Housekeeping: Is TTAG Saber Rattling on CT Confiscation?

Katrina confiscation (musicians4freedom.com)

A member of TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia writes:

I am very disappointed with the rattling of sabers at TTAG over the unjust laws in CT.  In my humble opinion having SWAT teams confiscate guns and the resulting firefight would be devastating to our cause. No matter what, if a gun owner fires on cops, whether they are storming his house or not, he will be played in the media as a paranoid and dangerous gun nut with an arsenal.  This will pave the way to more laws, more confiscations, having gun owners being derided as nuts, or terrorists, and forcing public opinion against us. It will also divide and conquer other gun owners since some will decide a flash bang raid conducted by cops with machine guns is not worth the fuss. Therefore  . . .

TTAG should stop fanning the flames.

Instead gun owners in CT and elsewhere need to take a page from Martin Luther King Jr’s playbook with nonviolent assertive civil disobedience.

During the civil rights movement King pushed civil disobedience to show the unjust, capricious, barbarity of Jim Crow laws. By sitting at all white lunch counters and refusing to move to the back of the bus they forced the police to act while simultaneously making their cause known and winning the war of public opinion.

Gun rights activists in slave states need to do the same. Here is how:

Using social media activists need to coordinate a civil disobedience action. I like to call it the ‘Spartacus’ strategy. All over CT or other slave states they need to pick a date, preferably a weekday when the most media coverage is gained.

Each activist needs to bring a 30 round mag, and there needs to be a group buy of those 10 rounders that look like a 30 rounder. All the mags are mixed together and everyone picks a random mag.

Then wearing a prisoner Halloween costume and carrying signs reading ‘my government made me a felon’ they march on the nearest government building. No need to gather everyone in Hartford. Make logistics easy and have them march on the nearest courthouse or government building carrying American flags, Gadsden flags, and the Battle of Gonzalez come and take it flag.

When they reach the courthouse the leader reads a short speech about unjust laws, and civil disobedience, and stresses how everyone there is a law abiding American who works hard and pays taxes. Then they read the 2nd amendment.

At the end everyone holds up their mag, and stands there quietly, outside of the government building. The local government now has to decide whether to act with force against peaceful protesters or ignore them. If they act with violence our cause is bolstered in the war of public opinion. If they ignore it they communicate that the law is unjust and unenforceable.

As an added bonus when the police advance everyone drops their mags. Now there is plausible deniability as to who had the felon making mags and the oh so safe mags. This further erodes the CT laws and show them to be arbitrary and absurd.

Of course for this to work people must be willing to risk arrest. However, this is a much better strategy then waiting for the cops to come knocking at night.

Please don’t confuse my call for peaceful civil disobedience in order to get out ahead of the gun grabbers agenda with compliance to it. I am also not belittling those in CT who are saying they will not comply. I simply think a mass strategy has a better chance of political and media success than individuals.

I believe there will come a day when armed revolt is necessary if we keep going down this path. I do not believe that day is here yet, therefore we should try to avoid it while winning. However I pray I will be able to stand up and fight when the day comes.

In response to the growing crisis in Connecticut, the Internet is already abuzz with Molon Labe declarations and disinformation (i.e. the “satirical” story that Connecticut politicians decided not to confiscate guns after they discovered that a significant number of police failed to abide by the “assault rifle” and “high-capacity magazine” registration laws).

TTAG is in the thick of things. The question is, how should we play this one? We’re gathering and posting pics of gun owners supporting their freedom-loving brothers and sisters in Connecticut. We’re selling Stand Strong CT T-shirts. And we’re publishing posts predicting disaster. Have we gone over-the-top? [The Sipsey Street Irregulars figure I’m soft on CT defense of 2a.] Do we need to dial it back or is it steady as she goes?

comments

  1. avatar Andrew says:

    Hmm.. perhaps referring to the posting in which jack-booted thugs (ahh, finally got to say that) beat in the guys door, murder him and his family, and shoot the dog over a 30 round magazine?

    Oh wait, that was fiction. And bad fiction at that.

    1. avatar Hinshelworld says:

      Yeah, it stunk of propaganda.

    2. avatar Brad says:

      Bad fiction? Maybe, but similar non-fiction events take place all too often.

    3. avatar AlleyF says:

      Wasn’t a fan of that one. Keep it classy. Keep it intelligent.

      1. avatar Kris says:

        +1.

        I pictured The Fonz shaking his head in disgust as he was jumping the shark.

    4. avatar Veidt says:

      That prepper’s wet dream has been the most embarrassing thing I’ve seen on this blog to date.

    5. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      If you went to Mike McDaniel’s blog where the post came from and read his follow-up you would know that the events portrayed in his account were a composite of actual events pieced together from actual SWAT raids, and police shootings.

      So not quite fiction.

      And he has some knowledge of these things as a former LEO.

      1. avatar BR549 says:

        A point well taken. To bring Martin Luther King into the issue is exactly what the PTB are expecting; division among the ranks with some advocating standing their ground while others decide to take the Ghandi route. Either way, the NWO maggots have been trying factor all these responses into their blitz. They don’t want there to be any other form of citizen response other than the one they provide for you.
        It’s a difficult choice, as it was designed to be.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          Interesting the same pre-packaged “don’t get riled” “solution is suddenly being offered here. Like fifty times.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        “Based on true events!” -claimed by every ridiculous piece of tripe fiction everywhere.

      3. avatar Duke says:

        How is piecing something together from multiple events not fiction? You’re cherry picking things that have happened in tons of different, disparate, events and then pouring them all into one narrative.

        That is pretty definitively fiction.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          Easy: if it’s from multiple events, pieced together as some sort of representation of reality, it’s NOT fiction. All the events are real, actual events. How is that “fiction”?

          “Fiction” would be if it’s pieced together from fictional events.

          I don’t understand your line of reasoning.

        2. avatar Kevin A. says:

          Let’s make this easy: Anything that did not literally happen is fiction. Anything that literally happened is non fiction. Anything you think might happen is speculative fiction.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          You did a much better job at this than I did. Well done.

    6. avatar AngryAZ says:

      it”s only fiction for now… give the slave states a few more days….

      1. avatar James says:

        This is terrifying, that there are people out there with this mentality.

        1. avatar Rich Grise says:

          March 10, 2014
          “UPDATE: Since the release of this article, Branford Police have confirmed that Officer Peterson has been placed on paid leave while an internal investigation is carried out.”
          http://www.infowars.com/conn-cop-i-will-kick-down-doors-to-confiscate-guns/

          Although, I do take exception to that “paid leave” schtuff. It’s like, “Hey, you screwed up – go take a paid vacation!”

        2. avatar William Burke says:

          Paid vacation – for talking out of school.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          Wait for it: the story will STILL be doubted and condemned. Damned lying internets!

      2. avatar RAECOREP says:

        Until he kicks in the wrong door! Or possibly right door depending how you look at it.

    7. avatar TJ says:

      Honestly that piece of fiction has roots in real events. No knock raids have killed innocent people, and cops have shot and killed innocent people. That piece obviously portrayed the worst of the worst, a Murphy’s law of what could go wrong in a police state.

      I don’t think it was over the top. It was entertaining and not above our police. We don’t live on magical dirt. These things happen where rights are secondary.

  2. avatar lolinski says:

    You should do what he suggested. The “drop it like it is hot” seems smart.

    1. avatar Gregolas says:

      I’d add one thing as a former prosecutor. To make a conviction even more unlikely, have only half to 2/3 or 3/4 of the protestors equipped with legal/illegal magazines. Since everyone is wearing the stripes, (brilliant idea) observers would be hard put to ID who even HAD a mag in the first place.
      It would be a good idea for the Armed Intelligentsia to read “Negroes and the Gun: the Black Tradition of Arms” by ? Johnson. It’s a good historical background for what may or may not work.

      1. avatar K-Bizz says:

        I like it from a tactical standpoint, but it might weaken the message a little.

        1. avatar Bloggerusa1 says:

          The demonstration suggested is fine, but defending the right to keep and bear arms is not simply a public relations campaign.

  3. avatar peirsonb says:

    I think there is a fine, fine line. Opinions will vary, but I think the few posts theorizing what will happen when confiscation finally kicks off, while accurate, are probably across that line. The “Stand Strong Connecticut” posts, on the other hand, are firmly in the realm of civil disobedience the writer suggests.

  4. avatar steve says:

    Well written. No one wants bloodshed.

    1. avatar A-Rod says:

      Then tell the cops to stop with the no knock warrant raids at 3am. That would save the bloodshed of cops and homeowners alike. Oh yeah, the need to stop shooting dogs too. Canine deserves better too.

  5. avatar bontai Joe says:

    I think that dialing it bach a notch might be a good idea. I like this poster’s idea of non-violent protest and would prefer that to kick in the door raids that will most likely be coming. If I lived alone, my reaction to a kick in the door event would be very different than what I would do to prevent my family being harmed. The Mrs. is rather precious to me, and I would never knowingly do something that puts her life in danger.

    1. avatar EagleScout87 says:

      John Hancock
      Josiah Bartlett
      William Whipple
      Matthew Thornton
      Samuel Adams
      John Adams
      Robert Treat Paine
      Elbridge Gerry
      Stephen Hopkins
      William Ellery
      Roger Sherman
      Samuel Huntington
      William Williams
      Oliver Wolcott
      William Floyd
      Philip Livingston
      Francis Lewis
      Lewis Morris
      Richard Stockton
      John Witherspoon
      Francis Hopkinson
      John Hart
      Abraham Clark
      Robert Morris
      Benjamin Rush
      Benjamin Franklin
      John Morton
      George Clymer
      James Smith
      George Taylor
      James Wilson
      George Ross
      George Read
      Caesar Rodney
      Thomas McKean
      Samuel Chase
      William Paca
      Thomas Stone
      Charles Carroll of Carrollton
      George Wythe
      Richard Henry Lee
      Thomas Jefferson
      Benjamin Harrison
      Thomas Nelson, Jr.
      Francis Lightfoot Lee
      Carter Braxton
      William Hooper
      Joseph Hewes
      John Penn
      Edward Rutledge
      Thomas Heyward, Jr.
      Thomas Lynch, Jr.
      Arthur Middleton
      Button Gwinnett
      Lyman Hall
      George Walton

      I’m not advocating violence, I don’t want to see bloodshed and I don’t want my family to put put in that kind of danger…. those are truly measures of last resort and staging peaceful, non-violent protest of grievances MUST be exhausted as is our responsibility, but when thinking of the mentality “I would never do anything to put my family in danger”, I am reminded of these 56 men who basically put their heads on the chopping block and had the revolution failed they’d have surely been hung for high treason against his majesty King George. It gives you pause that our nation was founded on men who knew the risks they put themselves and their families in, and pressed forth in the name of true freedom and liberty…. just something to chew on.

      1. avatar gurge says:

        They weren’t just a bunch of random dudes who signed it – they were the continental congress. And I mention that because it shows the importance of having plans and being organized.

        I think the plan described is quite ingenious.

      2. avatar Matthew says:

        And they won that war with military grade weapons…

      3. avatar JR says:

        Another set of names to keep in mind in regard to militarized police:

        Crispus Attucks
        Samuel Gray
        James Caldwell
        Samuel Maverick
        Patrick Carr

        “The heavy military presence in Boston that lead to the Massacre was the result of British enforcement of the Townshend Acts of 1767. ”

        (from http://www.bostonmassacre.net/facts-and-numbers.htm)

    2. avatar B says:

      Its not like we are the ones kicking in police station doors and shooting their german shepherds. These are hypotheticals that almost exclusively involve us having to react to police busting down our doors in the middle of the night and murdering our families. Our protests are peaceful. We phone and email our reps. And we are now at the point where a state has turned 300k of its citizens into felons. I love the protest idea, I think I’d actually drive up for that.

  6. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

    Report the facts. That is all. Leave the emotion and hysteric’s to others. The facts are scary enough IMHO. No need to build up the heat. Remember that 26 percent of Americans have some form of mental illness.

    http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml

    1. avatar PeterK says:

      This sounds about right to me. I don’t MIND the doom and gloom, nor do I call it sabre rattling, but it is there.

      That guy does have a sweet idea, though. Though it’s possible it’s merely speeding the inevitable, in which case how is throwing your sabre at the legislators any better “saber rattling”?

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      “Leave the emotion and hysteric’s to others”

      So, ‘leave the emotion and hysteric is to others’, or ‘leave the emotion and (some undefined thing belonging to a hysteric) to others’?

      Fourth-grade English. It shouldn’t give you a headache to learn the rule.

      1. avatar James says:

        While I agree with the sentiment, you’re really just proving that you’re an uppity punk with nothing better to offer to the conversation than your immeasurable vocabulary. Please don’t be that person.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          That had nothing to do with vocabulary. Please hate again later.

      2. avatar Joe says:

        WILLIAM,I don’t think anyone wants you grading their post on this blog . Correct or not, they are here for the same reason. You have some very good comments, so stick with that.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          It’s done on here all the time, not only by me. Either criticize them all, or let it pass by. Unless you wanted to make this personal, I mean.

        2. avatar Rich Grise says:

          It kind of looks like he has taken up the mantle since I abandoned my dreams of cleaning up the extraneous apostrophes on the interwebs. 😉

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          More of a hobby than an avocation. Part-time hobby, more like. All I’m ever saying is, “Respect your native language like you would your wife or girl friend. She doesn’t deserved to be savaged or slapped around.

          The writers here do a commendable job at respecting her; emulate that, and it’ll be a better relationship.
          They recognize the value of respecting the language. Why act like you don’t care about your language? What did she ever do to you?

    3. avatar Rich Grise says:

      Facts are good, yes. But I wouldn’t put prior restraint on editorializing, as long as the reader knows which is which.

  7. avatar Roll says:

    No, dont stop, MLK didnt stop fighting for our civil rights, even when it got dangerous for him and his family, why should we? TTAG, do not stop.

  8. avatar JM says:

    I agree with this member that we need to try to find a peaceful way out of this predicament. However I think we also need to be prepared for the alternative. If it turns violent, then we have no choice but to win, for if we lose, the gun grabbers will use it as a justification for civilian disarmament.

    1. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

      I agree, I truly hope it doesn’t not come to armed conflict. I think fighting cops during a no knock raid would not turn out well for the homeowner, but they are being put in a very difficult situation when they have been turned into felons. The raids will probably come eventually in some form or another, and I don’t see any way this ends without at least a few botched raids.

    2. avatar Jonathan says:

      Yes that what I think too we must try the peaceful way but if that do not work than we must do that what is next.

    3. avatar B says:

      In Texas we have tons of cases of criminals (along with innocent wrong house occupants) shooting police during raids. I don’t think any of them have been successfully prosecuted. Texas castle law, you break in I will shoot you. You slink across my property at night, I reserve the right to shoot you. I don’t care if you are wearing blue or not, you want to talk knock on the freaking door and talk like a (wo)man.

  9. avatar anthony o. says:

    Both approaches have their merit. And I, like many here at TTAG, am a 2nd amendment absolutist, but if history teaches any lesson, its that its better to make friends than enemies when the choice is gself defenseThe protest suggested by the reader is exactly how to make friends with the fence-sitters whose votes are crucial to our cause especially in states like CT. However the presence of arms in private hands must be clearly shown to have consequences for those who attempt to enforce unjust laws.

  10. avatar former water walker says:

    MLK? LOL. The 2A is carved in stone. America is in a death spiral. How s that unarmed civil disobedience working out in Ukraine,Egypt,Syria,etc? We are a nation of laws& rights. Robert Farago is spot on with his analysis & reporting.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      You are just all over the map.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Like one of those fireworks that skitters and zips all over the ground.

  11. avatar Ralph says:

    Allow me to paraphrase the OP’s argument:

    “Because the purpose of the Second Amendment is to enable people to resist tyranny by being armed, then we must not actually, you know, resist tyranny when we’re armed. Because that would be icky.

    “What we really need to do is sit around contemplating our navels while singing Kumbaya. That’ll teach those Connecticut b@stards not to mess with Constitutional rights.”

    If the Weaver family had rolled over when the Feebs and their Gestapo buddies came a-callin’, they would probably all be alive. In prison, sure, but alive. Except the dog, who would have died of natural causes by now. And gun rights in America, which would have died of neglect.

    The whole argument that 2A is for protection against government overreach would have fallen apart without a dramatic example of government overreach. Ruby Ridge was the light bulb above America’s head. But maybe the OP is still sitting in the dark.

    1. avatar peirsonb says:

      I hope to be just like you when I grow up. That was beautiful.

      Edit: Except for the cats…

    2. avatar Zebulon Pike says:

      “Ruby Ridge was the light bulb over America’s head.”

      I dunno. I was high school age when Ruby Ridge happened. I don’t know a thing about it, nor do I remember any reaction at the time. It is certainly not some sort of indelible image like it is apparently for you. I’m not sure the younger generations, or even average Americans, if they even know about it, will understand how it relates to CT, or even agree that it was some catalyst to a distrust of government. Now this MLK guy, him I’ve heard of.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        You weren’t taught in High School. You were trained. And probably damn well.

        Just because you don’t know about something, don’t assume that it didn’t occur or that it did not transform the discourse.

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          You weren’t taught in High School. You were trained. And probably damn well.

          I’m STILL trying to sift through the “official” accounts to determine what actually happened at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Classic cases of history being written by the victor.

        2. avatar Zebulon Pike says:

          Actually Mr. Ralph, I went to a very small religious-fanatic church school. Most of my “graduating class” of 6 were actually home-schoolers who showed up for “socialization” and so on. I’d wager my education would have been more to the Weaver’s liking than yours. And I can promise you I’ve memorized more of the Bible and historic American patriotic speeches than you. As a 15 year old, I recited the entire Biblical book of Proverbs from memory. As well as Patrick Henry’s speech, both preambles, the Gettysburg Address, and Lincoln’s 2nd. That’s just the beginning. So, is that “trained” enough for ya?

          With that pedigree, I get it–the revolutionary fervor shown by so many on this board. I truly do. My contention is that you are putting too much hope that the average American, especially of my generation and younger, realizes any lessons from Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc, and can apply them to today. If there is a CT version of these events, I’d say most people would blame the gun owner and his “arsenal” and that such an event would not be enough to provoke a revolution, much less sustain one. I think we are still at the “ballot box” stage and for a long time to come. We should therefore put our efforts at winning there.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          Same ol’ same ol’: “Keep on voting for the phonies, boys. Maybe one day, something will change; if not, at least you voted for one of two status quo phony baloneys. Keep on a-votin’, Mister and Missus America! With the candidates we offer you, heads we win, tails you lose! HAHAHAHAHAHA! SUCKERS! We OWN this game!!”

        4. avatar Rich Grise says:

          The “lesser of two evils” is still evil.

        5. avatar johannes p says:

          Ralph,

          I think you’re missing the point.

          There are lots of people who don’t know what Ruby Ridge is.

          Of the ones that do, there’s probably a significant percentage of them who dismissed it as some kook in the woods doing something stupid and ended up getting killed by the cops because of it. How many people even care that the guy who dropped Randy Weaver never served a day in prison?

          Use the right tactics at the right time. If you’re determined to go down in heroic flames, that’s your own lookout. But if you actually want to protect our liberties, ask yourself: which tactics will not only make our point, but do so in a way that convinces the rest of the nation to stand with us, in the face of a hostile press and government? Which tactics will do little more than play into the hands of those hostile forces that wish to portray us as a bunch of hot-heads that pose a danger to public order?

        6. avatar William Burke says:

          I’ve been here a good many moons, and I don’t think Ralph has ever missed the point about anything. Maybe it was you.

        7. avatar Brad says:

          johannes, Randy Weaver is alive, it was his wife and son who were killed at Ruby Ridge. Lon Horiuchi, the FBI sniper who shot Weaver’s wife in the face, while she was holding her baby, was also involved in the Waco debacle.

    3. avatar William Burke says:

      You can’t see me, of course. But I am standing and cheering!

      Just as things start to look really hairy, I’m astounding at how many (usually unheard from) “Voices of Calm and Reason” show up en masse.

      Probably just a “coincidence”, however.

    4. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Well stated, as always, Ralph.

      The fight against tyranny isn’t going away. We’ll only see an increase in government’s ability to put down any unrest. I firmly believe that if we would have resisted tyranny in the 1990s then we would have had better odds of restoring government to constitutional limits than we have today. Next year? The year after that? I’m confident that the odds of success will be even lower. Too many factors favor tyranny over time. I agree with those who caution about not ‘starting’ anything. However, dragging things out will only jeopardize successful restoration. The more powerful government becomes, the more costly it becomes for the People to reign it in.

      Keep going as you are, TTAG! Speak up now while you still can. You have my respect and admiration for it.

  12. avatar Thomas says:

    The important thing is to get the guys who voted for this law out of office. We have a election in November. Support those who would vote for repeal. I am not talking about just voting. Contribute money and volunteer time. My prediction is you aren’t going to see anything resembling raids until after the election.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      My prediction is you aren’t going to see anything resembling raids until after the election.

      What does that tell you?

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Uh… that the raids are coming later?

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          Or that the pols are afraid of losing their jobs by attacking actual Americans.

        2. avatar Andrew says:

          The lost ark… is a chalice?

  13. avatar Dickie J says:

    Everyone is afraid of a popular backlash if some gun-grabbing cops get their just desserts in some early morning raid. But remember the popular sentiment in favor of Chris Dorner? And he stupidly killed innocent relatives of the cops he was targeting. I think there’s a lot of people out there who see the burgeoning police state we now live in and have no idea how to stop it… but it seems like they would be on the side of anyone who opposes the ever-growing tyrrany.

    1. avatar Bill says:

      Excellent point, I used to be a huge LEO fanboy, I’d cheer everything they did. Things have changed, now when I see a cop, I feel so much contempt and loathing that I have to consciously remind myself that they are a human being with a family too and that they might actually agree with me politically.

      1. avatar Hinshelworld says:

        Because it’s perfectly reasonable to loathe someone you’ve never met and have no knowledge about…

        1. avatar Bill says:

          When you’re in uniform its seems a lot easier to stereotype, for better or worse.

        2. avatar CoolBreeze72 says:

          Loathe is a strong word for sure but cops profile and a prudent citizen does the same.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          But actions speak, do they not? I read of a cops-gone-wild atrocity nearly every day, and every one I read about is an actual event. Yet some say I’m hysterical about the militarization of the police force, in their full combat gear and MRAPs….

        4. avatar peirsonb says:

          @William: you are hysterical, but that doesn’t make you wrong.

        5. avatar Marcus Aurelius says:

          He doesn’t disrespect the man, he disrespects the office.

        6. avatar Bob says:

          If a person is wearing a police uniform, then you can be very confident that:
          1. They are enforcing laws that are unjust or unconstitutional.
          2. They are enforcing laws in ways they were never intended. (For example, writing speeding tickets for the purpose of generating revenue, not for safety purposes.)
          3. Protecting other officers’ misconduct that should put them in jail.
          4. If they are caught breaking a law, they will expect to be treated better than they would treat a non-uniformed citizen.

          For all of these reasons, I can not have respect for any uniformed police officer. I did respect them when I was young and naïve. Now that I am older and wiser, I can not.

        7. avatar Salty Bear says:

          Bob, your list of reasonable assumptions is exactly what I think of too when I see an LEO. It’s hard to remind myself that I might be wrong about them, and I still default to the cynical mentality because they signed up to enforce laws already on the books that are blatantly unconstitutional.

    2. avatar Charles5 says:

      The correct phrase is “just deserts” not “just desserts.” A desert is an arid region. A dessert is a sugary dinner course, and deserts are punishments, rewards, and recompenses. The confusion is understandable because “deserts,” when used in the context of “just deserts” and not the plural form of desert, is pronounced like the plural form of the sweet food, dessert. See the definition here.

      Stepping off my soapbox.

      1. avatar ropingdown says:

        According to the OED ‘desert,’ meaning ‘recompense,’ is properly used both as a singular and plural noun. The plural ‘deserts’ is more common because it reduces confusion aurally with the after-dinner final sweet course, since the two meanings sound the same though spelled differently.

        desert, n.1
        (dɪˈzɜːt)
        Forms: 4– desert, 3–6 deserte, 4 desserte, 4–5 decert(e, dissert, 6 dyserte, 6–7 desart.
        [a. OF. desert masc., deserte, desserte fem., derivs. of deservir, desservir to deserve. The Fr. words are analogous to descent, descente, etc., and belong to an obs. pa. pple. desert of deservir, repr. late L. -servĭt-um for -servīt-um.]

        1.1 Deserving; the becoming worthy of recompense, i.e. of reward or punishment, according to the good or ill of character or conduct; worthiness of recompense, merit or demerit.

        1. avatar PavePusher says:

          Argh, you beat me.

        2. avatar Hannibal says:

          I done learnt something on TTAG today!

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          You’re citing what?

      2. avatar William Burke says:

        Well done. Now you will be attacked; wait for it.

      3. avatar William Burke says:

        I don’t know about “your wrong”, but you’re wrong:

        http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/just_deserts

        Please try again. I love it when someone says to “look up” something that proves them wrong.

    3. avatar jwm says:

      Popular sentiment in favor or Dorner? I think it was more sympathy for the 2 ladies getting shot up in their truck.

      Just for the sake of argument let’s suppose Dorner was the focal point of popular sentiment. What came of it? LAPD wasn’t disbanded. Dorner’s still dead. Try shooting up the cops and their families like he did andyou’ll meet just the same fate as him.

      Popular sentiment doesn’t go far. More people were probably interested in the latest reality tv show than the Dorner show.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        Actually, I thought that Dorner looked a lot like that fat Kardashian chick, Whatshername.

        1. avatar TheBear says:

          Are you talking about the tall one?

          I just call her Chewbacca.

        2. avatar peirsonb says:

          that fat Kardashian chick

          Yeah, um, going to have to ask you to be just a touch more specific….

        3. avatar Rich Grise says:

          The only Kardashian I can name is Gul Ducat.

        4. avatar William Burke says:

          Yeah, further details are required to go forward with this!

  14. avatar Bill says:

    Fortuna audaces iuua, Fortune favors the bold. A man has to make a stand, and if he can’t make a stand when the Grenadiers are crashing down his door and threatening his home and family, then I don’t think there is an acceptable justification to stand up to tyranny.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      +1000

      A man who becomes a patriot when all the other patriots are in their graves is a patriot too late. He may be brave or stupid at that point, but he is too late. Who will remember him?

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Spot on! That’s where the rubber meets the road.

  15. avatar Tom W. says:

    http://www.examiner.com/article/vet-conn-cop-said-i-cannot-wait-to-get-the-order-to-kick-your-door-in

    Who’s fanning the flames? Really?
    Why is it “we” have to play nice? , the antis don’t, won’t, and have to know they are “public servants” to protect and serve remember? I know, let’s put up another moderate, can’t we all just get along candidate for POTUS also. The past two worked out great. Stand Strong CT!!!!

    1. avatar PavePusher says:

      While I can imagine some police saying this, it’s at best third-hand, and completely uncorroborated. There’s a lot of unsubstantiated rumors and claims running around Teh InturWebz about the CT issue. And very little evidence…..

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        “Third-hand”? And yet you get your own information and opinions by fourth of fifth hand. If someone sees it and a reporter picks up the story, HOW MANY HANDS IS THAT? You are superimposing false criteria so you can reject information that doesn’t support your view.

        Just like the mainstream media.

  16. avatar Ross says:

    I personally don’t have a problem with TTAG on this issue, what exactly the purpose of the Second Amendment anyway? I’ll give y’all a hint, it’s not hunting or sport.

    1. avatar Dickie J says:

      Yep. We endlessly argue that the entire point is to overthrow a tyrannical government. So what does that entail? Sit-ins? Strongly worded letters to our “representatives”? No, our founding fathers believed that periodic violence would be necessary to preserve the power of the people against the always-increasing power of government. And up to this point in recent history, there’s been plenty of violence- all committed by the government against we the people- through forced seizure of assets (taxes), forcible imprisonment for a medicinal plant, invading the privacy of personal correspondence, and outright murder of vocal opposition. I’d have to imagine that there is a breaking point in the national psyche somewhere. And once that point is reached, our “civilized” society may cease to be civil.

      1. avatar soccerdad1150 says:

        ….” What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”… Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787[2] — http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/tree-liberty-quotation

    2. avatar A-Rod says:

      I see just as much practice of the 1st Amendment on this forum as I do the 2nd. Speech, Press and Assemble are pretty nice… nice saber rattling. F them and Shannon Watts too if they do not like it.

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      I take your point but some- and from the stories I read here occasionally, more than a few- seem to get almost giddy at the idea of a violent conflict. I wonder how many of these people have seen a country that has such problems in their lifetime, and how long it takes for it to recover.

      For me, any sort of violence like that is the 2nd worst possible outcome.

      1. avatar Joe says:

        Hannibal: One skirmish between gun owners and police, and everyone , citizens and military alike, will have to pick sides.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          I don’t see any way around that conclusion!

  17. avatar detroiter says:

    I’ve thought the rhetoric about the Ct situation has been strong, maybe too strong. Reading some of the posts I’ve wondered if ttag has been encouraging the bloodshed. Certainly you are fanning the flames.

    On the other hand if I was not in compliance with the law your posts about ct made me rethink how I would go about being non compliant.

    I think we all fear the same thing. I say report the facts, report some opinions, and reduce the flame fanning. Youve predicted the violence and I see no reason to stop predicting that….but I really fear antagonizing one of our own into a very bad situation that won’t end well for the Ct gun owners.

  18. avatar Will P says:

    Freedom of the press! Steady as she goes boys!

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      No one is suggesting the government censor TTAG that I see. That doesn’t mean yellow journalism is something that should be appreciated.

  19. avatar Chris says:

    Finally a really good article and post about this, all this talk of revolt is silly.

    Those of us who really want to fix this problem are either donating money to the CCDL/NRA lawsuit or working with the Republican Party to VOTE the problem away.

    Instead of all this pointless flame fanning TTAG should be pointing out useful ways to actually solve this problem. But that doesn’t create sensationalist reading now does it?

    Gov Malloy was in my city last week and a lot of very good questions were fielded about these laws, gun owners are not going away!

    We need good and consistent PR to convince people to VOTE properly at the next election so we can get this law repealed.

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      It’s not one or the other time just yet.

      Those guys at Concord Bridge really did get a little to excided didn’t they? A little “nonviolent protest”, singing kumbaya and all would have been roses. MLK/Gandai are for sheep not free men.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        There are a lot of sheep. Herd them and you can move a mountain. That’s a lesson that could be learned better by some pro-gun rights groups. Don’t push people away who you can use.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      Okay. I’m marking this down as “won’t be there to answer the call”. Take solace. About 96% of Americans were of the same ilk during the Revolutionary War.

      “May your chains rest lightly upon you, and may we forget that you were ever our countryman.”

  20. avatar Excedrine says:

    TTAG should do what TTAG wants to do. If that be more so-called “sabre rattling”, then so be it.

    But this alternate approach was very well-written, and could be damned effective if executed to a “T”, which shouldn’t be that hard except to gather sufficient numbers of people willing to spend a few hours (or a night) in lock-up.

    Absolutely brilliant.

    1. avatar mirgc says:

      The prison garb is probably getting just a bit too theatrical for me. But the rest? Yes. Good idea. Probably better to do it at the capitol, or governors mansion, in order to get a bigger crown.

      Especially the idea about the 10 vs 30 round (but look the same) magazines. Heck, maybe throw a pezz dispenser or two in the picture 🙂

  21. avatar jimbthepilot says:

    So, just swim around a bit more animatedly and kvetch loudly while the water temperature increases? This nation was born of better stuff. May we find the courage that produced “And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.” And, if you would like a brief review of what it could cost, go here: http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/Our_Culture/our_lives_fortunes_honor.htm

  22. avatar Stacy says:

    I’m of two minds. On the one hand, reader is absolutely right that any exchange of fire between gun owners and police will be portrayed as the second coming of Tim McVeigh, facts be damned. Blogs can put the truth out there, but can’t overcome the reach of the MSM, or the fact that a substantial number of voters still get all their news the old-fashioned way.

    On the other hand, I have a visceral reaction to this situation, and especially to the bellicose statements coming from the Malloy administration (which I still say seem to all be coming from this Micheal P Lawlor person, described as an ‘aide’ to the governor). I don’t think they should be allowed to get away with threatening the citizenry like that, and in view of that I’m finding the molon labe talk more bracing than worrying. At some point you have to say, this far and no farther.

  23. avatar John C says:

    Just keep pounding! They need to feel the heat. They stepped in it and they need to know before it spins out of control. When they start door to door all bets are off. It will light a fire that will spread across the nation.

    Thanks to social media we have seen enough videos of cops acting poorly. I don’t think the majority are bad. But they need to be on the side of freedom.

    All they need to do is repeal. No retreat from gun owners!

  24. avatar Mark N. says:

    I was thinking that a nonviolent protest of 10, maybe 20,000 people (the more the better) camped out around the statehouse while the Legislature was in session for say a week, maybe more, lots of drums, tents, chants, etc. might be persuasive to those numb nuts. Lots of signs with the names of those who voted for the ban. Schedule it just before the election.

  25. avatar DD says:

    Got Lobbyist???

  26. avatar Colby says:

    I like the dissenter’s above stated strategy, though I agree we should reserve the right to confront violent tyranny with force of arms as a last resort.

    But I think we are a lot farther from that point than RF seems to think. I think that some of the postings here assume that a confiscation order would be generally followed by the rank-and-file law enforcement of CT. As a member of law enforcement, I think such an order would be more likely to cause an internal organizational meltdown due to officers refusing to enforce unconstitutional orders, thereby debilitating the CT leadership from mounting any real offense in the first place. Cops just aren’t willing, in my experience, to go out and pick fights with their neighbors to enforce unjust laws just to risk getting shot by someone they know isn’t really a bad guy. If such an order comes down, I think we may see a lot of police disobeying and siding with their neighbors instead of the disconnected State leaders, thereby preventing violence from occurring.

    I may be idealistic and wrong, but that’s at least how a confiscation order would probably play out in Texas. I admit I don’t know anything about the institutional cultures of CT police forces though.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      “As a member of law enforcement, I think such an order would be more likely to cause an internal organizational meltdown due to officers refusing to enforce unconstitutional orders …”

      I believe that our saber rattling is largely responsible for the internal organizational meltdown that you anticipate.

      I do NOT believe that any sense of community will be a factor at all in tempering LEO participation. There isn’t a law enforcement officer anywhere in the state of Illinois, California, or New York that would refuse to arrest a neighbor who strolled around in front of the capital with an openly visible firearm. No, the only thing that will cause law enforcement officers to pause is when they are convinced that a mission is a suicide mission.

    2. avatar Ken Hagler says:

      Which is why nobody ever gets thrown in a cage by the cops for smoking dried leaves from the wrong kind of plant. :-/

  27. avatar Evan says:

    I agree with this persons method. We keep violence as the LAST RESORT. Any peaceful method is preferable to that. A peaceful Civil disobediance march is a good method.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Okay, but keep in mind that the people who haven’t registered their guns are already peacefully committing felonies by peacefully resisting. Unfortunately, they are facing very unpeaceful consequences for their resistance.

  28. I don’t see this as an either / or situation.

    A huge fear of lawmakers is what happens if people blatantly ignore laws passed and don’t treat them as gospel – for that reason, we should encourage the enforcement of laws of folly so that they can be challenged in court, I don’t think anyone needs to be killed over that and I don’t see the first step being a flash-bang raid.

    The suggestion of a non-violent protest is great – it’s just another way to push the folly of this law by showing how impotent those who made it are.

    No one needs to be killed but someone needs to be charged to have standing to best challenge the law; while this sucks for that person, I do not feel they would stand alone and would the support of numerous organizations and private persons to mount a strong defense. I’m not in CT but I would personally put a few hundred $ towards supporting such an effort because I think it’s important.

    I think we really are winning but we need to keep up the pressure and not slack off or get despondent even in the face of draconian, unconstitutional laws such as this

    1. avatar Dickie J says:

      Law. That’s great. You mean the law that applies to us little people but not the people who make the laws? David Gregory ring any bells?

      1. One Dick Gregory is one thing; 1,000+ otherwise law abiding citizens is another. The elites can make an exception for one person; are they going to round up 1,000, 10,000, or more? I doubt it

        I’ll bet with effort the legislature can be made to choke on it’s own laws. We need to force an attempt at mass enforcement and not allow people to get picked off one by one.

        It’s better an effort get made to enforce the law so it can be challenged and stricken than left in place, unenforced but on the books, like some selectively enforced Sword of Damocles.

        Someone can always fire the first shot but it doesn’t seem like a really good idea until other forms of recourse have been exhausted.

        We all talk about the Constitution; it’s got a way to work these things that don’t always involve pulling out heaters or starting a revolution.

  29. avatar crzapy says:

    After reading the comments and as the author of the email in the article I want to make it clear I never advocated retreat. I did not say defend the 2nd amendment but…

    What I proposed was an alternative nonviolent strategy that puts the tyrants in CT on notice.

    The people of the gun don’t own the media. Violent actions, or even standing up to jack booted thugs breaking down your door, will be spun negatively and we will lose. Right now gun owners are the underdogs and that is a VERY strong position in the US. People here love an underdog.

    That being said we don’t need to bite, yet. I firmly believe CT is either afraid to act or waiting for the elections. The mass protest will elevate our cause and bring more media attention. Not as much as anti rallies, but then we don’t own the media.

    We need to control the message, keep hammering away, and keep our powder dry.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      And if the State Gestapo raids a home with their guns and grenades, then what would you have the people inside do — start a parade?

      1. avatar crzapy says:

        This is a preemptive strategy to the raids. Once the raids start happening there is bound to be blood shed. It will most likely be the people who were peacefully resisting by holding on to their guns, it could be the cops.

        A police raid with flash bangs and machine guns at 0 dark 30 is a loser for any citizen. You alone cannot prepare to resist that effectively. If they raid your house you are getting arrested or going down in a hail of gun fire. Either way the media posts your ‘arsenal’ on the news and the pols and anti groups say; ‘look at this gun nut who was willing to kill police!!??!!’

        That does not win hearts or minds. Instead we rally en mass and force them to act. They then ignore or act with violence against thousands holding nothing more than plastic and springs. That makes the news. The protestors get their DAYS in court and the state has to spend money to prosecute and PROVE you were the guy with the 30 rounder.

        People watch and go ‘this law is stupid.’ Gun advocates chip in money for defense. We win or lose and then appeal. Case go higher. We win at the highest level without bloodshed.
        Or we lose. Some people go to jail and others see the violence inherent in the system. Now we have just cause to resist with violence since it is clear the government no longer wants to respect inherent rights.

        However, I am saying we aren’t there yet!

        1. avatar Michael B. says:

          That does not win hearts or minds.

          Every war America’s fought that involved “winning hearts and minds” as a goal, it lost.

          Furthermore, you seem to think that CT’s general voting public would be outraged to see gun owners there arrested or killed. I beg to differ. The reason these laws were passed was because the left wants to criminalize its political opponents.

          They have no problem with using government to kill libertarians, conservatives, etc.

        2. avatar Ralph says:

          I’m less interested on winning hearts and minds than I am about defending my ass.

          If cops were to come to my door nicely, I’d make them coffee and finger sandwiches. If they were to come with guns drawn and flash-bangs flashing and banging, I’m going to defend myself.

      2. avatar Pascal says:

        No, I would expect every gun owner in every state to rally at the capital — mass protest of the action that even the MSM cannot ignore. Some poor family may very well be killed — the politicians will make this inevitable. There will be nothing to stop this. Just like a determined mass murderer, the state who is damned and determined to make an example of someone will have no problem killing a family standing behind the color of the law and the progressive left will see this as justified — it is what happens after the incident that matters. Due we simply go talk among ourselves in these here blog comments or do we finally stand up in mass protest from coast to coast?

        A raid will happen, a family will be killed and Obama will praise those brave cops who killed the family and the cops will justify it by saying “they were just doing their job” — and then we are suppose to continue to trust government and police and give both cooperation?

        There are plenty of big talkers in the gun world, few who will actually bring rhetoric into action.

        The Rally at the Hartford Capital is April 5th — How many buses from outside CT will come to stand with us?

        How can we prevent the bloodshed and the loss of a family? By keeping the rhetoric and keeping it in the news. Once the State Legislature comes out and says “this will never happen” then we win. Because if something happens after their proclamation, they will have to explain themselves and nothing government hates more than to have to explain themselves. The state will have to answer how they could answer one tragedy (Newtown) with another and someone will have to get the Newtown parents on camera asking if they finally feel justice has been done with a death of a family that had nothing with their tragedy.

        if all this pisses someone off, good, go do something about it politically in your own back yard. The days of just sitting around and talking guns is over — we all must be active — the three most dangerous things we have is: money, our vote and a long term deep vested emotional interest — three things politicians hate. Do not stop the noise.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      I believe there is no point whatsoever where you will not still be saying, “not just yet”. It seems evident to me.

      Therefore, every post from you will be filed in the “not just yet” file, and ignored for what it is – the governmental Voice of Reason.

  30. avatar Gun_Chris says:

    Make civil disobedience plan A, and if that works great! If not, there’s always that plan B….

    They’re both tools in the toolbox, so why can’t gun owners take both approaches?

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Correct. And IMO, the OP did their fair share of saber-rattling too.

  31. avatar Matt says:

    Well as a CT resident I’m happy for all the coverage we are.

    The writer has a point, mass civil disobedience is a good tactic and would be very effective but… what would stop the police form doing nothing at the time of the protest, taking say a nice video of the crowds and looking through pictures from media outlets and social media then gathering and arresting protestors up later at their convenience while they are alone? It sounds crazy but it already happens to a lesser extent with riots, big parties that get out of control, etc.

    I wouldn’t call what TTAG is reporting saber rattling, but I do agree and believe that both sides, the possibility of violence (unintended or otherwise) and the peaceful protest route needs to be talked about. Not talking about the possible violence doesn’t serve anyone; it’s wishful thinking to believe ignoring it will help keep gun owners in a positive light if something goes down. Plain and simple, we are screwed PR wise if a gun owner shoots up a SWAT team except under the very narrowest of circumstances.

    1. avatar Matt says:

      I should add, while I think the last hypothetical fan-fiction-esque post was over the top and I was not personally a fan of the dramatics, it does illustrate the possibilities of what could happen.

      We should default to Mill here, all conversation on the matter is valuable and the chaff and crap will be apparent and filtered out thusly.

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      And don’t ever forget that the local and state po-po can call on the resources of the feds (notably the specific reason for DHS’ very existence) to use their license plate readers, drones, cell phone intercept equipment, metadata analysis and facial recognition software to identify and keep track of each and every recipient of an arrest later (and let the courts sort ’em out).

      You forget that the society we live in has all the machinery of a modern police state already in place, just waiting to be used.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        The chances of the Feds NOT getting involved are extremely slim… to none. Who really believes they WON’T be involved? The entire confiscation thing is specifically as the behest of the Federal Government.

      2. avatar Matt says:

        Considering as a sys admin I am the butt of a NSA joke every other day I think I’m acutely aware of it.

  32. avatar Rustholio says:

    In a word, YES.

    My perception of your coverage so far is that the only possible resolution to the situation created by the law is armed conflict with law enforcement, and frankly the contributors writing the copy seem to be looking forward to it.

    These stories are presenting a false choice between peaceful possession of firearms with no restrictions, or all out civil war. This is a ridiculous position. There is a whole spectrum of available options. STARTING at civil war is foolish. Cali has had similar regs on the books for years with similar noncompliance and they seem to be making progress in litigating their issues.

    Everybody needs to takes deep breath, calm down, call Alan Gura, and lay low till we see how this plays out long term.

    To truly WIN this conflict we have take the high road. Starting a war because the Gov tried to take away guns only feeds the narrative that private citizens can’t be trusted with guns. Even folks who are nominally on our side won’t be for long if we turn their neighborhoods into Aleppo.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      “These stories are presenting a false choice between peaceful possession of firearms with no restrictions, or all out civil war. This is a ridiculous position.”

      There is nothing ridiculous at all. The civil war has been happening for about 90 years and civilian disarmament advocates started it. There is no “middle ground” because civilian disarmament advocates want complete disarmament. As for violence, the civilian disarmament advocates have kidnapped, beaten, and outright killed thousands of good people for merely possessing firearms. If that last statement has you scratching your head, realize that civilian disarmament advocates did not themselves apply the violence; rather they ordered government law enforcement to apply violence for them, cheering all the way.

      Tell me again why we should continue to “be nice”???

  33. avatar John L. says:

    The overall idea seems sound at first glance.

    However. While dropping the magazines does establish at least some plausible deniability, it also opens everyone there to the (justified) charge of littering. Unless they dropped the mags into a trash can…

  34. avatar neiowa says:

    Sabers are so 19th Century (to paraphrase John Fing Kerry). And very difficult to affix to a rifle. Better we go with bayonet rattling.

  35. avatar Brad says:

    The non-registration of firearms was civil disobedience. Demonstrators will be labeled as extremest gun nuts. In my opinion the proper thing to do is wait for the legislature and law enforcement to make a move. Hopefully they will hold off until the courts find the laws unconstitutional.

    1. avatar Tom W. says:

      The courts have shown they too cannot be relied upon to “vote the Constitution”.

      Chief Justice Roberts did backflips that would make a gymnast proud to pass obamacare. Why hasn’t an emergency injunction been filed in CT? Unconstitutional laws are void. This is not a state ordinance, this is an infringement. The 2A is not the 12th or 15th, it’s the Second for a reason.
      The founders tried to be nice to King George for a while also. KG kept taking and wanting more. Just like power addicted politicians.
      Get it?

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      “wait for the legislature and law enforcement to make a move.”

      They’ve already MADE the last fifty moves! Who wins a game of Chess in which only the other guy moves pieces?

  36. avatar James says:

    I would start by just wasting the staties time chasing ghosts. The rally isn’t a bad idea, just use all 10 round mags that look like 30 rounders. The police can try to arrest people and confiscate the mags which will open the doors to civil suits for wrongful arrest.

    For CT banned rifle owners, store the rifle off any premise you may own, not in your home, your in-state vacation home, your car, your yard, or your business property if you own some in-state. Keep any evidence that could track back to the gun’s location off premises ie storage locker documentation, keys, etc. If the cops have no leads and can’t find it on your property, all they can do is ask you what you did with it. Then you can tell them you sold it in panic over the new law and were in such a hurry to get rid of it, you didn’t get any documentation of who you sold it to, out state in a gun friendly state like Tennessee. Make sure they have a warrant for any search of your property. Place cameras everywhere to record the police’s actions in your property so you could sue if the cops go too far. Make it as difficult as you can without obstructing, they will waste time and resources to come up empty, potentially embarrassed, and maybe civilly liable for violating your civil rights

    1. avatar John L. says:

      “…you didn’t get any documentation of who you sold it to, out state in a gun friendly state like Tennessee.”

      I’ve never made a private sale across state lines … What sort of federal paperwork and regs have to be done for long guns? E.g. shipped through an FFL?

      If so, there should be a paper trail to be found and follow if you’ve followed the law. And if that’s what you’re claiming you did, I suspect the burden will be placed on you to validate the claim.

    2. avatar Jus Bill says:

      You realize of course that you can buy/possess 30 round-ish Airsoft mags that would fill the bill just fine.

  37. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

    Saber rattling? TTAG hasn’t that I’ve seen, though some comments could certainly be characterized that way. I see no major reason to change. Call it like you see it, as long as you clearly present facts as facts and opinions as opinions. I personally think TTAG does a better job of this than the legacy media.

    As to comments, I’m sure many of us have actual red lines based on clear principles, specific practices that would be intolerable. It might be worth clearly and carefully thinking about this ahead of time. The decision to take up arms is deadly serious and should not be made at the spur of the moment, in a fit of emotion or because you have talked yourself into a corner.

    Then, having clearly defined your personal lines in the sand, it might be wisest to STFU about it.

    1. avatar rlc2 says:

      +1. I think TTAG does a good job stimulating frank discussion, without going over the top, and tolerates dissent amongst commenters.

      Thats a HUGE improvement on the typical mass media.
      Saber rattling? No. Not even close.
      The story may have been in bad taste, but anyone reading in the context of the times and the focus of this blog got it right away, that it was fiction, as a form of “be careful”- not a threat, but a caution for everyone to slow down, and calm down.

      I see some ill-advised comments by individuals- maybe, but this is still a free speech nation, last I heard, and this community is a he11 of a lot more civil and responsible than a LOT of lefty- prog-tard comments sections, including WAPOs.

      If burning the flag is a Supreme Court upheld protected form of symbolic speech, then someone posting a picture of yourself with a firearm, saying Stand Strong, is much less “inflammatory”.

      Personally, I really feel for CT gun owners. They have been put in a bad situation, and the cops too, by the elected officials.

      I’m certainly not going to tell them what to do, either.
      But if a fire starts, its on the legislators who clearly ignored the will of the citizenry, and ANY harm, or blood shed, is on the hands of the legislature and the Governor, for this VERY FOOLISH “dare” they put in place, just to keep up with the cool kids in the progressive club.

      Thats either gross incompetence, or arrogance bordering on tyrranny, if not both.
      We should demand much more from our elected officials, and CT voters of all stripes should be outraged for that glaring lack of good judgement.

      Does CT allow for recall campaigns, like CO?
      That seems like a more positive action for right now.

  38. avatar cubby123 says:

    Just bury them , they can’ t confiscate what they can’t find!

  39. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “Instead gun owners in CT and elsewhere need to take a page from Martin Luther King Jr’s playbook with nonviolent assertive civil disobedience.”

    Just in case you haven’t been paying attention…the days of “non-violence” are LONG gone…LE has taken it upon themselves to shoot first, get the details later, and I for one, will NOT become their next conquest…

    1. avatar John L. says:

      Because of course the civil rights protests generally showed local constabulatories as paragons of law enforcement restraint. /sarc

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        No, because the civil rights protesters had the FBI, the National Guard and several POTUS on their side. We don’t.

  40. avatar Paul B says:

    I like this guys idea. That could work and I am sure Sipsey Street would back it.

    Ruby Ridge and Waco were government fiasco’s brought about by ATF arrogance. Ruby Ridge was a viet nam vet in a survival community selling s shot gun that was not long enough and Waco was a cult following of David Koresh in Texas. I think that was for the children, if I remember correctly.

    The Government seems to become a little more controlling when the Dem’s have the reins, but the Rep have not covered themselves in glory on this of late.

    It has all been down hill since Ronny got the Commies to fold their tent.

  41. avatar Sam Spade says:

    Warning the people who are coming for you that it might not work out for them isn’t violence. It’s just a warning. Not backed up with the ability and will to carry it out, though, is not so much a warning as a posturing.

  42. avatar Bill says:

    Tried to post this before so if it’s a repeat …

    The first time law enforcement shows up in force, wearing body armor, carrying automatic weapons, driving armored vehicles with SWAT pasted on the side to confiscate weapons and make arrests under this law, the genie is out of the bottle and nothing anybody does will put that genie back in the bottle. Armed civil disobedience/revolution will be a stones throw away then.

    Please, please, please CT legistlatures, look before you leap.

  43. avatar Justin_GA says:

    Let them take the guns, let them take your women, let them take your children, let them take your freedom, let them take your life.

  44. avatar Handgun Dad says:

    “Instead gun owners in CT and elsewhere need to take a page from Martin Luther King Jr’s playbook with nonviolent assertive civil disobedience.”

    Remind me… how’d that work out for Mr. King, again?

    What the text of the post does is a common form of debate where the person presents two choices and then demands a path be chosen between either one or the other when no such dichotomy needs to occur. This is referred to as a ‘false choice’.

    People in Connecticut, or wherever the grabbers strike next, don’t have to choose one option or the other. They in fact don’t have to do anything at all. They can ignore the current law and attempt to get it changed… but at this point it should be pretty obvious that’s not going to happen.

    The author is correct that most incidents of violence are going to be spun negatively with regards to gun rights groups… but anything that happens is going to be spun in such a manner be it an assault, a strongly worded letter, or standing up and giving an elected official the bird. How something will be portrayed by a media that hates you shouldn’t define the parameters of the engagement.

    Either Connecticut will enforce their laws, or they won’t. If they don’t then they look like fools, if they do eventually someone’s going to get shot. It’s that simple, and it’s not a false choice kind of simplicity because that many doors getting kicked in is going to end up with somebody screwing up.

    1. avatar crzapy says:

      It ended badly for Dr. King as an individual. However, the movement and message was bigger than the individual and that is why Dr. King won in the end. It sucks being the martyr, but at least he was effective and History remembers that.

      It will suck being the individual when the police come no-knocking. But unless the individuals band together there may never be an effective movement or message and that individual will have sacrificed in vain.

      My strategy is preemptive in nature.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        that is why Dr. King won in the end

        Nonsense. King won because Ike nationalized the Guard to integrate the schools in Little Rock, Kennedy intervened when King was arrested, armed soldiers showed up to integrate the University of Alabama when Wallace stood in the doorway and the FBI infiltrated the Klan. Those forces won’t be helping us.

        Political power comes from the barrel of a gun.

        1. avatar Jus Bill says:

          You’re right, and Mao was in all likelihood correct.

        2. avatar TheBear says:

          Lots of truth here…

          Which is why I’ve been saying for some time now that the gun rights fight will be won when high schools have gun safety or shooting electives again.

          Normalization begins in schools.

          /My/ idea is to start with private schools, get news coverage of the “new” classes, and use that platform to explain how kids get lots of self esteem, real world knowledge, etc etc etc from these classes.

          I don’t think this one change or idea in just private schools will solve the issue (that would require public schools too) but it’d be a start.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          And George Corley Wallace ended up being a bigger man than almost all of his liberal critics. Unlike them, he admitted his wrongheadedness, repudiated his pro-segregation stance, and ran as a populist presidential candidate, who pledged to support every citizen’s rights.

          And was cut down, nearly fatally, by yet another “lone assassin”, before election day.

  45. avatar Alan Longnecker says:

    You have to realize that politicians are nothing but con-men(women). A good con artist knows when the con is blown. They’ve ridden this anti-gun horse as far as they could. The smart ones will now flip the other direction, if they’re allowed to. I say allowed to because I don’t think anyone gets elected to a position of authority at the federal, state, or large metropolitan level without being wholly owned. I have a nickel that says if you scraped away all the b.s. G.W.’s top 100 campaign donors and O’Bummer’s top 100 are the same.
    The standard issue police officer doesn’t receive Obscene amounts of bribe, er lobby, money. I believe any stupid door to door order will, most likely, be ignored. If this foolishly comes to violence, then I say no holds barred. Not only do gun owners outnumber libertyphobes, but, uh, we have guns.

    1. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

      Actually, Obama and bush’s top donors were exactly the same. Don’t know if it went all the way to 100, but I believe at least the top 20 or so were.

      1. avatar rlc2 says:

        Interesting- link please. Should not be hard to document with facts.

      2. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        I don’t remember who said it, but I read the opinion that W was one of the best presidents the left ever had. He was a big government statist, but one the GOP let operate in peace because he had an R after his name. I must admit I wasn’t very politically aware then. The more I learn about W the less I like him. Still, at least he generally surrounded himself with competent staff and (I think) didn’t have a substantially weakened America as one of his main goals.

  46. avatar Samuel Adams says:

    Never underestimate the power of ridicule. The goal should be to construct as many situations that humiliate and frustrate the CT authorities as possible. To wit, ended up at a fundraising cocktail party with my NY Assembly-critter this past Saturday. Now could have harangued her in a group situation and come off as a nutcase (mostly liberals there). Instead just asked her a few polite questions about how many lives had been saved by the SAFE Act, particularly the assault weapon registration and magazine limits. Pretty much “hamada, hamada, hamada”. By the time I got to why we were allowing evil 30 round magazines to be sold to out of staters so they could kill kids in other states, she was doing her best to get out of Dodge–and I just looked like a perfectly reasonable person. When you are behind enemy lines like we are the offense has to be clever and layered. I think of my Polish great aunt who was a slave laborer in a Messerschmitt parts factory during the war–every 4th or 5th part was carefully and subtly sabotaged.

    1. avatar foggy says:

      Cool story, bro. Must not have been critical parts.

  47. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    Yes by all means lets be politically correct here so we don’t offend anyone’s delicate sensibilities.

    The founders are weeping in their graves and lady liberty lies with her robes torn and panties around her ankles from the gang rape of leftist politicians. Wake up people. The Sons of Liberty would already have been shooting.

    The Real Truth about Guns is the 2A is absolute, any infringement should be met with violence and force of action. Not only should TTAG be fanning the flames, but tossing gas and tires on the damn thing.

    *Mike Drop*

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      *clap*… *clap* *clap*… *full-on applause*

  48. avatar Michael B. says:

    I don’t get why people are upset over that bit of fiction you re-posted here, Farago.

    They seem to think such things couldn’t happen. Unfortunately **** like that happens more than it should in the US, with a lot of similar cases coming out of California. I don’t know if the Connecticut state cops are as unaccountable and untouchable as the LA County or LAPD boys but I’d be willing to bet they could be.

    I say stay the course.

    Nonviolent solutions should be explored, but if cops start kicking in doors going after people for life-ruining felonies then violence is going to occur.

    1. avatar Samuel Adams says:

      On your last point you are absolutely right. However, for those that don’t live around here, it is hard to appreciate the sort of self created echo chamber these politicians live in and how little it takes to crack it. They simply exist in a world where no one questions their orthodoxy. Have always found that when confronted in public with a hard question or two their argument falls apart. That is why the SAFE Act was passed in the dead of night–the CT law with debate cut off. In the election last fall, the Democrate running against the incumbent Republican (!) county executive ran ad after ad on gun control, accusing Astorino of allowing assault weapons to sold to criminals at the gun show held at the County Center. This in a county 2:1 D to R. Then watched Astorino call out his opponent in a debate with the facts (background checks, ATF/State Police on site etc) and the guy just fell apart. And lost by a landslide, despite having Clinton, Schumer and Cuomo campaign for him. Now he is running for governor and his first add showed a visual of the 2k jobs going to Alabama with Remington. Even here there is a big “middle” that can be won. Remember that the founding fathers understood PR very well- there was a reason many were publishers, writers, organized the postal system of the day–controlling the message was power.

  49. avatar Tom W. says:

    I’m sure all the Ukrainians will have to do is stage a “peaceful” rally when the tanks roll in. Putin respects that.
    Sarc off

  50. avatar SomeOneInWA says:

    C’mon, PC police on TTAG? I agree with the poster’s idea. In the same time I disagree that TTAG crossed the line. Call it as it is. All points of view should be welcomed.

  51. avatar Maineuh says:

    What, I’ve got to get a saber now? I don’t even know if I’m spelling that right.
    Nicely written letter, but I don’t completely agree. I don’t see anything TTAG is doing as saber (or sabre) rattling. Generally, it’s pretty level-headed around here and it self-polices well. Carry on, I say. Nothing wrong with keeping our emotions in it.

  52. avatar Don says:

    Sabre Rattling, I don’t think that’s the intent.

    I think TTAG is may be skipping what will be a whole lot of protest, petitioning, and litigation in between now and the possible violent future they have depicted in various posts. I don’t think by skipping all of that they are suggesting that it won’t happen.

    I think they are trying, as a thought experiment, to take these policies to the most terminal of their effect on society, to illustrate the ridiculousness of enacting such polices. For example, noncompliance with an arbitrary restriction shouldn’t merit the treatment given to terrorists who have their thumbs on a button, yet that is the only way to “enforce” these new policies against non-compilers. The more they enforce in any way against “regular otherwise law abiding citizens” the worse they’ll look and that will breed defiance faster than any speech.

    Lawmakers ought to take a step back when passing legislation and ask themselves:
    “Will we have to commit something that looks like a humanitarian atrocity to enforce this law against people who have done no harm beyond noncompliance with said law?”

    If the answer is “yes” then the policy is stupid, socially and politically, and should not be enacted.

    -D

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Actually, lawmakers ought to take a step back when passing legislation and ask themselves if it violates the Constitution; is it a privilege that the People have vested in government through that document?

      Anything less is tyranny.

  53. “As an added bonus when the police advance everyone drops their mags.”

    … and they arrest everybody for littering.

    1. avatar crzapy says:

      In most places littering is a misdemeanor and usually you are given a fine, not arrested.

      I don’t know about the people’s republic of CT.

    2. avatar slicer87 says:

      The sound of all those magazines hitting the ground would scare the cops, sending them into into a panic and shooting the protesters dead. Then the media will present the cops as heros putting down the nut cases.

  54. avatar Paul G. says:

    In that situation the cops do nothing, but the press comes in and labels all of these people as gun nuts, lunatics, fringe personality disorder types with their guns and flags and magazines, and reinforces exactly why they need to take the guns from these people. After all, despite the laws, the police were leaving them alone!!
    The next week, they state puts out a last chance statement, and when they start going door to door a few weeks later, they look totally justified.

    1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      The Vietnam War protests looked like a lot of druggies, cowards and communists, because it was, until the middle class became affected and participated.

      Howsoever this gets characterized early on, if the social dynamics are there to sustain it, then no amount of big liberal media shilling will be able to propagandize it into submission. At that tipping point, such lies would only energize and galvanize the protesters.

  55. avatar A-Rod says:

    Here is the thing about confiscation that will happen if and when it happens. The cops, no matter how many at every level of enforcement, from small town deputy to midsized town SWAT team to three letter acronym government agency, will be able to round up guns in a fast or efficient manner. The very first time the cops start banging on doors word will spread like wildfire via cell phone, email, web forums etc. The American Revolutionary War may have started off with ‘the shot heard around the world’ but yet it took weeks if not months for the news to actually spread but you can bet $100 in ammo that ‘the raid heard in the middle of the night’ will spread around the US in a matter of hours. It will take just a few good people, not the convicted felons, who get their firearms confiscated to spark outrage. Reaction, good people, now paranoid of the government and suspicious of their neighbors ratting them out will hole up to protect their own. Any time a cop car drives down a street it will be all quiet except for the occasional slide rack of a shotgun or the click of a safety going off heard behind closed doors. Next, a few good cops are gonna get killed because ‘they were just following orders’ and hopefully in a many areas the police themselves with turn ranks and defy confiscation orders. Man, I could go on and on like this and I am sure other could list realistic scenarios but the point is confiscation will not be a quiet event.

  56. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    I’m willing to give peace a chance, like the hippy’s said. I posted my thoughts on this in another thread. As to MLK just using peacefull protests, you must be a young man, & didn’t see the burning & looting. I haven’t seen TTAG offer any suggestions for peacefully resolving this. It would be nice if those 10’s of thousands of Fema coffins get used, that everyone could say, we tried to do this peacefully.

  57. avatar Byte Stryke says:

    Glad this guy wasn’t around Concord circa 1175

    1. avatar crzapy says:

      No one was at Concord in 1175 except maybe the Native Americans. That being said the parallels are not the same. The CT gov’t has not made a move yet, i.e. there has been no Boston Massacre and they have not marched on Concord. My strategy is preemptive. Also we have the benefit of social media, and places like TTAG to get out message out.

  58. avatar SysEng says:

    The OP’s has a major flaw in his plan. He assumes there will only be one of two outcomes and they will favor our side. This is what will really happen, they will ignore the protesters and nothing will come of it. The only thing that will be communicated will be in his head and not to anyone else. After the protest people will go home and the government will continue on with their plan. The protest will be lucky to get 10 seconds of air time in the media and then he realizes this protest was all for nothing and the only thing that came from it was the exposure of his weakness and his fear of standing up for his rights.

    1. avatar crzapy says:

      The protest is not a 1 time deal. Civil disobedience only works if it is often enough to be a major pain for the powers that be. MLK Jr. did not win in a day. The Gay rights movement has been obnoxiously in your face for decades and guess what, it is slowly working.

  59. avatar Jonathan says:

    What is going on in Connecticut is big if the left wins in Connecticut thay will do ti in every state in the U.S. that is why we must stand with Connecticut. But I do think that the writer of that email have an goog idea TTAG needs to help the Connecticut gun owners organize Daye for Peaceful Civil Disobedience Protests. And let’s be careful not to start nothing prematurely

  60. avatar Anon says:

    At first I thought it was over the top BUT on reflection I think it was good. I’ve posted before about the over 70,000 no knock raids every year in this country, SWAT using flash bang grenades on kids. A 17 year kid was killed in Ga because he opened the door carrying a Wii remote? The cops went there for a father for violation of parole and the cops go in with guns drawn and triggers on fingers?

    If only 1 kid is saved because some cop in Conn read this scenario and did some THINKING before acting, it will be worth it.

    I would be very unhappy if a cop killed my child over carrying a Wii. I bet the cop walks.

    You all need to be afraid of the police, they are not there to help you and they have proved over and over, even with poor aim, they will kill YOU.

  61. avatar slicer87 says:

    Persons in such a protest would have to worry more about than just being arrested. Most likely cops in riot gear would be sent to break up the protest and arrest the members using mace and baton beatings. Remember that TTAG article about how LEOs are allowed and told to escalate violence according to a scale. If you just sit there as a form of protest a cop is allowed to mace and beat you. Not saying this protest is a bad plain but the protesters will be harmed and something they should expect. Responding cops may be even allowed to use deadly force since the protesters are holding firearm parts would be justification and the media may spin it to favor of the cops and make the protesters look like nut cases.

    1. avatar crzapy says:

      That is true. The government could certainly escalate but many would say they already are. If they begin to fire on peaceful protestors than the hawks were right. The government has shown itself to be run by tyrants and they have begun the violence. Just like Bull Connor though violence may blow up in their faces. They may either sway the public in our favor, or force gun owners to acknowledge their predicament and begin the revolution.

  62. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    Highlighting plausible dramatic, injurious outcomes for all to read could serve more as a primer on warning signs to beware, than as an igniter of already smouldering emotions. In that way, TTAG’s efforts could help forestall those outcomes by reminding with each step how perilous is this path we’re all on.

    Often heard after a DGU use is the pleading exclamation “I didn’t have any other choice!” Well. There are always choices and some of them lead you to a time and place where only one choice, or none, remains; but that doesn’t erase the fact that prior choices did exist at various earlier points.

    TTAG’s drawing attention to the potentiality of this looming national DGU could help prompt early identification, evaluation and selection by all involved of better choices, before there is but one unavoidable, irreversible choice left.

  63. avatar Tom says:

    If there are mass arrests at a protest or they decide to launch raids on homes and if you are one of the unfortunate do not allow yourself to be fingerprinted or booked into jail. It will create chaos especially if there are large numbers brought in. Even if you refuse to be booked, they cannot prevent you from contacting legal counsel. Allowing yourself to be booked into a jail is essentially admitting guilt. Why do that when you are not guilty of anything except standing on a constitutional right.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      “…they cannot prevent you from contacting legal counsel.”

      Yes they can. They can do any little thing they feel like. Remember the Occupy mess – riding around in busses manacled and shackled for hours and hours. Done, but not legally. “Gee we’re so sorry we did that! Have some money!”

  64. avatar Nelson says:

    sure, perhaps we should just all welcome the cattle cars; ask Farago’s grandparents how that worked out.

  65. avatar Jethro says:

    Yes, let’s organize a hi-capacity magazine ‘turn in’ event. Wait, what?

    Civil disobedience is happening now. That it appears to be making even our side nervous shows that it’s working.

    The MSM is not on our side. Mass protest would be portrayed as provacative on our part. It would only take one or two saboteurs from the opposition, or nitwits on our side, to turn a mass demonstration into a massacre. Que the ‘domestic terrorist’ meme, chalk up the loss of the moral high ground.

    Keep ignoring unjust laws, keep your head down and your powder dry. It’s coming, no need to rush it.

  66. avatar Patrick Hayes says:

    Gun owners and gun rights supporters have to fight the huge liberal media complex. That is where sites such as TTAG come in. It is our voice. I am a police officer and I would turn in my badge before I followed the CT law. Sadly many of my CT brothers may have to make that call soon.

    It is important to see that any force used by the State of Connecticut would look far worse on the State than in the gun owners. The vast majority of Americans want limited police authority. There is a very good reason for that. Look at Nazi Germany or Stalin’s Russia.

    The State is in a bad spot. We are not talking about 2 or 3 warrants. We are talking about thousands.
    No State, Ct included has the police force capable of doing that. Even less when a percentage refuses to do it.

    Washington DC police ( A liberal ran and controlled department ) do three or four a year and each one makes the news. NY does the same. No State has ever considered mass arrests like this. The American public (Hopefully) will not stand for armed teams kicking in doors of Americans who committed no crime other than failing to register a gun. If the liberals running CT have any sense at all they will suspend, then repeal this law..
    If they don’t, the THEY are responsible for what happens.

  67. avatar Sam Spade says:

    Of which I was thinking earlier–of the Jews forced from their homes carrying all their worldly possessions in a cardboard suitcase. Legally.

    Play the Nazi card plenty and often against them. No matter how they would rant against you wouldn’t matter–they already think you’re worth less than kitty litter.

    EDIT: This was a reply to Nelson.

  68. avatar Noah says:

    I think we could sum up the majority opinion with one sentence: “We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
    He got his face on the hundred-dollar bill, so I’m going to assume he knew what he was talking about.

  69. avatar Jus Bill says:

    TTAG is doing just fine, IMO. It’s the front line in a war of cultures, of ideas.

  70. avatar ChuckN says:

    “Using social media activists need to coordinate a civil disobedience
    action. I like to call it the ‘Spartacus’ strategy.”

    Not sure using calling your plan Spartacus is the best course.
    Spartacus gathered an army of people who had been subjugated
    by the Romans. For the next 18 YEARS he killed government
    officials, routed the Roman armies, and looted and pillaged
    (particularly from loyalist communities) to feed his men.

    Spartacus wouldn’t really be one to seek peaceful resistance, he’d
    be wondering why we haven’t beheaded or crucified anyone yet.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      +100,000

  71. avatar Roll says:

    I knew this looked familiar, there is a poster on another forum (rhymes with AR-15) that posted this exact thing word for word…

  72. avatar Andy says:

    Myself I do not want to come out and say that I am for people firing on cops that come and knock down their door to confiscate weapons , former deputy myself , but in a concerted effort I feel that citizens militias should organize and and take the fight to the tyranny , in whatever way needed , the reason I feel this way is all that government knows to really get what they want is force , and all that they will understand is when this same amount or more force is used to counteract their actions , is when this tyranny will end , also we do have the ultimate law on our side given to us by God . Be prepared and ready. Keep your powder dry.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Good post.

  73. avatar ZM 1306 says:

    It would be interesting if, on election day, a huge group of people go vote then take up unregistered rifles and mags and just stand in front of the main legislative buildings. Send the message home, with the new officials.

  74. avatar S.CROCK says:

    “No matter what, if a gun owner fires on cops, whether they are storming his house or not, he will be played in the media as a paranoid and dangerous gun nut with an arsenal. ”

    i totally agree with that sentence. i have said it before and i will say it again. there will be no civil war II, partly because of the media. if you have 106 rounds of ammo you are labeled as having a large arsenal. if you shoot a cop with a rifle, the media will say “crazy cop killer shoots cops with illegal arsenal of assault rifles.” it will make no difference if they were coming to take your legally purchased property that you bought to defend your family against threats both foreign and domestic.

  75. avatar Luke says:

    Wars start when the aggressor feels they can engage in their aggression with a minimum of consequence.
    That being the case, rattle the d*mned saber!

    Sipsey Street Irregulars has this exactly right.
    Make clear the price that will be paid by those wishing to declare war upon the citizenry if they follow up on their foolish threat. This way, you minimize the chance of them actually sowing the wind.

    But just in case, be prepared. Engaging a SWAT team that’s breaking down your door isn’t a good tactical situation. I’d advise trying to avoid it.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      When they kick your door in, what are the chances it’s going to end with hugs and flowers exchanged?
      Not good at all, I’d say. You have a decision to make, and it might be better to think on it until you’re satisfied with your decision.

      Surrender and hope they don’t shoot you anyway (or a member of your family, as applies)? Or try and make sure some of them don’t knock down the next door?

      No one can make that decision for you.

      1. avatar Luke says:

        That’s a false dichotomy. There remains the option to passively resist the initial incursion.
        Banned firearms can be hidden rather securely. Firearms and ammunition can be staged elsewhere.
        Get the names of the officers. Publicly post them on the internet. Pictures if you can get them.

        This is the reality of guerrilla warfare: you don’t defend. Not anything. Not ever. You attack. And only at the time and place of your choosing. Then you disengage and fade back into the populace.

        IMO, the .223 is primarily a defensive round, and standard-capacity magazines encourage you to stay and get cornered. I don’t see the banned firearms as being the most effective weapons to conduct an insurgency.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          “False dichotomy”? So you just post a sign on the door that says, “NOTICE TO POLICE: I SOMEHOW, ERR…. GOT RID OF ALL MY PROHIBITED FIREARMS. PLEASE KNOCK NICELY”? That’ll do it?

          And what makes you believe, since they’re going to the trouble and danger of a raid, that they won’t go for ALL the firearms, not just the prohibited ones? So they… y’know… don’t have to do it again?

  76. avatar William Burke says:

    Need… some… aspirin.

  77. avatar TJ says:

    TTAG has done fine on the Connecticut issues. The blog has not gone overboard. Keep doing what your doing.

  78. avatar Jim R says:

    I think you guys do need to turn the rhetoric down a notch. You’re not doing anyone any favors, and neither is anyone in the comment section (you know who you are) yelling “COME AND TAKE IT!” You’re making us look like the crazies, fools and loons the media portrays us to be.

    One thing you have to remember–the antis have the media. The papers, the TV news, the radio and a large portion of the Internet’s biggest sites are run by statists. THEY get to set the tone, not us. That means we need to be on our best behavior at all times. We ARE being watched and they’re looking for ANYTHING to pin us to the wall. They want us gone and they’ll do everything they think they can get away with to achieve that end. Lies, half-truths, slander and libel are not beneath them. So we don’t need to give them any help.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Speaking on behalf of myself only, which is my privilege and my right: I am not here to do you, or anyone else, any “favors”.

      If you want to bow down before your masters, no one is stopping you. But don’t try and dictate to others what you think they should do.

      I have recently seen a sudden influx of “calm-downers” here. Such as yourself. And I do not believe in coincidences. Take it for what it’s worth.

      May your chains rest lightly upon you.

      1. avatar Rich Grise says:

        “If you want to bow down before your masters, no one is stopping you. But don’t try and dictate to others what you think they should do.”

        This is another argument for the slashing of the Fed. Gov. back to strict Constitutional levels. If some state wants to go full-on Communist, they should be allowed to, as long as they’re not allowed to rip off the Free states to bail them out of their inevitable bankruptcy.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          SOMEHOW I knew I could count on you to say that. I must be peripatetic that way, I guess. 😀

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Molon labe, baby! Have a nice day.

  79. avatar ErinTarn says:

    When the fight goes country-wide, people will stop believing the sensationalist media.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Many will. Some will never, I guess.

  80. avatar Ben says:

    Some of the coverage (you know what I mean) has been sensationalist in a way
    That seems beneath TTAG. I first started coming here a few years ago because I liked how often you references fact or debunked false claims made by antis. All this “saber-rattling” is obnoxious.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      If speaking with patriotic fervor in support of the Bill of Rights is to be deemed “obnoxious”, you have given me all the excuse I need to continue being “obnoxious”.

      May we forget you were ever our countryman.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Shoulder to shoulder, my brother.

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          Word!

  81. avatar Copy&Paste says:

    Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17). The original 1818 text came from the Mississippi Constitution of 1817.
    http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm

    Ref: Violations of ‘Rights’ in Connecticut
    Regardless of the intent expressed by the legislators, the evidence is now irrefutable that their actions have resulted in transposing many among the vast numbers of Morally-conscious, ‘Rights’-respecting, Law-abiding, Dutiful and Peaceable Citizens into ‘criminals under law’.
    Given these and other facts, the only logical, rational and reasonable solution to the legal problems lawmakers have created for themselves, the Citizens and those now trapped in the tenuous position as law-enforcement officers — is to immediately rescind the laws as enacted.

    Suggestion to de-escalate the legislatively-created conflict as follows:
    While our initial intent was purely in the interest of making an effort to enact laws with a mind toward preventing gun violence and enhancing safety and security;
    upon further review and given ancillary considerations;
    We as representatives, find that;-
    the laws as enacted were beyond the scope of Constitutionally-permitted authority and inconsistent with our Moral, Ethical and Legal Duties to ‘Secure Rights’ of all Citizens of the Great State of Connecticut.
    Therefore, all laws under Public Act 13-3, Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety are hereby rescinded.

    [ Simple point of inquiry: What better reason can there possibly be for legislators to avoid enacting ‘Rights’-violating laws than simply adhering to laws already written into Constitutions as ‘Rights‘ they‘re Duty-bound to protect, secure and defend?
    In the case at hand all that’s necessary is to simply rescind those erroneously written. ]

    Do No Harm / Successfully Defend

    1. We were first.

      Vermont: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State — and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. Ch. I, art. 16 (enacted 1777, ch. I, art. 15).

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Nice, Vermont.

  82. avatar kap says:

    they should march on city haul and prosecute the Seditious and treasonous wimps in a Kangaroo Court then ????
    when the unlawful hide behind laws its hard too be peaceable especially when the system is wired against the Constitution and freedom of the people! Political Crooks want average people too toe the Line
    the sad part in all of this is the Politicians will not be affected at all, just those that uphold it and their victim’s Connecticut has set the stage for suppression and Armed rebellion, make no mistake the Federal Baby Incinerators will be their to perform their magic like Waco,

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