Reader John writes…

TTAG’s post, Connecticut: The Coming Storm was the last straw for me. Many have been discussing the general theme of confiscation for a while, and while I believe that is a good thing (the discussion, that is), I believe too many are far behind the curve. The hypothetical/fictional scenario illustrated in that piece is certainly possible, and even likely; but it is behind the curve in terms of the tactics that are likely to be used . . .

I liken this to the argument that antis make (made?) that no one is coming for our guns. Before Newtown, I never really heard anyone arguing that someone was actually coming for our firearms. Then again, I never really heard anyone clearly communicate that there are definitely some trying to limit and prohibit our ability to acquire new ones and limit what we may choose from (and that there’s nothing wrong with obtaining and having our choice of guns). That would be an argument ahead of the rhetorical curve. Retorting, “yes, they are coming for them!” (although valid) is an argument behind the curve.

As for door-to-door (D2D) confiscation, how single-minded we become once we’re on the defensive. I’ve heard a quote that goes something like, “history does not repeat itself, but it sure rhymes”. While D2D confiscation is a very real threat and a historical reality, does anyone really believe that law enforcement won’t make plans to their best advantage?

D2D confiscation won’t be law enforcement’s primary modus operandi. For one thing, it does nothing for the operational security of that mission to publicize such a predictable maneuver. Once started, D2D confiscation will be by definition a very predictable, public event. In my humble opinion, far more likely and tactically sound methods of persecuting/prosecuting people in violation of Connecticut’s anti-gun law will go down more like this:

Law enforcement obtains a bogus non-firearms related warrant, or “mistakenly” executes such a warrant on the wrong person/dwelling, a la Jose Guerena. Simple enough. This will be reported publicly as a drug warrant. Any weapons recovered would be a bonus. And since the weapons in question are now illegal to own, they cannot be returned. No outrage. After decades of the “war on drugs” this is commonplace. A few DEA agents could throw off the suspect’s suspicions about the weapons violation rendering him relatively docile.

Here’s another hybrid approach. Police will obtain a warrant – bogus or legitimate – on a suspect. They will stake out his dwelling until they are ready to execute. On the day of the execution they will wait until the suspect leaves in an automobile, trail him until he crosses over a yellow line or fails to use a turn signal and then pull him over. They will take him into custody and let the warrant squad know that they’re clear to conduct the raid. They’ll trash the dwelling, harass and possibly batter any occupants present. At this point they will either get what they came for, or they won’t. The point being, that the primary individual that might provide resistance won’t be at the scene when it all goes down.

This kind of scenario avoids the possibility of thousands of Ruby Ridge-like events. Then again, the police may not even bother with real estate. They’ll go after all suspects when they’re alone in their automobiles in traffic, unsuspecting and totally unprepared to do anything about it. Law enforcement literally makes their living on the streets. It’s their turf and they have home field advantage.

I could go on about possible variations and scenarios. Heck, LEOs might just set up shop at gun stores and shooting ranges and let the violators come to them in some sort of twisted checkpoint, as outlandish as that may sound. The point, though, is that the scenarios I offered are ahead of the curve in terms of the usual door-to-door tactics most people envision. I don’t want there to be any bloodshed, but those in this very real situation (and every other freedom-oriented individual following these events) ought to be aware that D2D is outdated.

86 Responses to Connecticut Confiscation: It Won’t Be Door-to-Door

  1. Guess you missed what happened in NOLA after Hurricane Katrina. The NOLA cops didnt even have a nifty new state law to validate the seizures.

      • I may be behind the curve here; but if you have received letter threatening confiscation of your guns and mags, aren’t your guns and mags kind of registered by default? They know who you are, that you have guns & mags, and where you live. Sounds kinda “registered” to me.

    • Also, in NOLO, the gun confiscations had been going on for a LONG TIME. For years before, if the cops caught you with a gun, even with a carry permit, you had to prove that you lawfully owned the gun – they wanted a receipt or something of that nature. Well, most people didn’t carry those – so their guns were taken. The more blatant confiscations during Katrina got a judge to put the kibosh on NOLO’s previous practices and required the return of the stolen guns – has that happened? No, but the confiscations have stopped, apparently.

    • I think you’re missing the point. Unless you’re in extraordinary conditions like Katrina, don’t expect that to be how it goes down.

  2. You make an excellent point and the main takeaway should be this: How will the Police know who get to warrant against?

    Snitches, that’s how. For a monetary incentive or even just a pat on the back, people will rat you out. They want to pit neighbor against neighbor and will even try to dupe or pressure family members and friends. That is how it will go down over the long term.

    • Once upon a time, in countries across the big water, they encouraged children to report their parents for things. Doing things, saying things, owning things that the state frowned upon.

      How’s this for a scenario?

      Elementary school holds a safety assembly. Talk about “dangerous” things in the home. The trooper giving the talk asks the kids to raise their hands if their parents own any guns.

      Those kids are taken aside afterwards. “So Johnny, what kind of gun does your dad own?” “Oh really? That’s neat. Run along to class now.” Meanwhile a walk down to the office produces the home address and Dad’s work address from the emergency contact card.

      Yee-haw!

  3. Once confiscation begins. . . people will have real standing to challenge the law in court. despite the current environement, there has to be one judge with a pair of balls to stand up for the constitution.

    • Heller seems to have focused the 2nd Amendment discussion towards the right to personal self-defense, and what judge is going to say that legislature shouldn’t have any say at all in what tools one could and couldn’t use for such a mundane activity. And as for finding a judge who will say loud and clear that the 2nd Amendment is also about protecting us from tyranny, it seems like a pretty long shot at the moment. But then, even the Heller decision would have been impossible 20 years ago, so perhaps one should never give up hope. Too bad I don’t have any left.

      • Perhaps the founders didn’t intend for the Amendments to be defended by the SCOTUS (since the SCOTUS was barely a gleam in their eyes and didn’t become an equal branch of government until later), perhaps they intended for the Amendments to give us the backbone to confront the tyranny when it arose…

        • In 1803, the Supreme Court created a fictional power for itself through Marbury v. Madison. Wisely, the Court kept it close to the vest for a very long time. Judicial Review is, arguably, not a constitutionally enumerated privilege for the Court. http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html

          Regardless, enough rulings by the Supreme Court have clearly demonstrated that Judicial Review is used by government to violate the Constitution. Therefore, I contend that Judicial Review is unconstitutional either way.

        • “Constitution is a legal document, not an inspirational essay.”

          And yet it has managed to inspire so many here and elsewhere….

        • Certainly, who can argue with that, but it is also a legal document that the courts are supposed to adhere to in protecting our freedoms. And they do to some extent, but not enough. Not nearly enough.

  4. Warrants?
    Pshaw!
    They don’t need warrants.
    All they need to do is suspend the drivers/business/professional (medical, legal) and other licenses of gun owners. Or levy fines or liens on their tax returns or real estate.
    When you can’t pay the rent/mortgage or water/grocery bill, you will be come a very compliant little ewe….

    • Bingo! Why confiscate your firearms directly, when putting the screws somewhere else will accomplish the same result?

      Before too long, you will be required to sign a federal affidavit, under threat of perjury, affirming that you do not possess any prohibited firearms. Firearms will be defined as a “public health hazard” and will fall squarely within the jurisdiction of HHS (authorized as ” community preventive medicine” under the Affordable Care Act). There will be NO door-to-door confiscations. Rather, it will be like vaccinations and public school enrollment: you must provide proof of vaccination as a pre-requisite of enrollment. Same thing: if there isn’t a signed affidavit in your electronic health record, neither you NOR YOUR FAMILY will be eligible to receive medical services from any facility receiving federal funds (all of them, since even the smallest clinic receives some MedicAid or MediCare patients). The USSC will rule that it does not violate the 2A because it “advances a critical governmental interest”.

      The ACA was the last nail in the coffin of 2A rights in America. Why do you think they were so desperate to pass it? Why do you think so many D’s went down with this ship in 2010? Why do you think so many D’s are willing to go down with this ship even now? Because it is the gateway to full control of individual choices down to the most minute level, including firearms ownership.

      • Long before such a scenario would come to fruition, the 2014 version of Concord will have happened.

        You have no idea how many armed people are pissed about this.

      • If you think guns are some magic thing the Dems are eager to control for some fantasy totalitarian state, I have some news for you.

        They get better control from handing out freebies.

        Certainly, a number of them want to take guns. But the games overlap, they are not all part of one big conspiracy.

        And, most of it is a combination of believing most people are too stupid to take care of themselves (And they’re right), and that people are easier to control if you have pull over them.

        Remember, though, that CT law doesn’t apply in any other state, and you can’t accuse SCOTUS of any kind of complicity until and unless they rule this is valid. Especially given Heller and McDonald.

        Every group in power has its own agenda. There isn’t some overarching mystical plan. And if there was, there’s nothing you could do about it.

    • To: “Kommiefornia” — I think your “wargaming” hits the nail on the head. That’s definitely a way they could slowly and effectively “attack” CT citizens refusing to register. I would say in that situation, CT citizens would really need to pool their money and legal resources together and fight back as a cohesive unit. If it were physical battle then citizens would need to group together as a fighting unit. If it’s political or legal the principles remain the same.

  5. I too am skeptical of the Door-to-Door Raid approach. I think they will come to your place of business/work with an arrest warrant and cart you away in front of all your co-workers. Then, they will execute a search warrant on your residence, but not with SWAT, since you, the gun owner aren’t there to resist. If they find what they are looking for, felony charges. If they don’t they make up charges or just drop the whole thing. You can sue, but it will take years to litigate.

  6. You’re right. IF everyone involved in the confiscation is being smart. And wars are usually started by someone NOT being smart. Look at Waco. There were so many mistakes made there if the goal was to accomplish a simple, safe, takedown.
    Problem is, ego and authority come into play. The CT Gov may just want to set an example – they may WANT the D2D raids, risk and all, to demonstrate the folly of resisting the total authority of their government. They may consider a half dozen dead LEOs highly acceptable collateral damage – and a trump card for securing LE cooperation. The boys in blue don’t like it when their brothers get shot.
    Same thing happened it Tienanmen Square.
    Many individuals in the army sided with the protesters – the command to put down the protest would be disobeyed by many. So, high command sent an APC through the mob. The mob, through sheer force of numbers, stopped the APC, pulled the occupants out, and beat them to death. The rest of the army, watching from a distance, was horrified and was then ready for the crippling, murderous beat-down that followed. The Chinese military leaders understood that they needed the sacrifice of the guy in the APC – so they made a really dumb move at the tactical level to advance their strategic goals. The APC was a gambit – the mob should have let it pass.

    The leaders in CT are playing a dangerous game – we can’t assume they will make the sanest moves or that we understand their motives fully. History shows that tyrants often make bad choices (Lexington and Concord, anyone?). I hope gun owners are studying strategy and tactics – we need wisdom here.

    • “Look at Waco.”

      Indeed. It would be prudent to note that government actors were killed at Waco.

      It would be equally prudent to acknowledge that many, many more would be killed in Connecticut, and that’s just at the first such skirmishes. The ensuing targeting of the people responsible would change the equation significantly.

      I doubt that Connecticut is THAT stupid, but if it is, then so be it.

  7. I think it will probably be done with a huge show of force like the Boston lock down. They want gun owners to shoot at the police. It gives the government a reason to declare martial law and expand the confiscation.

    • “We came to get these paranoid nutjobs with guns and APCs, and they shot at us. Look how unreasonable they are.”

      Lefticle news watcher: “This wouldn’t happen if they weren’t racist teabagger Limbaugh Faux News McDonald’s munching fat stupid Christian gay haters with guns.”

      • And, I can already just about hear some gun owners and the “I support the 2A but…” crowd (ISt2aB) disavowing those brave Americans with saying like, “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”

  8. The execution of any warrant, whether under the pretense of outright confiscation, or a fictional drug distribution/possession would be executed by a LSHD swat team. Again they know there are most likely “assault weapons” in the home so they would be going in with their predictable tactics.

    In the event that they go with the wait till you leave and pull you over scenario, you are still entitled to due process, which means you will be notifying your attorney, who presumably will go public with the trumped charge and confiscation.

    So in any of your fictional scenarios, it will be public knowledge within 24-48 hours that confiscations have begun. Then the shooting starts.

    Regardless of how CT tries to play this, they wont and cant keep it under wraps.

    • I think the whole idea of using warrants is so that there is no clear demarcation of “when the confiscation has begun.”

      Do you really believe that people are just going to “start shooting” when they hear that someone else had their guns taken by police serving a warrant? I don’t think so…

      • And that ruse lasts for how long? It cant unless all manner of due process is suspended.

        So they get a drug related warrant, raid my home, find no drugs but seize my guns. What evidence did they have for the warrant in the first place?

        Warrant obtained under false pretense? Gun evidence is inadmissible in the court, you walk. Or if you don’t walk, it’s going to a jury. Plenty of time for it all to go public.

        So why would you wait to take you chances on an obviously rigged justice system? Once the rule of law, and due process is suspended its all the more reason to start shooting.

        • I tend to agree. How many bogus “drug” stings can they execute before the scheme becomes obvious? A few dozen, maybe? We’re talking about thousands of CT gun owners here. These tactics (which are still pretty much the same thing as door-to-door, anyway, just with a little added smokescreen) won’t scale up to the task ahead of the CT government.

        • Well you guys above are right that a person might eventually “walk” from the legal charges. However, once you’re incarcerated and brought before a court, your life is altered in meaningful ways. You’ll have the following expenses up front: –bail; –attorney fees; –court fees; –clerk of court filing fees; –loss of work expenses; –loss of job expenses; –any jail time served is lost time; –any fines, public service, or prison time served for anything a jury does convict; and if you appeal then begin the fees all over again.

          As for citizens getting the “shooting started” after first confiscations. If the People are singled out individually, I agree most by their nature will simply hope they can “weather the storm” and not be the next targeted. Now we’re getting down to the root of the entire topic. People have to go beyond their natural inclinations and show resolve. People have to get up, be uncomfortable, speak with & join their neighbors and go out and change the situation. Basically, People will have to do their duty, even though it’s hard, unpopular, and makes you feel like your an “extremist”. Remember, the State & Police are the ones so extreme and willing to barge into your home with firearms just to take away your rifle which you have a right to possess. I do Not advocate violence as first recourse, but if there’s no other choice left, and tyrants are about to enslave you or create conditions where your children will be enslaved, then something must be done. I think one of our forefathers said it best, and if you really ponder it, this is really what it all comes down to:

          “Young man, what we meant in going for those Redcoats was this: we always had governed ourselves and we always meant to. They didn’t mean we should.”
          – (Capt. Levi Preston, Danvers Militia, at age 91 remembering Lexington & Concord)

      • Do you really believe that people are just going to “start shooting” when they hear that someone else had their guns taken by police serving a warrant? I don’t think so…

        Probably not with the first report. Maybe not with the 10,000th. Get to the millionth, and now we’re talking “real confiscation”. That still leaves 99 million gun owners who, after a million other warrants/confiscations, might think about getting nervous.

        • Most people wont even 99% wont but a small percentage will start shooting then the AuthoritAAAYS will start shooting first etc…. it’s always how bad things get worse…

      • I am fairly certain that’s exactly when the shooting starts. Any type of 2A raid there, even if they play it smart and pick them up on the street then wreck their house, is the starter pistol for this. Word will get out, videos will be posted. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if a ton of people from other states drive up there to help. People are pissed and tired of being pissed on.

  9. This makes more sense. I can see this happening years before D2D rears it’s head. It doesn’t cost more money to the state, and nobody has to get hurt.
    So….any CT residents need someone to hold their guns out of state??? I volunteer!

  10. You guys are leaving out the obvious fifth column, to wit, the media. They are just as complicit in this crime as the politicians are, and should be punished just as severely, as well.

    Tom

  11. I think “John” is correct. The State of CT is not going to expend resources “hunting down” the estimated over 100,000 persons who did not comply with the Law. I never recognized that “D2D” is a “behind the curve” concept, but his argument makes good sense. I still think those who sent applications “late” should probably be nervous…maybe real nervous. We still do not know how much CT actually knows about those who simply did not comply with the “registration” requirement, but they are essentially “stuck” with firearms and magazines they cannot really take to a public shooting range or area without risk of arrest. Firearms or magazines condemned to sit in a storage area forever are as useless as ones “confiscated” by the State, with the only benefit being the owner is not arrested, prosecuted, imprisoned, fined….et cetera.
    I think it is still imperative that Arms Owners push for and contribute financial resources to Pro Second Amendment Organizations to continue Appeals or file new Lawsuits against this onerous CT Law. In the meantime, I sincerely hope the fewest possible citizens of CT (none at all would be my first choice) have their lives altered/ruined because of this Law.

  12. The problem is, what possible cause could you have for a warrant on regular Joe from the block? Sure, you can raid those who are suspected of engaging in illegal activities, but the state is going to have one heck of a PR nightmare when it starts raiding the local mechanic, nurse, butcher, dentist, lawyer, doctor, or grocery clerk we all know and love. Those are the people who didn’t register their ARs and magazines. That’s why there will be no raids. Malloy can cry “You Lost!” all he wants, but when he starts charging his constituents with real felonies, I don’t think they will be his constituents for long. Politicians want to retain power above all else.

    • We may love those local doctors, etc. now but simply publish a story detailing their abhorrent kiddy-porn addiction (even if completely false) and see how quickly people start saying, “you know, I always thought there was something not quite right about him…” And the media loves this sort of controversy.

  13. I want confiscations to happen, because that means that somebody will actually be able to challenge this nonsense in court and get the law changed. With any luck, they’ll actually be able to force SCOUTS into looking at this case, and then we’ll see some honest to God firearms case law progress.

    Granted, I’m being a little too optimistic, but whatever. Maybe one day we can kill the Hughes Amendment, too.

  14. All door-to-door scenarios, whether disguised as drug raids or not, are all too complex.

    Much more likely is that the guns are confiscated when used in public. Take one to a range? Watch out for off-duty cops who see it. Out in some government forest or park shooting them? Watch for rangers. (I am in CA; I don’t know how rangers and government forests and parks are organized in CT.) Pulled over for speeding and have them in your car? Too bad.

    They don’t need to actually search for the guns if they make them unusable. Go ahead and keep them for SHTF and TEOTWAWKI. That’s not the point; the point is out of sight, out of mind, and that’s accomplished by making gun owners afraid to show them in public.

    • Those who did not register their arms cannot really use them anymore, I agree.

      From that standpoint, the politicians have won. They don’t need to go get them because the firearms no longer matter – they can’t be used by otherwise law abiding citizens. If anyone is caught with a non-registered rifle or magazine, that’s just a bonus.

      • The problem for the politicians is that they pushed this through by claiming that these firearms are way too dangerous for ordinary citizens to own. Once you’ve hitched your wagon to that argument, the only course of action you’ve left for yourself is “getting them off the streets”. They’ve painted themselves into a corner with only two ways out: back down and admit they were full of shit to begin with, or start confiscating guns.

        • Maybe not. Statists are notorious for thinking that they can change things merely by passing laws, and voila! they can stop worrying about it. I suspect this particular issue is only an issue for those who are theoretically affected, ie gun owners, and that the libs and progs are confused about why anyone is concerned about such an old issue that has already been solved.

        • Ya they’re confused allright. Laws don’t prevent crime. Laws don’t deter criminals because by definition … u get the point. Most of all none of the recent gun laws would have prevented the crimes that motivated them but then truth be known the crimes were a pretext. Gun control isn’t the ends it’s a means.

      • For all practical purposes owning these unregistered arms is the same as owning an old Tommy Gun in full auto with the serial number filed off. That’s why the pols wont go after them. They KNOW that the owners are otherwise law abiding citizens. Nothing to worry about as far as they are concerned. The only ones that have to worry are the owners. And they can never use the arms again in public.

        It’s that simple.

  15. My guess is that politicians being politicians, this whole law had far more to do with politics (doing ‘something for the children’) than the notion that they were accomplishing anything toward public safety. Politicians are far more concerned with looking like they’re doing something than actually getting things done. Now that potentially hundreds of thousands of gun owners have acted in civil disobedience they would probably love to find a face saving way of making this all go away. I could see this as a law that is never actively enforced. There are already tens of thousands of laws in this country that are not actively enforced. We already have a long list of weapons that are illegal, but no one is going door to door to search for them. The politicians will likely be happy enough with the fact that these rifles are no longer for sale in the state. A few individuals will screw up and be caught with their ‘illegal’ rifles and be prosecuted (provided the courts don’t strike the law down first), but I doubt the politicians have the stomach for the full repercussions of the law they passed.

    The police on the other hand, are a little less predictable. They are insulated from the voters they ‘serve and protect’. Add to that all the shiny new hardware they carry around in the trunks of their squad cars while they hide behind billboards waiting to catch someone rolling through a stop sign, and you have the potential for some very bored officers with itchy trigger fingers. But I have a hard time seeing the order coming down from the politicians.

  16. The US postal service will be your worse enemy. Those CT residents targeted will get letters indicating tax audits, seizures of real property, inability to register your car, loss of professional licenses etc. Then Child Services will call you in and take your children. All done with the banality of beauracrats. Have a nice day…

  17. Who will be the Rosa Parks of the modern 2A movement?

    Someone will get arrested. Ok, maybe a bunch of people will get arrested for owning contraband weapons. It’s a felony, after all. Precisely how this happens will be secondary to what happens next.

    The NRA and other gun rights groups will pick someone to be Rosa Parks (Rosa was not the first person arrested for refusing to comply with Montgomery’s segregation laws, but she was the “chosen one”). Such organizations will provide the legal representation to take Rosa down the long and winding road that ends at the Supreme Court Building.

    Rosa Parks is lionized today, but she paid a heavy price for her civil disobedience. She lost her job and her husband had to quit his. They eventually had to move to another state to find work. She and her husband both suffered from ulcers and other medical problems.

    Someone will again pay a heavy price. It will only include body bags if someone decides to be stupid about it.

  18. If it were up to the LEOs they wouldn’t go after unregistered weapons and mags. They would just tack those onto additional charges. But it’s up to politicians. They are the ones that are concerned with how this looks. They will either push confiscation or back down.

  19. What this article describes sure sounds like D2D. I don’t think the reason they give for coming into your home to take your firearms changes the fact that they came into your home and took your firearms.

  20. Your statements assume that nothing changes in response to these take downs. The best defense against these take downs would quickly turn into offense by those not yet taken down. They start doing this crap and it’s 4GW baby. I hope they don’t but “I recon it’s a coming”.

  21. If I lived in CT, I would make sure my guns were well hidden. They would have to dismantle the whole house to find them. As for using dogs to locate them, I would spread trace amounts of gun powder all over the house.

  22. I think is will be D2D. Several years ago there were over 70,000 no knock raids. The STATE already knows how to do it.

    They shoot a few people or better yet, they pick weak people, catch them outside their primary residence as they walk and then take them down. After a few of these, others will generally give them up.

    They’ll just make a few examples, spread fear and confusion, done!

    This has been done before.

  23. The “How To” Manual is literally in bookstores right now – Stephen Halbrook’s “Gun Control in the Third Reich”. Warrants, regulatory intimidation, etc. that will be a big part of it, but D2D simply has to happen to a certain extent, maybe under some other ruse, but don’t think that “inspections” won’t be part of it. Once you have the laws on the books, then you have to demonize the target, then you have all manner of ways to get the guns from that school assembly trick mentioned to D2D as the last step. Next step from the Malloy’s of the world will be a “See, I told you so” campaign to demonize gun owners (another incident involving an AR-15 sure would help) as terrorists or sociopaths. Then all the tactics will be rolled out. D2D will only be for the harder cases and/or when they think they’ve got public opinion on their side. The Nazis did the regulatory stuff until an incident where a Jew (not even a German citizen) shot a German diplomat in Paris, then they ramped up the demon machine and started going D2D. It’d be as if a Canadian with an NRA T-shirt shot up a school in Ontario – American pols would use this as a pretext. So, we are in the regulatory phase until something bad happens. Let’s hope nothing bad happens (although it is probably inevitable) and we can wipe the laws off the books legally in the interim.

    Otherwise, we all move to the Separatist Republic of TexHoma. (Don’t get all over me for suggesting moving – that is what the federalist system is for, and Sun Tzu advises to fight on terrain of your choosing, not theirs. A shoot-out with a gun-grabbing constabulary is going to go better for you in Tulsa than in West Haven.)

  24. Assuming the only owners who they know about are those who mailed the registration late, the majority of owners are unknown or registered. It is hard to imagine that they would go door to door for every home in the state.

    • Silly boy. Do you really think that all the information entered into NICS is discarded? Even if it were there are still FFL log books. This little experiment in personal liberty was hosed as soon as we made the first compromise to register the first firearm. Those who want our guns are not going to give up without a fight. Since they control the courts it doesn’t take too much thought to see how far they are willing to go to win the fight. (Hint: as far as they need to.)

  25. I hope you’re wrong…I hope the cops come in guns a blazing and you see entire neighborhoods banded together to with blockades holding them off. Shots heard round the world…

    Any CT gun owner who doesn’t have their stuff hidden is making a mistake….and I mean REALLY hidden…where they could never find it…. And to falsify a warrant would be a violation of the 4th amendment…granted they are violating the 2nd so why would they respect any of the Constitution.

  26. Or you could just move out of Sh.tsville to a state that allows the Constitution to be honored. If not don’t bitch! If you want to live around liberalism that applauds this POS politician who swore to uphold the Constitution then pees all over it, you need to get out! I had a conversation with an Aussie who hates guns and thinks they are bad and likes being disarmed When I asked his background on firearms he admits he knows nothing ( like all antis) so I said I can t talk to you cause you don t even knowwhat you don t even know!

  27. My advice to any Connecticut gun owner who gets arrested for their BS laws. Do not allow yourself to be booked into jail. They will throw you into a holding cell until you comply. Stand firm. If they deny access to legal counsel because you didnt comply with their administrative actions, you have grounds for a major lawsuit against the jail and individual officers. The right to have access to attorneys is a pretty inviolate right, upheld by the Constitution and case law. If you are denied bail, that can be turned into a Eighth Amendment case.

  28. The cops will not even have to STAKE OUT anybody; they will have access to telephone meta data and will know where you are and where you are likely to be.

  29. I reckon you guys will move to the free states leaving the statists to rot in a welter of crime and liberals discover what we’ve learned in the UK, socialism works until you’ve run out of other peoples money then you have to be persuaded to comply!

  30. I had a debate last week on Facebook about the dangers of cars vs. guns. I told my friends friend that homicides via guns account for roughly 9,000 deaths a year. Drunk driving fatalities are roughly 10,000 a year, reckless driving fatalities are roughly 10,000 a year, and driving distracted fatalities are about 3,000 per year. I then told him out of the 9,000 gun deaths that many were gang on gang and didn’t affect or reach the general public. I then told him that about 300 gun deaths a year are attributed to assault rifles. So the odds of being killed by a drunk or reckless driver as opposed to the guns CT is banning is about 80 times higher for the car! The only arguement he could conjure up was that guns were designed to kill people and cars were designed to transport people. I told him that millions of people go to the range every day and fire millions of rounds of ammunition while never killing anyone in the process, and that hundreds of thousands of people protect their family and their dwelling without ever firing a shot. I also told him the object (cars) while not designed to kill people, kill more people than guns when used recklessly and that those events are indiscriminant of who you know and where you live. While most gang shootings take place in bad places, drunk driving takes place EVERYWHERE there are innocent people which makes it even more dangerous.

    • You should also point out the stupid who used a car at the SxSW event as a torpedo into a crowd of pedestrians and other events like it to show misuse of anything is dangerous to life and limb.

    • So, if cars aren’t meant to kill people, but still kill more people than guns, doesn’t it mean cars need to be more regulated?

      Does he work a farm or own a business? Then what does he need a car for? There’s mass transit. He can ride the bus and save fuel, too. Good for the environment. (Actually, buses are THE WORST, most polluting method of transit out there, but that’s a separate point.)

      Also point out that if he’s ever had a drink he’s supported Big Alcohol, and the deaths of millions of people, and there are ZERO practical uses for booze. It’s purely recreational.

      Obviously, he’s selfish, hates kids and wants them to die, as long as he can drink his booze and drive his car. He’s too morally corrupt to debate with and is a racist.

  31. Boys and girls, think tactically outside the box. You have to be modern terrorists to survive. Gather together your ready reaction groups. You will have to have 100 or so to start. Get someone on the inside of the LEO to warrant judge operation. A clerk or janitor. Someone who is invisible. When the intel is solid, call your groups up. Think no cell phones or land lines unless coded. Gather at cardinal points around the search area, but out of sight. All of you people are masked and in camo. When the warrant is delivered, your four groups surround the swat crew in full force, but under cover, with a team leader to start the commotion. Quickly move on the radio bases. Then, Everyone lets out a predetermined yell. Tell the LEOs to drop the contraband and leave. Do not start a war. Have media present for the story. When they do leave, disperse quickly. This will send a chilling effect on the boys in blue. The next mission will be a different one. Think interception. The people must take control. They do not outnumber or outgun us.

  32. Consider this, LEO’s are people like yourselves. They share the same fears, the same aspirations, and the same zeal towards the issues that we are all faced with today. I know this because I am one. This matter has been discussed amongst officers all across the states. The general consensus is that we’d rather be unemployed than violate any of the Constitutional rights that were given to us by our forefathers many years ago. We are not the people that the majority of you are making us out to be. Have some faith in your fellow man as well as faith in God to lead us out of this. Don’t give up hope.

    • You say this, but does it ever happen??? NO

      LEOs talk but their actions are always with the government.

      I am sure the same thing happened in Nazi Germany. They don’t want to do it, but our AFRAID and believe they are on the winning team. Basically looking out for themselves instead of for this country.

      Cowards!!!

  33. There will be selective enforcement of these laws. The police will be at your home because of a call for service, or they stop you on the way to the range and will “discover” your illegal firearm or magazine and they will charge you for it. If you have 6 magazines, then it’s 6 felony charges plus the one for the gun if you didn’t register it.

    Some police officers will not enforce the law but many will.

    These fights must be won in court, when some poor sap gets charged and convicted.

    Bottom line, is you get the government you elect. Until democrat gun owners are caught up in their own legal webs they lay, maybe then, it will awaken them. Because I say this loud and say it clear, it is the DEMOCRAT party, that hates us, hates our gun rights and it’s DEMOCRATS that introduce and sign into law, the mess we have in Connecticut.

  34. Thank you for writing John.

    I disagree with most of your conclusions.

    “D2D confiscation won’t be law enforcement’s primary modus operandi. For one thing, it does nothing for the operational security of that mission to publicize such a predictable maneuver.”
    I disagree. Law enforcement conducts how many tens of thousands of such raids every year? They are both public knowledge and tactically dangerous. And yet they continue.

    “A few DEA agents could throw off the suspect’s suspicions about the weapons violation rendering him relatively docile.”
    I have absolutely no involvement with any narcotics whatsoever. I would not be “docile” if DEA agents knocked at my door. I actually would expect that to be a ruse.

    I do agree that law enforcement could implement your “hybrid approach” since they already use that approach quite often.

  35. Much of this about confiscation is assuming police officers will follow the orders. Most officers will not comply with this order and most corrupt politicians know this. Not to worry at this time about a D2D confiscation situation. Now the blue helmet people might be a different thing that we have to contend with but we will have plenty of notice and time to prepare for that situation. Cowboy Up – Yeppie Ki Yay America!

    • Most cops will suck the mayor’s @#$ if the Chief tells them to, and cash their check. The days of cops who cared about integrity and the Constitution are six decades behind us.

      Any cop who “won’t rat out a brother officer” is himself a rat, beneath contempt, and a disgrace. And that’s most of them.

      They are armed thugs for the politicians, nothing more.

      If they wanted to help people, they’d be EMTs or firefighters. They want to kick ass, but only in circumstances where they have the numerical and technical advantage.

  36. when they start the games and piss people off. the rest of the to be screwed with will start making payback. there will be a lot of bleeding do gooders laying where ever they are found. it will be open season on uniforms.

    I think this country is on the edge of a blow up and if they start the nonsense, it will blow up in their faces and then spread across the country. I have seen articles about what the 3 per centers will do and it will not be pretty. the cleansing of America will make the civil war look tame.

    wake up connecticut leaders. and the rest of the states with attitudes.

  37. Have the documents you drafted up from when you sold your weapons. Maybe have a throw-away or two to surrender. Never allow another human being to completely disarm you.

  38. I get what your saying in your article Mr. Zimmerman. And I agree, there are many scenarios that could play out. But whether it’s D2D or your hypothetical checkpoint schemes, they all amount to a what I’ll call an “open linear action”. What I mean is, some police officer, unit, Dept. will organize and go out to confiscate and they’ll have to start with “House Door 1” or “House Door 2”, or in your scenario disarm “citizen 1 in car”, and then “citizen 2 at shooting-range”. And before you know it, the word’s out and People will either react in whatever way they choose / planned. Whether it’s D2D or Checkpoint it’s all linear and after the first dozen (unfortunate as it is), I’d hope Citizens would respond by stopping it however they must. Now some commenters over the weeks have offered scenarios where CT Govt. just seemingly “backs down” and goes “silent” and then just allows the natural course of time to work its evil upon Citizens. They just wait for things like traffic stops and then find that the person is an owner of a now banned firearm. Or they slowly start going down the list using deduction and issuing warrants to those refusing to register. These schemes would be very subtle and would disorient most Citizens making them feel as though they’re each alone and isolated, caught up in a personal little struggle with the weight of the entire State upon them. The People would need to stand together in these instances and pool their monetary and legal resources together to help those few who are targeted first. Perhaps physical resistance would also be necessary, but in the mean time it would be a legal and money “battle”. Nevertheless, a different physical way I can imagine CT Govt. carrying out confiscation would be by simultaneous raids, which would be “non-linear” (at least at first). I could imagine DESPP Chief or some other CT Law Enforcement Official quietly organizing and planning a day’s or week’s worth of simultaneous warrants issued for citizens owning banned firearms. –By deduction they’d compile a list of those owning banned firearms who haven’t registered; –Next they’d simply pick those who they believe would be the most likely to resist or retaliate against LEO’s (remember by this time it’s all arbitrary anyway); –Next the CT Govt. would have warrants issued for those “guilty” citizens & firearms; –Next the State LEO Chief would order some small contingent group in each & every police Dept. throughout the State to conduct a dozen warrant raids on those citizens by the end of the particular day, and perhaps each day for an entire initial week. It would be a simultaneous way to “legally” and “legitimately” strike a large group of citizens all at once and disorient the People. It’s unfortunate to be doing these “wargaming” scenarios, and I don’t like it, but it’s important to think about this stuff.

Leave a Reply

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