty seeking way into the trash bin of history.
    As asked of you previously, you are basing this on what, precisely? We are an organization devoted to building exactly this kind of support network.

    I notice that you keep mentioning how CT residents don't do anything and instead lay down and let evil happen to them, but I wonder where you get this information? It certainly is not reality, and it is certainly not our experience. Do you have some inside source that you want to share with us?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  15. #15
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    I base this on the numbers. How many CT residents are outraged with this law vs. how many gun owners, that are directly affected by this law, are outraged. I submit that the gun owning community is not unified on this issue. I certainly hope that I am wrong. But, I'll wait and see where the sentiment you claim is evident becomes evident. CT citizens should prove me wrong. Sadly, I suspect that litigation and legislation will rue the day and this will require some number of CT citizens to possibly become convicted felons to effect the change you seek.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I base this on the numbers. How many CT residents are outraged with this law vs. how many gun owners, that are directly affected by this law, are outraged. I submit that the gun owning community is not unified on this issue. I certainly hope that I am wrong. But, I'll wait and see where the sentiment you claim is evident becomes evident. CT citizens should prove me wrong. Sadly, I suspect that litigation and legislation will rue the day and this will require some number of CT citizens to possibly become convicted felons to effect the change you seek.
    I would love to have your crystal ball, but I am glad I do not have your pessimism.

    Just a suggestion: How about leaving this to those of us in Connecticut and not ******** on us in almost every post?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post

    What is David Godbout (aka DavidMcBeth) doing on opencarry.org when he is unable to carry a firearm lawfully, either concealed or openly in the state of Connecticut in which he resides?
    Now Rich/CTCarry, you know that this is a lie. First, I can carry a handgun because I & others don't need a permission slip to do so...and when I was in Illinois I, like others there, carried for years. I inform people of their rights but I do not tell others to carry w/o a permit, at least not w/o informing them of the hassle that may result (unlike CTCarry) in this state. Secondly, one can carry a long gun in CT w/o a permit (clearly making the statement a lie). Thirdly, CTCarry has no idea if I have a permit to carry or not and when I carry or not...these records are "sealed"~and, for security reasons I will not divulge information regarding guns I own or do not own, and other information that gov't officials can use to assess my ability to thwart off an attack.

    Fourthly, CTCarry supported the idea and encouraged folks to not registering of the dreaded "assault rifle" variety and now appears to support an armed response (but nothing including CTCarry management of course). But the management (or some of them) of CTCarry have exclaimed that they have no assault weapons.

    And now CTCarry makes demands of the police to arrest people who followed their advice not to register.
    Is Lawlor or Sen. Looney actually behind CTCarry? I wonder.


    Women and children first seems to be the motto of CTCarry.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    I would love to have your crystal ball, but I am glad I do not have your pessimism.

    Just a suggestion: How about leaving this to those of us in Connecticut and not ******** on us in almost every post?
    I will not respond to a post attacking someone just because they don't live in the state. That's inappropriate, period.

    I don't expect even people in this state to understand the law.

    OC for ME brings up good points and they are good points.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077

    Conn. Police: Woman who questions gun laws "Sounds Un-American"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUxjuz2o9Gk

    "Ma'am, it sounds like you're anti-American, it sounds like you're anti-law. I can't answer your question," Lt. Vance remarked."

    "You're the servant, we're the master," she said.

    "I'm the master, ma'am. I'm the master," Vance said in response.

    I can't ignore the "instructions / commands" for the citizen to contact their attorney for advice. The caller didn't call for advice. She wanted clarification. A dodge job on answering. Further, it sends a message that should be discussed:

    Are we only afforded the rights we can afford to get an attorney to explain to us [basically, telling us we can't afford to contest intrusions on our rights]?

    Does the 1A remotely imply that through an attorney only shall we protest tyrannical government activities?

    Where in the constitution does it say we shall not question the activities of the government when those activities directly affect our freedom and liberty?

    How does the woman in the audio recording differ from Rosa Parks?
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  20. #20
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Wear a sandwich board and walk to and fro in front of the cop shop. The board should ID the miscreant who has violated your 1A right, your 2A right, and your 4/5A right.

    Public scrutiny is a very powerful weapon.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I think its a guy using software to disguise his voice (not that there is anything inherently wrong with that) and he duped a weak old man like Vance ....

    Hooray???

  22. #22
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    The caller in post #19 does ask what would be a legal question of a police officer - something we are admonished not to do..

    Don't recall that Rosa Parks ever called in advance to ask a LEO if what she planned to do was legal, or how it would be enforced.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 03-04-2014 at 04:56 PM. Reason: Fixed after thread merger
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  23. #23
    Regular Member dakatak87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Livingston County
    Posts
    46
    http://www.callthecops.net/connectic...ps-state-list/

    Here is an article I just saw today posted yesterday that says "Just over 68% of Connecticut cops had failed to register firearms according to the new law." Which would make the majority of the police force "felons" and not fit for duty.

    I post this even being out of this state that because what ever happens from this day forward in regards to these recent enacted laws will lay a path for the rest of the states and our country as a whole.

    I hope that a full repeal is ordered.
    The only sensible gun law is the 2nd Amendment. Anything else is an infringement.

    "The road to tyranny is paved with compromise."

  24. #24
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by dakatak87 View Post
    http://www.callthecops.net/connectic...ps-state-list/

    Here is an article I just saw today posted yesterday that says "Just over 68% of Connecticut cops had failed to register firearms according to the new law." Which would make the majority of the police force "felons" and not fit for duty.

    I post this even being out of this state that because what ever happens from this day forward in regards to these recent enacted laws will lay a path for the rest of the states and our country as a whole.

    I hope that a full repeal is ordered.
    That is a satire site.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    Just a suggestion: How about leaving this to those of us in Connecticut and not ******** on us in almost every post?
    Because what happens in CT might spread to other states like a metastasized cancer. People all across America have a stake in the outcome.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •