Connecticut State Police “Overwhelmed” by Gun Registration

 Colonel Stebbins (courtesy

“We didn’t see this coming and there was no way we could be prepared for it.” Well he would say that wouldn’t he? Connecticut State police Col. Danny Stebbins [above] is in charge of implementing the Constitution State’s unconstitutional gun laws. To say Danny and his dinosaurs were unprepared to process the gun registration system created by Connecticut legislators would be like saying that this Texan would look in a gunny sack (hint: she would). That said, the stats are startling . . .

State police Col. Danny Stebbins said Friday that a backlog in background check requests has exploded to more than 62,000 from about 1,000 in December — a spike of more than 6,000 percent.

As my father used to say, how much is this boondoggle going to cost me? Me, nothing. Nutmeg State taxpayers, plenty.

The Office of Fiscal Analysis estimates the gun control law will cost taxpayers up to $17 million through the 2015 fiscal year, including more than $4 million for state police to conduct background checks, issue permits and develop and maintain a gun offender registry.

Needless to say that’s not going to do it. Connecticut’s new laws mandate a state police-administered background check for all long gun purchases. The po-po’s got to process registrations for all “assault rifles” and “high capacity magazines” grandfathered-in under the regs. And they have to issue (or not) ammunition eligibility certificates.

In short, Connecticut’s whole gun control system is going to collapse. Registrations will not be registered. Background checks will clog-up the works. The state’s gun owners’ Constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms will be delayed and, thus, denied.

And get this: Malloy’s looking to do a little union busting to clear the [now] anticipated logjam.

Gov. Dannel. P. Malloy has said he wants most of the new workers to be civilians because their pay is lower than that of sworn troopers.

Malloy and the Legislature are now negotiating a two-year budget that, among many other responsibilities, will establish staffing levels and funding for the state police.

Bad ideas only get worse with time.


  1. avatar Russ Bixby says:

    They really should flush this turd before it stinks up the hole house.

    1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      And check out his gig line. He must be from upper slobovia.

  2. avatar Jeff says:

    The link is to an article, not a babe. Please fix.

    1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

      Yeah it does, but look at this juicy tidbit I found.

      How’s that strict gun control working?

      1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        awesome. It is for the children(TM) so let the governor and his cronies deal with it – payback will be public and brutal

      2. avatar Jeff says:

        Nice find. Who could have anticipated that would occur? (Yes, most of us.)

  3. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    This is what happens when people who lack the cognitive ability to understand and anticipate second and third order effects push or write laws, which is pretty much most “law” makers.

  4. avatar Bob2 says:

    They didn’t see this coming? Did i read that right. For us who work in places that deal in reality, there are two words that usually are said to managers like this: “You’re fired!” What kind of idiot would not see this coming? It is absolutely astounding to see the level of incompetence in government, especially when a mistake from that area of government can cost someone their life or their freedom.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      How could the State Police, an administrative agency, have foreseen that the Legislature would ram through a series of bills with little to no public debate imposing all new burdens on the agency? Its not like the Police asked the legislature to pass stupid laws.

      1. avatar Rambeast says:

        One need only look to the north to see how Canada’s registry worked out.

      2. avatar Roscoe says:

        Thanks Mark N!

        Some folks are in such a hurry to bash all law enforcement they don’t think it through before they start blasting away; kinda like how those CT legislators jambed that law into effect without thinking through the logistics.

        1. avatar csmallo says:

          Then maybe the government employees should have testified against the bill. “Law enforcement” is the problem.

    2. avatar J says:

      This might actually be a good thing. If the wait to register or transfer a gun becomes too long, that could be an avenue for court challenge. A right delayd is a right denied, and too long of a delay is effectively an unconstitutional denying of the 2A.

  5. avatar Southerner says:

    Law enforcement officers are civilians.

    1. avatar Rambeast says:

      When they are held accountable as much as the common citizen for their actions, I’ll believe that.

      1. avatar EPThorn says:

        He’s right. I guess it came about because police look at the way military talk about ‘civilians’ but police are assuredly civilians. I’ve heard police try and avoid that by calling non-leos “citizens” but it brings in the same problem that police are also citizens.

        1. avatar csmallo says:

          The simple solution is to remove the rights of citizens from government employees. If they want to live off the tax payers and have “authority”, then they should not have the same rights as a citizen.

        2. avatar twency says:

          Police are civilians, and they are citizens. But they are not private citizens, they are public officials.

        3. avatar twency says:

          Police are civilians, and they are citizens. But they are not private citizens, they are public officials.

  6. avatar JOE MATAFOME says:

    This couldn’t have happened to a nicer moron. I’m going to pay in pennies when my slave state passes the same dumbass law.

    1. avatar Mike in NC says:

      Just be sure you don’t use any of those high-capacity coin rolls when you do that!

      1. avatar Rambeast says:

        Those full auto coin separation gatling thingies too!

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Say, now there’s another great idea for civil disobedience … pay our government firearms fees and taxes in coins!!!!!

    3. avatar Silver says:

      That’s a good idea actually. Best part, it’ll take only one disgruntled civil servant to get fed up and deny someone doing that, thus putting a lawsuit on their hands.

    4. avatar Ing says:

      Careful, they’ll get you for that, too. There was a guy who paid a bill in pennies a while back and got charged for harassment or impeding public justice or disturbing the peace or some such garbage.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        I went to my home town police station circa 1992 and paid a ticket in loose change. My sin was for parking 2 hours and 7 minutes in a clearly marked 2 hour zone. I paid that ticket with about 300 pennies and the rest in nickels and dimes. Good stuff. The clerk said the ticket wasn’t her fault. I told her that it wasn’t my fault that I didn’t have cash.

  7. avatar Pantera Vazquez says:

    It will be interesting to see what happens when the next election cycle rolls round the Former Constitution State. If constituents wake up and can the legislators and governor, well deserved for not living up to the state’s moniker.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      Mostly liberal state CT is with lots of liberal democratic sheeple voters, I doubt they’ll change a thing. Just like it is here in CA, but without the good weather.

      Don’t be surprised when incrementally more restrictive legislation keeps coming down the ‘pike.

      Ya gotta fight it every way you can, though.

  8. avatar Jerryboy says:

    and why would people register their weapons in the first place, when they’ve got to know that the next step is confiscation.

    1. avatar Rambeast says:

      The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens. Even if the law is obviously unconstitutional or morally wrong, they will respect them. There will be a tipping point eventually, and you see mass non-compliance, until then, it is what it is.

      1. avatar Silver says:

        The gun-grabbers know that gun owners are by and large the most law-abiding segment of the populace, and use that against us. Or try to anyway.

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    It’s only going to cost $17 million? That’s governmental chump change. Besides, all the bleeding heart @ssh0les who wanted this law will be very happy to pay for it. Me, I’ll just laugh, “for ’tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard.”

  10. avatar In Memphis says:

    I dont miss Connecticut at all, no offense to my fellow natives. I used to miss the beach, having grown up on the shore, until I vacationed in Destin, FL last month.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      I lived in Stamford for several years. I thought the people there were @ssh0les.

  11. Connecticut’s system is currently overwhelmed by the background checks for concealed carry permits which mushroomed over the past few months. The State Police have no way of dealing with the newly imposed gun / magazine registration requirements. In fact, they haven’t even devised a system to register magazines.

    From the scores of gun owners that I’ve interviewed, It’s safe to bet that few, if any, will comply with Malloy’s unconstitutional measures.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      When too many laws are in place, citizens start to ignore them, particularly those laws that appear unjust, overburdensome, yada, yada, yada.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Actually, it might be even better if everyone registered everything … see my post below about burying them even further.

      1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

        One application per magazine, one application per weapon. Sounds like it would be a fun filled Saturday for filling out the forms.

  12. avatar Mediocrates says:

    Let’s help them! Disarm the North!

  13. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Do the background checks for private long gun sales cost anything to the seller or purchaser? If not (or if it is minimal) what the residents should start doing is pair up by the thousands and sell the same two rifles back and forth several times a month. Imagine if 10,000 state residents grouped themselves into 5,000 pairs of gun owners and then sold the same two rifles back and forth to each other twice a month? That would generate 20,000 additional background checks per month. If the state employee eats up something like 10 minutes to approve each background check, that 20,000 checks per month would require 19 full time employees — assuming 8 hour work days and 22 work days per month.

    And then the gun rights people can point out how the state employs an additional 19 people for a task that still would not prevent another Sandy Hook Elementary massacre.

    On the other hand, the Statists might like that because it requires the State to become even larger. Thoughts?

    1. avatar Nate says:

      My guess is they would love it as it provides more $$ for the state, more voters whose employment is tied to big gov, and an excuse to demand “use fees” for the “privilege” to transfer firearms between two law abiding citizens.

  14. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    That . was . excellent !!!!!!!!

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Sorry, I was replying to a post which disappeared. I think the site admins deleted the comment to which someone replied to which I replied.

  15. avatar Jess Banda says:

    Soooooo, background checks increase 6,000%…does this mean we might have the numbers necessary for recall elections???

  16. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

    Dopey pols didn’t learn from our northern neighbor. Canada had a similar long gun registration system for a decade and spent BILLIONS on it. In the end the people of Canada revolted and refused to obey. Finally, the pols up there realized the waste and last year did away with it. But then again the people told them to eff themselves. Just to make the remaining data held by Ottawa useless, the folks engaged in a last act of civil disobedience by “trading” guns with each other. This so that any records would not reflect who owned what. If Conn thinks thinks that all will comply they are fooling themselves.

    1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

      But since we are muricans we know better than the rest of the world. We won’t fail at a registry like those Canadians! /sarc

  17. avatar Silver says:

    Any who register are slaves.

    Do not comply. They have the law of tyrants in their hands, you have the law of the land in yours.

  18. avatar percynjpn says:

    American Cop = lazy, overpaid, slovenly, public sector union “worker”. No surprise here.

  19. avatar janklow says:

    ah, reminds me of the current state of things in Maryland…

  20. avatar residentCT says:

    Another juicy tidbit about the State Police official Col. Danny Stebbins. State Police union members voted 740-34 for no confidence in Col Stebbins on 6/26/12 for “jeopardizing the safety of troopers and the public”. Looks like they will have more reason for no confidence. When they say they want to replace sworn officers with citizens could they mean to hire temps to permit?

  21. avatar littlegunguy says:

    As I have stated on many posts, the police are not your friends. Why are these police officers not standing against the unconstitutional bill. Because they are all Gestopo. Every state police force is the enemy of the citizens. IF THEY WEREN’T, THEY WOULD DO THE PATRIOTIC THING AND STAND FOR THE RIGHTS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS. THEY ARE ALL TRADERS!

    1. avatar Steve says:


      Traders or traitors?

      1. avatar littlegunguy says:

        Traitors. Auto correct does it again.

  22. avatar Mike M says:

    Yes, getting your permit takes time (took me about 5 months to go through the process). Yes, it will take more time to buy ammunition because 1) you have to fill out a form every time you buy munitions, 2) you have to have a background check at the store to buy munitions and 3) ammo is so tight, most stores are limiting the more popular rounds to 1 box a day. Yes, it takes more time to buy a gun because of the magazine limitation. Try buying a Glock with anything less than 15 round magazine. Not possible. I had to buy mine without a magazine, then had to buy a Glock 17 10-round magazine….because Glock 19 10 round magazines just don’t exist anymore.

  23. avatar Edward Bozenski says:

    As usual, Danny Boy Malloy was ignorant to the facts when he proposed the new gun laws. I do believe in background checks prior to the purchase of any handgun, rifle or shotgun; however Danny Boy is trying to make criminals out of law abiding citizens. I did a hitch in the Marine Corps and retired out of law enforcement. I can say, when carrying for self protection, the last thing I want on my mind is only having 10 rounds in a 15 round magazine. I’m pretty sure the thug I may be up against has 15. Malloy’s laws would have changed nothing in the Lanza household. His mother would still legally possess her guns and junior would still be a murderer, with no regard for the number of rounds in his magazine. Danny Boy is just looking for votes. Chris Murphy was a clueless “yes” boy in this matter and then there’s “shotgun” Joe Biden…I guess he’s just stupid for the advise he gave his wife and the American people. (Paraphrased – You don’t need an AR-15 for protection. Just go out on the balcony and blow off a couple of rounds.) In a life threatening situation, the last thing a person should do is give up their cover. My take on this; If shotgun Joe gave up his cover in such a situation, we would probably be watching media coverage of them scraping his sorry ass off the deck because he broke the golden rule of engagement.

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