Quote of the Day: Legislative Fiat Edition

 

“One thing is clear. If you haven’t registered it, on the following day, it is completely illegal contraband.” – Connecticut Undersecretary for Criminal Justice Michael Lawlor, Gun Owners in Conn. Rush to Register Guns, Magazines [at wggb.com]

comments

  1. avatar Taco says:

    You want it CT! MOLON LABE!!!!

    1. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      Perhaps those new felons should march on the capital….

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      Is there ANY chance that Connecticut Undersecretary for Criminal Justice Michael Lawlor will be the man in front of the SWAT team manning the battering ram to knock down doors? I’d pay to watch that.

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      Strong words… from behind a keyboard.

  2. avatar Accur81 says:

    It’s almost like registration leads to confiscation, and failure to register also results in confiscation.

    Don’t worry, we’re not coming for your guns. And if you like your current insurance, you can keep your current insurance.

    As Clint Eastwood would say “This is gonna get f$&@ing ugly.”

    1. avatar Shenandoah says:

      Or he might say “Don’t piss on my foot and tell me it’s raining” in this case too.

    2. avatar DisThunder says:

      “A man’s got to know his limitations.”

      I’m grateful that my state is a long way from this kind of thing, at least for now. Because this would be my line in the sand.

    3. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      Or:
      “OOOOOOklahoma where the wind comes whippin’ down the plain…”

    4. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

      If you like your AR-15, you can keep your AR-15.

    5. avatar Jonathan -- Houston says:

      A man slaves away his whole life working in a glass factory. Maybe one day he decides to pick up a hammer.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        Please tell where this quote comes from, it is fantastic and I want give credit when I use it in the wild.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Sorry I’m two years late responding. Hopefully you have new posts notification checked.

          I don’t know exactly where it comes from, but I do know it’s from a movie. Years ago, early 2000s, I read it on-screen at a theater during the movie quotes and trivia segment before the movie previews. I think it’s an old movie, maybe 1930s to 1950s, but I’ve never recalled the title or actor.

          Occasionally, I’ll try to find it, but no luck on movie quote sites. Sometimes, though, googling it turns up discussion boards where someone’s used it as their profile quote. So other people out there do know of it.

          Today I was trying to find it again, but only turned up this old 2013 TTAG post of my own. So here we are….

    6. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      “He shoulda armed himself.”

  3. avatar Chris_From_NY says:

    In NY’s case, the rough estimates for compensation of items banned by the SAFE act is between $10B-$40B.

    1. avatar Hal J. says:

      What is this “compensation” of which you speak?

      1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        the gov’t cannot seize legal items without providing adequate compensation. By banning certain previously legal items, the state has opened itself up to claims that it has to compensate the owners, which is the market rate for such items and not what the state thinks is acceptable.

        1. avatar Hal J. says:

          And what are the odds that such such compensation will actually take place? Couldn’t NY argue that gun owners there had the chance to sell their banned property outside the state, and should have availed themselves of the opportunity while they had the chance?

        2. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

          that’s not how it works. it is part of the takings clause under the constitution. you cannot just wish it away. the law required people to get rid of a legal product. think of it if you owned land. the gov’t announces it is going to put a nuclear plant next door to your subdivision, despite zoning and regulatory requirements and years of hearings/studies. Nope – Cuomo decided this is it and that’s it.. since they announced their intentions, the value of your house falls to damn near zero. well, you should have moved? Doubtful – the state has essentially taken your property. they owe you $$ and not what the house is worth now, but what it was worth then. Classic takings argument. I actually think it is a sound strategy. make it very expensive to ban weapons and watch the liberals balk at the costs.

        3. avatar DrewR55 says:

          While I agree with your argument Dirk I would like to point out that I have never seen the Liberals balk at spending money that was not their own.

        4. avatar JeffR says:

          I wish it was that simple, Dirk. Doing some quick google-fu, it appears our side has lost its share of Takings Clause cases.

        5. avatar Jonathan -- Houston says:

          The courts have wrestled with that for more than a century. In recent decades, much of the focus has been on the diminished value of property brought on by the imposition of environmental regulations; but there are mryiad examples of many kinds.

          As one would expect, there’s a whole judicial regimen for determining what action constitutes a taking that then requires compensation. Overall, though, you’ll find that exercise of so-called police powers offers a huge and abused exception to the Fifth Amendment.

          I think they justify it by saying that the government itself isn’t taking your property for its own use, just denying you your use of it. Distinction without a difference in my book, but what do I know? I’m not skilled in the dark arts of legal legerdemain.

        6. avatar Hannibal says:

          Dirk, your example is a whole different can of worms. Here the government is not ‘taking’ your guns in the same way they might ‘take’ your land for a power plant. They are making them illegal in the area and you have the option to sell them to any buyer outside of New York.

          Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s complete BS, but it’s arguments are not the same.

  4. avatar Anon in CT says:

    As I’ve noted a billion times, many of those “assault weapons” are ALREADY registered with the state and town, as is any weapon bought through an FL in CT in the last couple decades. So this is double-registration. It’s also a trap for those who might choose not to register, since if the State figures out how to do come basic database manipulation they can determine who has “assault weps”, and then say bye bye to all your guns. . . .

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Yes, you are correct – However, not every gun sold needs a DPS-3 especially if it was pre-DPS-3
      As many of us also found out, the states data is often wrong. In my case they did not have all my guns listed and had a few that I no longer had because they have been sold.

      The information the state has is cluster fvck of misinformation!

      How many of the new registration forms also going to fvcked too? The info is going to need to be manually entered which means more human error- the whole damn thing is Swiss cheese!

      At the end it will do nothing! WTNH Front page will be full of shootings and murders.

    2. avatar (Formerly) MN Matt says:

      What about the guy who honest-to-God sold a weapon prior to this whole sh!tstorm?

      1. avatar Anon in CT says:

        Hope you got a receipt . . .

        Also, hope you took a GPS fix during that boating accident. . .

        Maybe not enough for a conviction, but probably enough for a search warrant, and then who knows what other violations might be found . . hope you didn’t miscount your standard cap mags when you registered them.

        1. avatar Cliff H says:

          It’s a sad day for America when “probable cause” for a search warrant consists of passing a law making something you bought and owned legally a prohibited item, then using your purchase records for that legal item as probable cause to search your residence for the item.

          Anyone starting a pool for when the first in-home confiscation raid takes place?

          And here’s another problem – what if your ex-wife decides to call in an anonymous tip to the State Police that she KNOWS you still have an assault weapon?

    3. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      Anon,
      You’ve spent ~63 years noting this? (Assuming no more than 1/2 second per note…)

    4. avatar Steve in Iowa says:

      “I sold that gun years ago”……..

      1. avatar Hal J. says:

        “Do you have a copy of the receipt? No? Sounds like probable cause to me. Deploy the SWAT team, headquarters…”

        1. avatar Delmarva Chip says:

          “I gave that gun as a gift to my friend/cousin in [other state].”

        2. avatar Hannibal says:

          This gets bandied around a lot but do you have any examples where such a situation was considered ‘probable cause’ for a warrant?

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        Private sale. Assuming it was legal in CT, no NICS, no receipt required. Up to the state to prove you DIDN”T sell it, not up to you to prove you did. Does that qualify as probable cause for a warrant?

    5. avatar Mina says:

      If there were two rounds of registration efforts, here’s your database query to find everyone who registered in Round1 but not Round2

      use StateofCTWeaponsReg;
      SELECT *
      AS Out_of_Compliance
      FROM Registered_Weapons_Rnd1 AS Rnd1
      WHERE NOT EXISTS
      (SELECT RegistrationID
      FROM Registered_Weapons_Rnd2 AS Rnd2
      WHERE Rnd1.RegistrationID = Rnd2.RegistrationID) ;

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        You are assuming competence at the CT State IT shop.

        1. avatar Mina says:

          My 7th grader could write that query.

        2. avatar Jus Bill says:

          But your 7th grader isn’t a CT state employee. Overqualified…

  5. avatar ST says:

    Don’t get it twisted.As far as The Government of CT is concerned, your guns are contraband whether it’s registered or not.

  6. avatar Tommy says:

    Funny, now here I thought an assault rifle was only a fully automatic rifle. I bet the controllers are going to try and use this law to help push their agenda and try to redefine weapons again to make it easier to register and confiscate. Land of the sheep, home of the slave.

    1. avatar Hal J. says:

      In recent news reports, I’ve seen a Remington 870 lacking an extended magazine described as an “assault shotgun”.

      1. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

        They’re all “assault weapons”. And they’re all “anti-assault weapons”. They’re collectables. They’re rodent control. They’re works of art. They’re interesting paperweights. They’re paper perforation devices. They’re investments. They’re money pits. And much, much more…

        It’s the use to which they’re put that is important, not what shape they take or whether they make some hoplaphobe wet themselves…

  7. avatar Hal J. says:

    A couple of interesting bits from the linked article:

    Wilson has estimated there may be as many as 20,000 weapons in Connecticut affected by the new law.

    Only 20k “assault” weapons in a state of 3.5 million people? Even by East Coast standards, isn’t that a wee bit low?

    Ultimately, advocates hope the law will prompt people to turn in the magazines. “I think over time, there’s just going to be fewer and fewer of those in circulation,” Lawlor said.

    At the margin he may be right, in that law-abiding gun owners won’t be able to pass their standard capacity magazines on to those whom they choose, and new law-abiding gun owners in MA won’t be able to obtain them. Anyone intent on doing harm to others will, of course, bypass this absurd law with ease simply by purchasing their standard capacity magazines out of state.

    1. avatar tfunk says:

      Oh, no need to go out of state…just buy the ones already out there on the street. Or steal some more.

    2. avatar DisThunder says:

      We had this discussion at work the other day- of all the pieces and parts that make up a gun, the magazine has to be the most un-magical. Even if there wasn’t millions of almost every make already available, it would take very little effort to make most of them. Anybody with some basic machining skills an a little attention to detail could knock one out pretty easily, and do it with stuff they likely have laying around. Then there’s those damn plastic printers….
      Swear to God, these people think that guns are magic monsters endowed by Merlin or something. This stuff isn’t just going to “dry up over time” just because you take them off the shelf. That’s like saying people will eventually stop smoking if we ban cigarettes at 7-11.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        This all looks like the Progressive Temperance Movements’ efforts in the early 1900’s. They finally succeeded in getting the 18th Amendment ratified to prohibit all alcohol; but it all started at the local or state levels and spread nationally, like the plague.

        Well, we all know how well Prohibition worked in the 20’s!

        Because the antis don’t have anywhere near the horsepower to get the 2nd Amendment repealed, they are focusing on local and state efforts to restrict and prohibit ownership of firearms by classes of people, and devise new classes of prohibited persons, as they legislate new restrictions and sometimes create instant felons. Just like a cancer.

        The main difference between Prohibition of the 20’s and the anti-gun efforts today is the speedy widespread dissemination of news, information and critical analysis of the antis’ extremist activities, lies and rhetoric via the web. This exposure forces the liberal subservient conspiratorial press to acknowledge at least some of the fallacy of the anti-gun crowds’ assertions or risk being exposed for the mind thought manipulators they are.

        No matter what, it’s gonna’ be a long road.

    3. avatar Anon in CT says:

      20k? That’s hilarious. Add a zero or two, esp when you include all the pistols which are now “assault weps” for various reasons.

    4. avatar Cliff H says:

      How do they plan to prevent their slaves from ordering magazines on line and having them shipped by UPS or FedEx to their front door? Or even having their uncle or cousin out of state buying them and shipping them in?

      Do you have to FAIL an intelligence test to be a Progressive politician in CT?

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        They know they can’t stop people from breaking the law, but they can make people into criminals. Then you get someone who steps out of line somewhere and you use it against them. Look at how the seatbelt laws work.

  8. avatar El Mac says:

    What if they gave a law and no body came?

    In other words, a perfect time to invoke the duty of civil disobedience.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Several months ago I suggested that 100,000+ people peaceably march to the capital of a state like California, Illinois, New York, Connecticut, Maryland, etc. in a giant open carry demonstration to demand that the state repeal such arbitrary laws. It is logistically impossible for a state to arrest, book, process, prosecute, and imprison 100,000 citizens.

      Furthermore, if the state attempted to arrest those citizens, that opens up a giant can of worms because it would violate our right to peaceably assemble for redress of grievances and it would violate our right to free speech (carrying firearms openly and peacefully is a demonstration of free speech). It might also get the state into hot water for only prosecuting some but not others.

      1. avatar El Mac says:

        Exactly! THIS!

      2. avatar Anon in CT says:

        They won’t do jack – at the time. Just take lots of pics and video, and then spend the following weeks and months using facial recognition software to compare with the photos in the DPS and DMV databases.

        And then start knocking on doors . . .

        1. avatar El Mac says:

          Let em.

        2. avatar Jus Bill says:

          No, not knocking on doors. Sending in SWAT to serve Bench Warrants on overdue speeding tickets that were never signed, and “Well look what we found here!”

        3. avatar Jim R says:

          You think they’ll knock?

          You’re a lot more trusting than I am.

      3. avatar Mina says:

        Have you watched the videos from the guy who took his shotgun into the capital and videoed it about 5 months ago? What’s his name. Adam Kokesh

        Watch the video since he was released from prison.

        He suffered for his marginally legal activity. Big time.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Mina,

          Re-read my post. I said 100,000+ people. Adam Kokesh’s mistake was being the only person there. It is utterly impossible for any state to arrest and prosecute 100,000 people … even if they try to do it over the course of several months after the fact using photos and video.

          And think of the pubic backlash. The state suddenly deems 100,000+ people to be felons for having “contraband” at a peaceable demonstration. I sure as hell would NOT want to be the governor who ordered the police and courts to arrest and prosecute 100,000+ peaceable people.

          Ponder on this idea for several minutes before raising any objections. I think you will be amazed at the potential.

        2. avatar Jus Bill says:

          You can go first.

        3. avatar Mina says:

          I get you and got you from the get-go.

          I still think regardless of numbers you’d experience a high level of administrative punishment.

        4. avatar Mina says:

          Having said all of that my interpretation of the situation is this:

          1 People disregard the call to register.
          2 State starts sending out minions to “force” people to give up their un-registered guns
          3 People open their doors, say “prove it” and when police start entering in order to search they start getting fired upon
          4 Revolution

          That’s my take on how it should go and how it probably will go. Unless we’re all a bunch of pansies and fail to reach step 1 or acquiesce at step 3

          Step 3 translates to the crossed line into Tyranny. Maybe it’s just me but that’s how I see it.

      4. avatar Cliff H says:

        Philosophically I am with you, but desperate politicians often do desperate and stupid things. Think National Guard (Kent State). Think Lexington and Concord (The shot heard round the world). Think, because those idiot politicians may not.

      5. avatar Cliff H says:

        Should this “civil disobedience” action become a reality I strongly recommend they either carry locked and loaded or at least bring full magazines with them. The Progressive’s reaction to such a revolutionary act could well be an overreaction.

  9. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    The entire situation in Connecticut is completely antithetical to our citizenship.

    Why in the world are any citizens beholden to government to register any personal property?

    Why in the world are any citizens beholden to government as to what personal property they may or may not own?

    When government tells people what personal property they may or may not own or that people must register their personal property, those people are not citizens, they are subjects of the ruling class.

    1. avatar Mina says:

      Tyranny.

      Which we are supposed to fight.

      They are boiling the frog. So far they are getting away with it.

  10. avatar Darkstar says:

    Asshole politicians passing stupid laws that do nothing but make themselves look like they are “doing something” to low information voters and the hand wringing crowd in the aftermath of a tragedy. But then again what else would anyone expect? That’s what politicians do.

  11. avatar El Mac says:

    By the way, does anyone else note the resemblance of that asshat in the picture, to Heinrich Himmler?

    1. avatar Billy B says:

      That was exactly who I say standing there, his uniform must still be at the tailors. Hiel Conn.

    2. avatar Thomas Paine says:

      just come down and register and sew this yellow star on your jacket.

  12. avatar A-Rod says:

    “illegal contraband” – Isn’t that redundant? Kinda like ‘general consensus’.

  13. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    Did anyone else read the comments to the article?

    “The Scottish Weasel” is completely off his/her rocker.

    1. avatar S.CROCK says:

      wow that was scary.

    2. avatar Jeff says:

      Nothing new, just another “tough guy” anti-gun persona.

      Ever meet one in person? Probably not, but if you do, just ask them if they want to be the first one through the door when their confiscation plan starts.

  14. avatar Cubby123 says:

    Now line up take all your clothes off, go to the edge of the pit. ——–Ready,Aim,Fire!

  15. avatar Delmarva Chip says:

    So, the possession of a bit of metal with a spring that is perfectly lawful on December 31 is now prohibited on January 1.

    By itself, a magazine does nothing. It doesn’t attack anyone. It doesn’t have any motives. It is simply a part of a tool, just like a detachable battery for a drill.

    So thanks, Connecticut … you’ve just transformed law-abiding citizens into criminals. Not for harming anyone. Not even for having any intent to harm anyone. But because they own a small piece of metal, and they’ve decided that they will not comply with your registration (so we can confiscate them later) scheme.

    You suck, Connecticut.

  16. avatar Greg in Allston says:

    Does anyone out there know how the CT laws and NY’s SAFE Act impacts previously legal NFA items and their owners?

    1. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

      NFA weapons in NY were already illegal before the SAFE Act. As for CT, not all NFA items are defined as “assault” weapons. Silencers, pen guns, can guns, SBRs and SBSs that do not have the cosmetic features of “assault” weapons do not have to be registered with the state, only the Feds. However, if you have an AR-15 SBR it has to be registered with both. Also, as long as your AR-15 is registered with the state, you can always SBR it with the NFA at any time.

      This brings up a great question and I think a future lawsuit. According to the new CT laws, putting a threaded barrel on ANY pistol makes it an “assault” weapon. After Jan. 1, you can no longer “make” an “assault” weapon in CT, but silencers will still be legal. How can silencers be legal, but you are not allowed to make a host weapon for it?

      1. avatar Hal J. says:

        How can silencers be legal, but you are not allowed to make a host weapon for it?

        Grenade launchers are legal, but grenades aren’t (in practical terms). Never underestimate the State’s ability to contradict itself.

        1. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

          That is because these laws are written by people who have no knowledge about the items they are trying to regulate.

  17. avatar Matt says:

    Oh good– based on that shirt and tie, it looks like he’s used to having tight things on his neck. That might make it a little easier on the guy, eventually.

    1. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      In France they used guillotines…

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        In France, to be absolutely accurate, they OVER-USED guillotines. Additionally, it was the socialist winners of the revolution that used them on the conservatives and capitalists, with great abandon.

  18. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    This makes me sick.
    Watching my country turn communist/socialist/marxist.
    This used to be the country to flee to. To get away from oppression.
    Now we, state by state, are becoming the country to flee from. Only there’s really nowhere to go.

    CT, CA, NY and… Are the last stand.

    1. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

      If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth.

      RONALD REAGAN, October 27, 1964

      1. avatar Shire-man says:

        Said the man who supported an AWB and let “uppity negros” in true white old bigot fashion scare him into banning carry in CA.

        The quote itself may hold some value but nobody seems to really believe it. Not even the man who spoke it.

        1. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

          I know. He also passed the 86 FOPA with the Hughes Amendment. I like the spirit of the quote however.

        2. avatar B says:

          Maybe we should read it ironically, and switch we, to you.

        3. avatar Jeff says:

          seriously, stop using Reagan as an example for what to do. Reagan was the beginning of the fall of the GOP, the first in a long-line of RINOs who blurred the lines between two parties. he was anti-gun and anti-freedom through and through, but he did a great job of fooling religious conservatives with his acting chops and speech writers, and was lucky enough to be in office when the USSR collapsed under its own weight – which I might add happened regardless of how much money we spent, and Reagan had little to do with it.

  19. avatar Ross says:

    To the CT gun owner, when does it become Treason? When is your line in the sand crossed?

    1. avatar Hal J. says:

      While I can’t prove it, IMHO for 99%+ of guns owners, confiscation would not be a line in the sand.

      1. avatar Rambeast says:

        This is what we call a gut-check. How far are you willing to be pushed before you have had enough? How long before you decide that it is worth losing everything to fight back. You are close with your 99% estimate. I would think around 97% will accept subjugation just to hold on to their comfort. Even with those numbers, I believe when the time comes, the statists will have one hell of a problem on their hands.

        1. avatar Hal J. says:

          Bear in mind that the Statists are smart enough not to go for the whole enchilada in one gulp. Despite calls for a ban on all firearms on leftist message boards, they’re not about to try something that actually would cause significant resistance. Today, a few states are banning “assault” weapons and we’re not seeing the least bit of violent resistance.. 10 years from now, they may ban semiautomatics. Hey, you can still have a bolt-action rifle or revolver…what’s the big deal?

          And so on.

        2. avatar Mina says:

          right. frog boiling.

        3. avatar Cliff H says:

          I seem to recall hearing that only 3% of Americans actively fought the British in the Revolutionary War.

  20. avatar Treedodger says:

    I do not live in CT, but we need to stand financially with them in their fight, just as many did with CO. This has potential to spread and affect us all unless it is stopped.

    http://ccdl.us/blog/2013/05/24/litigation-fund/

  21. avatar Scorpion says:

    Mike Lawlor is a political hack trying to sound like a big swingin’ dick. Of course, he doesn’t say what will happen to you if you don’t register your firearm. No, that would require him to have guts and the courage of his convictions, both of which are lacking in the anti-rights faction.

  22. avatar Davis Thompson says:

    Hard to believe someone’s got it worse than New York.

  23. avatar Bryan says:

    I had a boating accident.
    All my stuff was lost overboard.
    No I didn’t have a GPS.
    You are welcome to look around.
    When you come back with a warrant !
    Meanwhile get off my property.

    1. avatar Hal J. says:

      I had a boating accident.
      All my stuff was lost overboard.

      Since these were (presumably) registered weapons, you must have reported this “loss” within a few days, as required by law, yes?

      No? Oh, dear. I’m afraid I am going to have to search your house, since I now have probable cause. Bob, cover him. I suggest you don’t make any sudden moves, sir…

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        If only you had turned your iron in at the last anonymous buy back like I did…

  24. avatar WI Patriot says:

    Not as clear as “From my cold dead hands” is…

  25. avatar Justin_GA says:

    A handful of a$$h0les dictating what I can and can not have…..Fukk that! I’d rather be a criminal then bow before any man.

  26. avatar DBM says:

    I see stupid people running Connecticut. They walk and talk and don’t even know they’re stupid

  27. avatar Excedrine says:

    This is why you never register your guns. Period. Regardless of what any so-called “law” says.

  28. avatar Ing says:

    Yes, please. We need more of this from our government. Finally someone’s legislature, somewhere, is doing its job!

    So glad that someone finally had the guts to step up and take care of people like the helpless children we all are. If only my state cared as much about me…I’d go buy a high-capacity spring-loaded box just for the privilege of registering it. I wonder if it would be more cost-effective to move to Connecticut or just wait for the Northwest’s benevolent progs to achieve their own victory? Decisions, decision…

  29. avatar niceguns says:

    Hey people of New England, please don’t move to any other state south of the Mason Dixon. You phucked up your states now live with it.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Contrarywise, if you were NOT one of the people who fvcked up your state, PLEASE get out as soon as you can! Do some research and move to a state where you CAN make a difference. Other states that are suffering from Liberal rot from New York, Colorado, California, etc., could use your pro-gun vote!

  30. avatar Sammy says:

    An absolutely bone chilling statement.

  31. avatar William Burke says:

    Ach. I wouldn’t leave that guy alone with anything remotely mine for 30 seconds. Including my grandson.

  32. avatar Bova says:

    Suppose someone had an 80% lower they built. How would they even be able to register that? If it has no serial number, what are you going to do…just say he had a “scary looking rifle”? That brings me to my next thought. If someone has several 80 percent lowers that they used, how would they deal with multiples? Obviously, the person would be dumb for registering them, but if they were only half smart, wouldn’t the best option be to make a few out of 80% lowers, then if they come and take one of them, you still have a whole slew of them left?

  33. avatar Joethecuckleburr says:

    Most of the ideas in your comments are obsolete. Can’t you see that war has been declared against you? There is no law. The war declared on the people by the bankster, political, bureaucratic, military/security class is neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm. At the present time you are still fairly comfortable. Your oppressors are more desperate than you. Who is more actively preparing for civil war, You or them? They see that the collapse of the dollar is a done deal and they know that the world reserve currency/petro-dollar is the catalyst that will keep them in power unless they can utterly and completely subjugate us before the collapse. Kris Kristopherson (?) may have called it with, “Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose”. Timing is everything and THEY know it. Let’s just hope that when the time arrives that we have nothing left to lose that we still have the means to resist.

  34. avatar BobS says:

    How do you “register” something that has no serial number, like a magazine?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email