Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: CT Cops sign statement they will not enforce PA13-3??

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    CT Cops sign statement they will not enforce PA13-3??

    http://www.examiner.com/article/conn...e-new-gun-laws

    A showdown is developing between a sizable number of Connecticut state police officers and the politicians who passed into law highly restrictive gun control, gun bans, and bans on high capacity magazines.





    story accurate?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648

    From the article

    Quote Originally Posted by Examiner article
    But now these courageous citizens have key support in high places. With at least 250 law enforcement officers joining them in disobeying an unconstitutional law, the gunowners have a new weapon in their arsenal -- the support of hundreds of police officers.

    Hardy reported that with the lack of support of police, Connecticut faces massive civilian resistance, with police officers refusing to enforce a law that to most citizens crosses a line that is unacceptable in a free society.

    If such a thing can happen in a deeply blue state in New England, what would law enforcement encounter if they attempted such an ill-fated attack on Constitutionally-protected rights in Texas, Wyoming, South Carolina, Utah, or Kentucky?
    I hope this is true, and I hope the "representatives are smart enough to at least repeal this foolish legislation, since I doubt they will resign willingly and will need to be voted out of office. Shame that traitors to this country and its people would have the audacity to wait until elections. If they had any decency, they would have never even entertained the notion of gun registration, let alone confiscation (I know it may not have been explicitly stated, but we can all read between the lines).
    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

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    not of this world, wa
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Young Man View Post
    I hope this is true, and I hope the "representatives are smart enough to at least repeal this foolish legislation, since I doubt they will resign willingly and will need to be voted out of office. Shame that traitors to this country and its people would have the audacity to wait until elections. If they had any decency, they would have never even entertained the notion of gun registration, let alone confiscation (I know it may not have been explicitly stated, but we can all read between the lines).
    This is the best news Ever, since the beginning of this Fiasco!

  4. #4
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    CT citizens must demand to see the document that is alleged to have been signed. The Founders put their names to the DoI as the proof of their commitment to liberty, by signing their names to a document that proved their treason to the Crown. No signed document, with real names of cops, then it is nothing but propaganda, from a source unknown. Besides, why would they need to sign if the state has no plans to confiscate any guns?

  5. #5
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Seems foolish to sign a statement. What's the point in that? You go on record for a thing that hasn't happened, in violation of your oath to obey the laws?

  6. #6
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    Seems foolish to sign a statement. What's the point in that? You go on record for a thing that hasn't happened, in violation of your oath to obey the laws?
    Never took the oath yourself have you???

    The one I took and all I have heard of state "to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic".
    Last edited by F350; 03-10-2014 at 12:11 PM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Never took the oath yourself have you???

    The one I took and all I have heard of state "to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic".
    What does a/the constitution have to do with this situation in CT?

  8. #8
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Never took the oath yourself have you???

    The one I took and all I have heard of state "to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic".
    Well maybe they should add 'obey the laws you're sworn to defend'? What could it hurt?

  9. #9
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    Well maybe they should add 'obey the laws you're sworn to defend'? What could it hurt?
    Because sometimes unconstitutional laws find their way into the books (infringements on religious practices, speech, assembly, the press, petition of government, infringements on the RKBA, infringements on the right to a speedy trial with a jury of one's peers, etc).

    Just food for thought.
    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

  10. #10
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Per Wikipedia (I know, I know), this seems to be the wording of the current oath of enlistment:

    (a) Enlistment Oath.— Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
    "I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."


    President:
    In the United States, the oath of office for the President is specified in the Constitution (Article II, Section 1):
    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

    Members of Congress:
    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."

    Federal judges:
    In the United States, federal judges are required to take two oaths. The first oath is this:
    I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. [So help me God.]

    The second is the same oath that members of Congress take:
    I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]


    I wonder when it will become acceptable to call the oath breakers by their earned title: traitors.
    Last edited by Rusty Young Man; 03-10-2014 at 03:18 PM.
    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

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Young Man View Post
    Per Wikipedia (I know, I know), this seems to be the wording of the current oath of enlistment:


    I wonder when it will become acceptable to call the oath breakers by their earned title: traitors.
    The only one that is a true "oath" is the servicemen...because they can be jailed for nonperformance

  12. #12
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The only one that is a true "oath" is the servicemen...because they can be jailed for nonperformance
    Qft

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    http://www.examiner.com/article/conn...e-new-gun-laws

    A showdown is developing between a sizable number of Connecticut state police officers and the politicians who passed into law highly restrictive gun control, gun bans, and bans on high capacity magazines. story accurate?
    Here's a new Prison Planet article about a CT cop who stated that, "I cannot wait to get the order to kick your door in."

    "Conn. Cop: I Will Kick Down Doors To Confiscate Guns

    Mikael Thalen
    Prison Planet.com
    March 10, 2014

    A Connecticut man revealed shocking comments made by a Branford police officer this week who has openly defended door-to-door gun confiscation."

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/conn-cop...cate-guns.html

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Augustin View Post
    Here's a new Prison Planet article about a CT cop who stated that, "I cannot wait to get the order to kick your door in."

    "Conn. Cop: I Will Kick Down Doors To Confiscate Guns

    Mikael Thalen
    Prison Planet.com
    March 10, 2014

    A Connecticut man revealed shocking comments made by a Branford police officer this week who has openly defended door-to-door gun confiscation."

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/conn-cop...cate-guns.html
    http://www.infowars.com/conn-cop-i-w...nfiscate-guns/

    They IDed the cop ... seems like police dept did not like his statements .

    . one of the state’s mostly highly decorated officers. http://www.infowars.com/conn-cop-i-w...nfiscate-guns/

    If they do start confiscation via breaking down folks doors ... they can not expect the gun community to be happy.

    And as I have said before: I will convict no one of ANY crime until the gun laws are repealed.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 03-10-2014 at 09:34 PM.

Posting Permissions

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