Heard the same stuff with NY residents .. crying "we will resist" and nothing further happenings.
Because, if one is serious .... when they say that they are coming after you, one does not wait but goes and gets them.
CT is in a slightly different situation than NY. In NY the law was passed legally. In CT it was not. The CT law will all be struck down due to technical aspects of the law's creation and other legal processes needed to have been performed before the bill was to be voted upon. the technical aspects are clearer arguments than the 2nd amendment arguments (that democrats don't want to be decided by courts).
The e-cert process was not followed - the law will be voided because of this issue. If it requires someone to be arrested is the question in my mind ~ it may very well require a criminal trial is needed in state court to decide this aspect of the law. 2nd amendment issues can be brought up (in federal court ~ not state) without a criminal trial. Various legal teams in CT have talked about filing a case in state court but I think that they'll file in federal court as that venue does not require a person to put his head on "the chopping block" as it were as the federal court can examine 2nd amendment issues ~ maybe a 14th due process case regarding the e-cert process violations?
Well, I'm content to wait a while ... I am still collecting data concerning the infringement aspect of various sections of the law in CT.
There are many angles to attack the law in CT ... and more limited angles to approach the NY law. If anyone was going to start resisting it would have been NY by now ~ yet all I hear is crickets from that state...I see 1 suit regarding the e-cert process in NY that is a dead duck IMO and nothing else. The NRA is involved with a lawsuit in NY ~ I don't trust them at all ... they like to make "deals". The NRA is taking the viewpoint that people need to be protected from criminals and don't have the gumption to actually say we need guns to protect us from the governments. I think that after boston this shows our need to have guns and accessories to protect us from both criminals and the governments.
There has been a new case filed, DISABLED AMERICANS FOR FIREARMS RIGHTS, LLC Et Al v. DANNEL P. MALLOY, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF CONNECT They claim in their complaint:
The provisions of the Act unfairly and arbitrarily deny these fundamental rights to the
plaintiffs....
in that "large capacity magazines" are convenient and necessary for disabled persons such as the plaintiffs to participate in these lawful activities....
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray that the Court:
1. Enter a declaratory judgment that the Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention
and Children's Safety, in whole or in part, violates the plaintiffs' rights to keep and bear arms,
not to be denied the equal protection of the laws, and to be ree of discrimination based on
physical disability, in violation of Article I, §§ 1,15, and 20 of the Connecticut constitution; and the provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 27-2 and 46a-58(a); and
2. Issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions
against implementation and enforcement of the Act.
Its a 17 paragraph, 6 page complaint. And it does not allege violations of any federal law.
http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/complaint-for-declaratory-judgment-and-i-34480/
If one wishes to read the complaint.
