Gun owners wait in line to register "assault rifles" and "high capacity magazines" ahead of Connecticut's deadline (courtesy wfsb.com)

“There are only five more days until the new gun laws go into effect for our state, that means a dash to register assault weapons or high capacity magazines,” wfsb.com reports. “A long line of people stood outside of the Public Safety Building in Middletown all day Thursday to register firearms. Specifically, anything the state considers an assault weapon or a high capacity magazine must be registered before Jan. 1, 2014. ‘If they were trying to make them illegal, I’d have a real issue, but if they want to just know where they are, that’s fine with me,’ said Charles Gillette, who was registering magazines. ‘I understand why they’re doing it, but I don’t think it’s constitutional,’ said Scott Boccio, who was registering guns.” Registration > confiscation > tyranny. It’s that simple people. It’s that simple.

Recommended For You

93 Responses to CT Gun Owners Stand in Line to Register “Assault Rifles” and “High Capacity Magazines” Ahead of Deadline

  1. “…but if they want to just know where they are, that’s fine with me,’ Yeah, well, that’s not fine with me. The day may never come and goodness knows I hope it doesn’t, but there is a chance the day will come when the local military is ordered to come and confiscate your weapons. Then your computers, phones, and probably your books as well if you still have any. You’ll get a bar code tattooed on your body somewhere and you will only be allowed to go certain places, buy certain things and even talk to certain people thanks to the omnipresent scanners that will be monitoring our every move.

    Step in line!

  2. What is the purported point of this? How does the cops knowing who has an AR reduce crime or keep criminals from shooting people?

    Stupid and onerous.

    • The only explanation I can think of is if someone is, for example, judged mentally incompetent, the police can know if they have an “assault weapon” registered to them.

    • That’s not the point of registration. Safety never is. The point is to make confiscation easier when they pass the next law making them illegal. Matter of time in a place like CT.

  3. + 1 Tommy. Now they know what you have and where you live. What’s next? They kick the door in and demand you turn over all your registrations? This is just the first step.

    • Or a registered gun is stolen, is reported stolen, criminal kills with said stolen gun, government morons don’t put 2 and 2 together and no-knock swat the former owner, either killing the swat victim or the swat victim unknowingly kills the first cop thru the door.

    • When that happens I hope the police and/or media will post
      his address so we can all show up and shout “We told you so”.

    • If they come, you have to shoot them dead, or die trying. Is no one going to life a finger, even the middle one, to tyranny? WHO OPPOSES? WHO STANDS AND OPPOSES??

  4. Sound like you have to burn a vacation day to boot.

    “If they just want to know where they are, it’s fine with me.” Spoken like a loyal slave.

    • “Its Fine with Me” if that Idiot thinks its Fine than he deserves to Live in that Marxist Utopia..What is wrong with these Lemmings? They will have No Problem Rounding up the Guns when the Mood Strikes them or there is another Sandy Hoax!!!! Grow some Buddy!!

  5. As someone who has lived through this in New Zealand and Australia I’m just going to have to beat that horse…………. If you comply you will loose your firearms at some stage, it might not be when we have the next mass shooting it may not even happen in the next 10 years but it will happen. If I lived in CT I would walk away from everything and move to America.

    • When did they confiscate guns in New Zealand? From what I’ve read New Zealand has some of the better sets of gun laws outside of the US, even if I find a lack of concealed carry appalling.

      • They changed the licensing categories A (Rifles & Shotguns), B (Handguns), C (Collectors, i.e. machine guns, but it’s illegal to shoot them but one can own) , D (Dealer, FFL), F (what would have been an assault weapon under the now expired US ban), magazine capacity is limited to 7 rounds I believe, .22 is 10 rounds for all semi-auto converted firearms (from a F to a A). The firearms license is for 10 years and they used retired police to go to every gun owner to interview them to assess their suitability, one of the questions we all got asked was: “would you use a firearm for self-defense? saying Yes was NOT the correct answer. They changed the licenses, cost and owners had to get all “F” class firearms into compliance or surrender them, ($200.00 license fee + safe, and alarms etc in ones home all had to be approved for F licenses) failure to comply, you were looking at jail time (years) and fines. Suppressors are un-regulated but self-defense is effectively outlawed, one can use no force that causes death of grievous bodily harm in defense of self on any third party.

        • Which is still far, far better than we have it in Australia. Would I like to compete in IPSC rifle (no range is even rated for this comp in NSW)? Yes I would. Would I like to shoot Service rifle and have the choice to use an AR/SLR instead of Enfields and Mausers (much as I love them)? Yes I would.

          NZ has a multitude of more sensible laws, and their police force does not intrinsically detest the idea of civilian firearms ownership either, unlike here.

          But then we will always be ‘convicts’ to those in authority (‘wardens’)

        • Ross,

          New Zealand’s gun laws sucked even before 1983. From 1921 to 1983, all semi-auto handguns were banned. And all rifles and shotguns were registered. They used to allow revolvers for self defense but those licenses were revoked in 1974.

          I don’t think registration alone will lead to confiscation. It seems that lack of interest in guns will lead to confiscation (the opposite is happening in America). Even before 1996, Australia had a low rate of gun ownership. Same for New Zealand.

          It’s sad though, people in New Zealand couldn’t own a 1911 until 1983.

      • Look up KiwiTed on youtube. His collection is amazing. He also goes over the gun laws in the country in some of his videos.

  6. Anyone know Vegas odds on how many people will either not register their guns or move to Connecticut and not register?

    This law also makes otherwise law abiding citizens criminals. How many people know you can no longer transfer “assault weapons” even with background checks in that state?

    Also, how do you register a magazine? It has no serial number.

  7. Someday these poor dumb bastards will be looking for the line to un-register. Too late @$$#013$. You’re almost better off not having a gun at all than having one that’s registered. Big mistake.

  8. There comes a time for civil disobedience. That time is now for the residents of that state. Seriously. No way I’d comply.

    • First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out – For I was not a Socialist.

      Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out – For I was not a Trade Unionist.

      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – For I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for me – And there was no one left to speak out.

      If you cut your losses and run every time a state starts to turn down this road, you’re only going to lose allies. Moving isn’t as simple as throwing a duffle bag in the back of your Jeep and rolling down the line to the next beach. ALL people need to be protected against this tyranny, regardless of who they are or where they live.

      Otherwise, the list of these blacklisted states will slowly grow and grow until yours is either consumed by it, in which case you’ll be PRAYING nobody follows your advice, or yours will be the only one left.

      • Well said and I would add that moving out is what gun-grabbing politicians would like you to do. That way they don’t have to worry about which way you will vote.

  9. If you bought your guns retail in CT (or NY or PA, probably), they are ALREADY registered with the state plus your town. So if you ignore the diktat to re-register (or double register, or super register) your assalty weapons, and the DPS has someone who is competent at using a database, they will eventually come after you, take your assalty guns and then bar you from owning any guns in the future. If you’re lucky.

    • Competent and government rarely go together. Although, I’m thinking a lot of guys are taking the guns ice fishing so that safe may just fall through.

    • That’s what I was thinking – gun owners are registering the ones that the state and cops already know they own. I will bet that any eeevil gun (and a few “forgotten” magazines) bought from a private seller will NOT end up registered. Same thing happened in the People’s Republic of California in 1991, when they passed their AWB. The PRCa Atty Gen estimated there were 300,000 “assault weapons” that would be registered. I believe they ended up with 10% of that number.

      Hey, can you say “plastic pipe and desiccant”, boys and girls?

  10. Heres what I don’t get, people say the fedgov would never confiscate, but we know, for 100% certainty they want to. Why is it so hard to believe they wouldnt do it? 30 years ago we would have said no way the govt could never just spy on everyone, now its pretty much the norm.
    Now lets be reasonable here…
    The govt does federal registration, however long down the road they confiscate, which we KNOW they want to. Okay, now the majority of the country is disarmed, minus criminals and now defacto criminals.
    Will tyranny come tomorrow? Probably not, but IF later down the road, whether its 10, 20 or 100 years from now, the govt goes there, theres literally nothing stopping it.
    Our forefathers werent retarded, they knew this, hence the 2nd A.
    Why is this so hard for people to ubderstand?
    Why do people think because its the millenium and this is America, tyranny can not under any circumstances befall us?
    Do these people really think all the countries in the past that have fallen prey to tyranny knew beforehand and were just like “oh well thats just how our country is”
    Its absolutely ridiculous to believe that

    • A well reasoned question and plea rawmade.

      In attempting to answer your question; tyranny is already here, now it’s a matter of degree of repression/oppression. We slide down the slippery slope a little further every legislative session and find our rights abrogated incrementally rather than suddenly and completely.
      Certainly some portion of this piecemeal approach to tyranny is political in nature as there are opposing forces at work, however some portion must also be because of the potential for armed insurrection by the people. The latter is at least why attempts at justifications are made when rights are being infringed.

      As for full on and unveiled tyranny by the government in the United States I’d consider it a real possibility, though the path we walk isn’t one way and the statist elements in society and the government occasionally see serious setbacks to their goals in the form of victories for liberty. I watch for the critical mass to be achieved that would result in an abandonment of pretense and a wholesale grab for despotic power to take place. I used to watch for ‘trip wires’ as defined by Jefferson and others but long ago learned that there were few who would fight at the crossing of these.
      I don’t believe we’re beyond the point at which our grievances can no longer be redressed from within. I’m even hopeful that the 2014 mid-term elections may result in a re-composition of the U.S. Senate that could be quite favorable to those of us who are freedom minded.
      Still yet the path will be long and require constant vigilance, but it may be that crisis can be averted and the rights of the people and the limitations on government that the founders intended will be restored.
      To the freedom loving people of Connecticut: I urge you to value liberty over familiarity and prosperity and flea at once to a free state in which your natural rights are recognized and immediately engage yourselves upon arrival in ensuring that your new home does not fall under tyranny as your old one has.
      As one who loves freedom but is also saddened and frightened at the prospect of the necessity of armed resistance to tyranny when it was unnecessary I remain greatly concerned that places such as New York, California and Connecticut will eventually serve as flashpoints in a conflagration that could and likely would instantly spread beyond resistance to unconstitutional and tyrannical state laws into a general uprising against the union itself.
      I have no answers and little relief other than to recommend a hasty retrograde to a state where liberty is yet safe.

  11. ‘If they were trying to make them illegal, I’d have a real issue, but if they want to just know where they are, that’s fine with me,’ said Charles Gillette, who was registering magazines.

    So, how do your master’s boots taste, Charles? Like freedom?

  12. When I was younger, I lamented living in an “unenlightened” state. Now I couldn’t be happier to live in a place that still respects freedom, if you don’t count the whole gays can’t marry law still on the books.

      • Look, I’m sorry you got beat up by some gay wedding in your past, but it’s really going to be okay. No one is going to make you gay marry a pedophile horse if we allow two people who love each other and happen to have the same pee pees also get married.

        • The redefinition of marriage is actually what the “marriage equality” movement is about. I’m glad to finally see someone actually acknowledge this fact. You may believe there is a right to redefine marriage to include same sex unions, but it’s just plain dishonest to ignore the fact that this is what it’s all about.

          Remember, Rock Hudson was gay and exercised his right to get married. It is a right that has been available to gay people all along.

          If you do not like it when grabbers use dishonest debate tactics when it comes to guns, don’t use dishonest debate tactics on other subjects.

      • uh, as long as marriage is a government institution and not a purely religious one, the citizens sure as hell DO have a right to define or redefine it as they will.

        Now, your particular church need not recognize a gay marriage, that’s their freedom of religion. But you don’t get to impose that religious belief via the government.

        • “But you don’t get to impose that religious belief via the government”

          But the government in NJ gets to impose on churches forcing them to perform gay marriages against their will.

          You can’t have it both ways and call it equal rights.

          It’s either gay marriage or religious freedom, you can’t have both.

  13. what’s the over under on how long it takes a bill to be introduced that would require confiscation of said now registered weapons and magazines? I give it 2-4 years tops.

    • If they keep voting in these liberals, this “assault rifle and high capacity” registration will absolutely turn into “assault rifle and high capacity” confiscation within a couple years

  14. I spent the day in southern Idaho, chasing coyotes. Then came home and read this. I’m seriously starting to think the the western states aren’t only in another country than the coasts, but maybe on a different PLANET.
    And to think, CT was once the cradle of gun manufacturing and innovation. Seriously, this is the time to start burying those weapons, not registering. And you know how the saying goes about the time to bury weapons….

  15. Connecticut has been anti-gun for a long time. The only reason they issue carry licenses is because of a judicial ruling in 1969. They still play some games with people; however, Connecticut Carry has been on them like a bull.

    I think many people were surprised because they didn’t realize how anti-gun CT really is because they are “shall-issue” more so than states like Michigan or parts of Pennsylvania that are “shall-issue if we really have to”.

    They have tough times ahead and the 2nd circuit most likely won’t declare any of this post Newtown crap unconstitutional.

  16. Not helpful to talk about violence… at ALL. Peaceful, open but inflexible civil disobedience is what I wish we’d seen here. Someone needs to stand up before this nonsense spreads.

    • When the talk refers to the very real possibility/current fact of government violence enacted on innocent people it certainly merits discussion. Please note that despite all the apparently disturbed aggressive trigger happy gun owners out there and the less than kind sentiments expressed here and elsewhere it is NOT these people that are responsible for street crime organized crime mass shootings and noknock raids.

      • in other words…
        if gun owners were 1/10th as violent as antis think we are, these situations would already be resolved and in our favor.
        we don’t want to use our firearms in active defense of freedom. gun owners truly abhore violence in all its forms. we just recognize that the distasteful task may some day have to be done… and we prepare.

        • [QUOTE] If gun owners were 1/10th as violent as antis think we are, these situations would already be resolved and in our favor.[UNQUOTE]

          THIS. ^^^^^^^ If the first 10 cops who walked up to someone’s door to confiscate a gun registered to that address were shot with it, that stuff would come to a screeching halt.

  17. Why would the government “just want to know where they are?” .Everything happens for a reason and sometimes that reason is because you are stupid.

  18. I would like to point out that unless they asked every person in that line what they were there for, the line was not as long as they would like to believe. The same facility is used for new permits and to renew permits and there is only two lines with only 1 maybe 2 people working the lines so it is easy to make the line look bigger than it actually happens to be. What the state will find is like NY, NJ, CA and IL and other states where this has been documented, far fewer people will comply than they would like

  19. Toronto, Ontario circa 2009. Mayor Miller is the present mayor. He passes bylaws that ban anything gun related on city property, which closes a range that was located in Union train station for decades with no problems. Few people even knew it was there. No new permits for business would be issued. I believe, but not 100% sure, that current permits were not allowed to be renewed and those companies had to relocate outside city limits. This was done for “public safety”. We had a Long Gun Registry for non restricted rifles and shotguns, since abolished April 2012, but were “promised” that the registries would not be used for confiscation. September 2009 Mayor Miller ordered his police services to go through the list’s and find persons who’s license had expired, ( a lot of renewal notices were not sent ) then went in heavy to confiscate fire arms from over 400 people. He then said the next day the streets of Toronto were safer. To the citizens of CT wait a couple of years. They will make your “assault rifles and high capacity magazines” illegal and with the list you are helping them create, they WILL come and confiscate them from you. The anti’s up here have been slowly confiscating our guns up here. A piece here, then a piece there.

  20. Well, it still doesn’t look like they’re registering 6″ PVC pipe, caps, desi-pacs, and shovels, so I’d be good.

    • Same thing happened here Matt…there were some in Aust who buried their semi auto rifles back in 1996. Trouble is, where could you shoot them? Not at any range. Not on your own property if anyone would have the slightest chance of seeing/hearing you and being suspicious about the rate of fire. Same thing goes for the anything over .38 & 10rnd capacity mags handgun ban in 2003 – but more so since you may only shoot pistols at certified ranges. No private property shooting allowed.

      Also now every single firearm & owner is registered and documented to a degree you probably cannot imagine. And the police have the right to enter your home at an agreed time and check not only your safe storage meets regulations, but that all the reams of paperwork you possess in order to be allowed to own guns is present and correct.

      • Yeah, I admit I haven’t put a lot of thought into this, but with the recent spate of clearly beyond-the-pale restrictions like this, and the fact that the tide is largely turning in our direction, I could see storing my stuff away for when sanity again prevailed and it was legal to own them again, or alternately, storing them away until it was feasible for me to move to a more gun-friendly climate. Neither of those would be reasonably likely scenarios when the crackdown and gun confiscation was nationwide, like it was for you guys. Keep in mind that the measures talked about in this post apply only to Connecticut, which is just a couple hours or a couple hundred miles from areas without these restrictions.

        • Yes, you’ve got far more gun-friendly States to relocate to that’s true. Another big plus on your side nationally is culture-based – America was a revolutionary society where gun ownership would not have only been tolerated by embraced by the majority as a necessity. To my knowledge the first gun control measures were enacted here in 1790 – 2 years after white settlement. And would any Govt be happy about a large pool of ex-convicts (or even free settlers) having easy access to firearms? We can never be like America, or even NZ which has far better laws…the way in which a society evolves has much to do with it, IMO.

          And even taking into account vast population differences (Aust 23mil total) only 5% of the ADULT population are licensed gun owners where I read somewhere that possibly there are 45% of US households which possess firearms. Massive difference, and voting block. Here we are so miniscule in number, politicians don’t have to care (and gain more votes from the masses by being anti-gun)

  21. I am amazed at the guy who thinks they aren’t trying to ban them. They ARE banning the them, just the further sale of them, and the ones people already own must be registered.

  22. You have to register your car, so the govt knows about it, whats the difference between one piece of metal and another? Too many paranoid people. 2nd amendment is not a wide open anything goes declaration, the courts have proven.

Leave a Reply

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