BREAKING: First CT Gun Owner Busted for “Large Capacity” Magazine

 11 bullets (a.k.a., cartridges) (courtesy The Truth About Guns)

“An officer stopped [Tyrone] Watson’s vehicle on Water Street at 1:25 a.m. Sunday, because the officer felt that Watson was tailgating him,” reports. “The officer let Watson’s car pass, then pulled him over. While trying to find his license and registration, Watson took out his pistol permit and quickly put it back, according to police. The officer asked if Watson had a weapon on him, and Watson replied that he was carrying a gun, police said. The officer secured the handgun for the duration of the motor vehicle stop and while making the pistol safe, the officer noticed that the pistol had 11 bullets in its magazine and none in its chamber, police said. The magazine had a capacity to hold 15 bullets, according to police.” Uh-oh, because . . .

A portion of Connecticut’s new gun laws, which went into effect Jan. 1, make it illegal to have a magazine that holds more than 10 bullets. Large capacity magazines purchased prior to the passage of the new law had to be registered by Dec. 31.

Watson was advised of the new law, and he said he had no idea that the law went into effect, police said.

The officer wrote Watson a summons and gave him back his gun and the magazine, telling him to store the items in his trunk until he arrived at his home, according to police.

And The Constitution State was saved from a spree killer! No wait. That’s not it. A criminal was prevented from using a “large capacity” ammunition magazine to inflict “gun violence” on a law-abiding citizen! Nope. That’s not it either.

A law-abiding citizen who’d jumped through more hoops than a circus pony to exercise his natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms was subjected to an unconstitutional law that will strip him of his gun rights forever – so that statists can extend their tyranny in the name of public safety. [h/t Pascal]


  1. Connecticut is hell, move to Tennessee. Here the cops won’t treat you like a criminal for carrying a gun.

    1. avatar S.dogood says:

      LIKE HELL LET THE YANKEES FIGHT FOR THEIR RIGHTS !!!! mark my words too many yankees will ruin tennessee

      1. avatar Vhyrus says:

        Did we just get transported back to the 1890s?

        1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          1850s would be better.

        2. avatar NickTX says:


        3. avatar Rich Grise says:

          I’d like to see the FedGov restored to 1789 levels, so the rest of us can get on with the 21st century. There are very few things that need to apply to the whole freakin’ country.

          Democracy = “Let’s all vote on what everybody’s favorite color is!”

      2. avatar H.R. says:

        There are plenty of “Yankees” who’d fit in better swapping tall tales with you next to a campfire than they would at a party surrounded by urban elitists.

        It ain’t the yankees coming you should be concerned with so long as you get the right kind of yankee.

        1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          There are no “right kind of Yankees”. Every thing bad in America has come from the Yankee.

        2. avatar shawn says:


        3. avatar shawn says:

          Chris…the war is over for about 150 years. Get over it.

        4. avatar Rich Grise says:

          “Every thing bad in America has come from the Yankees” doesn’t mean bad things in America come from every Yankee.

        5. avatar NYC2AZ says:

          I don’t get offended much. Especially by topics that procure the incessant whining about NYC and it’s smug populace because I whine about the same thing… worse, I lived (and continue to deal with, abet farther away) with people of that mindset. However, the above comment gives me a little more respect for posters like Accur81 who brave all the hasty generalizations of cops around here.

        6. avatar BT in Afghan says:

          As I have had to correct many of my neighbors in the south. I was born in Maine, moved south. I am Not a Yankee, I am a damn Yankee and yes I know the difference. That usually puts an end to the Yankee talk. If they wish to continue the BS I will also gladly debate them about the War of 1861-1865. They are usually surprised to find a northerner who actually knows the issues of the time and a States Rights supporter. Even asked to research family history to find a way to join Sons of the Confederacy. Not all us damn Yankees are bad.

        7. avatar PavePusher says:

          Chris Mallory, take your stereotypes and bigotry and GTFO, you three-toothed, two-toed swamp-stalker.

          (See how that works?)

        8. avatar int19h says:

          I hope you do educate them that Civil War was not over States Rights at all?

        9. avatar Rich Grise says:

          “I hope you do educate them that Civil War was not over States Rights at all?”

          Does anybody really know what it was about? I was told that it was over slavery, but other people have said that it wasn’t that at all; now you say it wasn’t about states rights either. At this point I really have no idea.

        10. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Rich Grise, regardless of why the war was fought; a subset of American citizens were freed BUT a Nation was enslaved. States that entered a Union voluntarily were forced to remain in that Union. The federal government gained impetus for non-enumerated power through the use of unconstitutional force against the Confederacy. Today, we are still reaping the poison crop from those seeds. The federal government is subservient to the States and to the People. Our Union was a voluntary one. We now have a perversion of that voluntary union and our federal government behaves as if power flows from government to the People. Through the loss of the War of Northern Aggression, the Union was essentially lost. It’s now servitude for all States and the People. As we’re all slaves now, who is to set us free but ourselves? Even as an abolitionist, I would have vehemently fought on the side of the South. I love a free Republic too much to have made any other choice.

        11. avatar Rich Grise says:

          John in Ohio, thanks for this. This makes it doubly gratifying to me to see the upsurge in the ‘Tenther movement’: Plus a lot of other Liberty activists.
          Freedom is my Worship Word!

      3. avatar Billy bones says:

        Very classy, dad gum it, them Yankees keep hitting on my sister, can’t they see I done put a wedding ring on her

        See, it hurts , eh Billy Bob?

      4. avatar JoshtheViking says:

        I’m from the south too, but I have known plently of people from Ohio and Indiana (Yankees) that fit in just fine with our gun culture. If you stand for freedom, you are more than welcome here as far as I care.

      5. avatar cheshirecat says:

        Yankees that move to Tennessee were never yankees to begin with…

      6. avatar USMC89 says:

        Dude, the civil war has been over for some time now and the only Yankees I know of play on a baseball diamond. I praise southern people for their manners and hospitality but that doesn’t mean they’re all that way. That judgemental comment just came across as ignorant but that doesn’t mean you’re ignorant….or does it??

        1. avatar niceguns says:

          The physical war may be over but the Yankee war against southern conservative values has never stopped and now a new one is brewing. Yankees never stop spreading there filth.

      7. avatar Bob R. says:

        Wrong, I am a Yankee and I moved to Tennessee and I have more guns than you and shoot them all.

      8. avatar Rick O says:

        Tennessee is the place of my birth…Memphis, specifically… And, I am cracking up laughing here. dogood writes, ” mark my words too many yankees will ruin tennessee.” The “Volunteer State that gave us not one, but TWO Al Gores….the ultra-liberal Kool-Aid Slurping Harold Ford, The uber-liberal Morgan Freeman, The Communist Van Jones, Oprah Winfrey and a whole bunch of other smarmy uber-liberals messing up the whole country. You complain YANKEES will ruin Tennessee but had no problem with Tennesseans screwing thing up elsewhere…You are a funny guy.

      9. avatar niceguns says:

        You said it, South Carolina is already having problems with New Englanders that moved there to escape the State they ruined and now plan to ruin that one. Liberalism is a disease.

        Yankees go to hell.

        1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

          Yeah! Damn those dad gum Yankees Sam Colt, Eliphalet Remington, Eugene Stoner, William Ruger, Benjamin Henry, Oliver Winchester, Richard Gatling, John Thompson, Christian Sharps, Horace Smith and Daniel Wesson!

    2. avatar 11B Infantry Hunter says:

      I served in the U.S. Army as a 11B with men from all over the country. Where a man is born doesn’t not make the man. It is his integrity, his honor, his selfless service to a cause bigger than one man, it is his ability to be counted on any minute of any day, it is his word and his morales. I know plenty a great Soldiers and Marines that are “Yankees”. I live in Memphis, TN and if any of you “Yankees” want to keep your 2A Rights come on down. Friendly advice stay between Nashville and Knoxville. Memphis is terrible.

      1. avatar Felicia Nomiko says:

        You are so right. Lived in Memphis for 10 years and it is a terrible city.

    3. avatar Thomas Pain says:

      quit running, and start fighting. i’m tired of this ‘move’ shit.

      1. avatar CT Resident says:

        You aren’t from Connecticut are you? 😉 Believe it or not there are many staying in Connecticut to fight for our civil rights. Many are leaving because they are following jobs and leaving the cold and high cost of living. Many leave just because they cannot afford to live in CT any more. The current government is headed by Gov Malloy, an extremely thick headed, arrogant, and possibly very corrupt, anti gun owner governor, backed by and overwhelmingly anti gun owner legislature. After “fighting” by going to several hearings last year (with thousands of intelligent and well spoken pro gun people) and missing much work we were betrayed by many, but not all, of our legislators with the Emergency Certification and passing of SB 1160 aka PA 13-3. Will keep pressing our rights by going to hearing and telling our side and supporting CCDL in CT, but with a Gubernatorial election coming up with both parties apparently fielding anti gun rights candidates it is tempting to bail out on this state. I have a job for now in CT but if that goes, the choice may be made for me.

        1. True story. The legal and law-abiding and Constitutional gun owners in CT do not need any grief from anyone about how we need to fight harder. We are fighting. We are doing everything we can. Get off our jocks.

    4. avatar Bob says:

      Sure, but if a Tennessee cop finds you in possession of $1500.00 in cash he’ll steal it from you.

    5. avatar Mannie says:

      No, but they may seize all your cash, just for the hell of it.

    6. avatar DJC1012 says:

      Right ON! … kinda
      I moved to TN eight years ago from Southern California when I came up with a plan to increase the company’s business. The boss agreed I could do it better if moved to TN and worked from home (yes, there IS a God)
      I moved to the Nashville area and after just a short while, vowed I’d never go back. It took me several years to get over blurting out is THAT legal here? Tennessee is freedom lovers paradise compared to CA … well, close anyway.
      Yet, somehow I want to shut the gate behind me. I know how too many Californians think. We don’t THEM coming here to “fix it for ya”. haha

      1. avatar Rick says:

        If you want to see someone positively giggly, watch a former resident of New Jersey complete a (completely legal!) handgun purchase here in Tennessee in 20 minutes.

  2. avatar C says:

    Something i learned pretty quickly about dealing with the cops. LIE YOUR ASS OFF!

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Why not? They will.

    2. avatar C says:

      Well, outright lying might be a bit hasty. Yelling back to him as he steps out of the car, “i ain’t answerin’ shit!” might be ill advised as well but only in style, not substance.

    3. avatar Don says:

      Lying to the police is a crime and an arrestable offense. I assume (but am not certain) that lying to the police (or a judge or FBI agent, etc.) can be considered obstruction of justice.

      You do however have the right to keep your mouth shut.

      1. avatar Jake F. says:

        As I understand it, it is completely legal to lie to a police officer, so long as the officer is not a federal agent, and the police officer is not conducting an investigation.

        That said, it’s certainly not advised.

        1. avatar Andrew says:

          As soon as you are pulled over and the officer is talking to you, he/she is conducting an investigation. Same as if you are stopped on the street because you are acting intoxicated, or are causing a scene, there is an investigation in process.

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        If you provide a false statement to a police officer during an investigation, most/all jurisdictions consider that a crime. I have no idea if it is a misdemeanor or a felony. If the false statement was serious enough, I am sure most/all jurisdictions would also charge you with obstruction of justice as well.

    4. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      But, the cops on Law & Order always say they just want to help people…

      1. avatar Rick O says:

        Law and Order…that is one of those shows where the cops are all nice, and do magic and own unicorns…..

    5. avatar Rich Grise says:

      “Something i learned pretty quickly about dealing with the cops. LIE YOUR ASS OFF!”
      I remember when I first discovered that and used it. I felt like a new man!

  3. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    So is this a $50 fine or a year in prison?

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      The law is written such the first offense is a fine, the second time you go the pokey

  4. avatar Jim R says:

    Too late for this chap.

  5. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    This is sickening.

  6. avatar William Burke says:

    But officer, I was looking for a safe place to take the bullets out! Been in there since before the law was passed. Really!

    Been looking ever since it passed.

    1. avatar C says:

      Yes! “Officer, that mag is grandfathered. I loaded it in october.”

      1. avatar Detroiter says:

        X2 ….dumber things have saved a dudes bacon

  7. avatar RKBA says:

    Less talking….

    More insurrection, please

    1. avatar Andy says:

      Here Here ! BPAR.KYPD.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:


  8. avatar Dave s says:

    Do note the officer was fairly reasonable, cite and release and return the weapon, V lodge and confiscate.

    1. avatar PavePusher says:

      True… but he could also have simply advised him on the new law, and let him go without a summons, or the idiotic order to leave the gun unloaded until he got home.

      Also, bullshit reason to pull someone over anyway. If that’s what the pull-over was for, that’s what the summons should have been for, and the gun should have been ignored unless there was reason to believe the driver was intending to commit a violent crime. Trampling on Playing fast-and-loose with the intent of the Fourth Amendment, even if it might be within the scope of court precedent.

      1. avatar Danny says:

        Cop’s cruiser records the whole event probably. If he let him go he’d risk his job. I imagine he hates the law almost as much as the people he’s supposed to protect, but then again he’s probably exempt under this law, right?

        1. avatar ADAM RO says:

          If he hates the law then he doesn’t need to ask so many questions about weapons. a criminal that is intent on harming a police officer isn’t going to handover weapons anyway. if the police are afraid of weapons they need to find a new job. a weapon is simply a tool of their trade.

        2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          So he is on a moral plane even lower than the Germans who loaded people onto trains. At least they could claim to fear being sent to the Eastern Front. He is “just following orders” so he can keep his tax fattened paycheck.

        3. avatar Hannibal says:

          You think a dashcam would record the number of rounds in a mag? Nope.

          Sounds very much like a search, anyway, unlike a simple temporary disarmament- checking how many rounds are held? I bet the guy could find some legal backup if he wants to fight the charge.

      2. avatar B says:

        Court precedent says their is no 4th amendment and its not reasonable to assume your stuff won’t be searched. Because Syria.

      3. avatar Jake F. says:

        Officers can write you up for any violation incident to a police encounter. The fact that he was pulled over may have been bullshit, and I’m not familiar with the laws surrounding CCW and informing the police of your carrying in the state of Connecticut, but if the driver offers information to the officer, and complies with a requested search, and the search reveals criminality the officer is able to cite for that criminality.

        All in all, that driver needs learn how to deal with cops to protect his rights, something I’m sure he’ll learn all about after this gross violation.

        1. avatar Pascal says:

          Do not need to inform, but cops already have access from their cars.

          There have been many of us in CT who have been stopped asked if we have a weapon while driving cars registered to us, however, when I drive my GF car and have been pulled over, I have never been asked.

          In this case, the guy flashed his permit when taking out his license. Not sure if that is enough for a RAS

        2. avatar Matt says:

          I’ve had the same exact thing happen to me while removing my license, cop saw my permit and asked if I was carrying. At that point I believe they have the right to ask to see your permit and you must comply. I could not quote the associated statute for this, but a friend had looked it up at one point for what that is worth.

          Without question it gets foggy if they have the right to remove your firearm or ask you to remove it,this my friend found nothing on for what that may also be worth. I also know of no relevant statute in the firearms sections of the laws that addresses this, but that does not mean it isn’t somewhere else like the reasonable/deadly force statutes are.

          Anecdote time! As mentioned above, this scenario happened to me and the officer asked me to remove my firearm and give it to her. I told her it was loaded and she looked like she had seen a ghost and told me never mind then. Had my mind been more focused on this exchange (my mind was reasonably much more focused on the motorcycle accident I just saw my dad get in), I personally would refuse/ask what the reason is for me to disarm. Especially since I have proven to have my permit and been cooperative and non aggressive the entire time. I would then ask the officer to disarm as well if they insisted on me disarming or to trade guns, this course of action would probably not have a happy ending for me unfortunately.

      4. avatar Mecha75 says:

        Yes but the officer was “making it safe!” As far as I am concerned, that gun was safe right where it was. The officer had no reason to confiscate the firearm from this former citizen turned Connecticut subject. Let alone eject the magazine and count the rounds. This poor unfortunate soul followed the officer’s direction and even handed over his fire arm to him. I am a firm believer in the fact you get the government that you ask for. And if you are consistently on the losing end of the vote, move and let the people you leave behind reap what they sowed.

        1. avatar Dyspeptic says:

          “I am a firm believer in the fact you get the government that you ask for.”

          You don’t have to ask for a tyrannical government to get one, you just have to live someplace where most voters have a slave mentality. My family has lived in California since the 1870’s. I have never asked for the kind of government we have here now but thanks to massive immigration we have it anyway.

          Yes, I am blaming the sad condition of my state on excessive immigration. And not just from foreign countries either. You can’t swing a dead cat in this state without smacking 10 money grubbing, paradise destroying Libtards from some New England slave state.

          1 out of every 4 Californians is a foreigner and almost all of them come from societies where private gun ownership is a criminal offense. Naturalized immigrants overwhelmingly vote Democrat. That’s why this place is a one party state with no political opposition.

          Illegal aliens can now get a drivers license and a law license in this state but legal gun owners are public enemy #1. If you want to preserve what is left of your gun rights then you better be prepared to fight the coming open borders/amnesty blitz as if ALL of your rights depended on it. Because they do.

    2. avatar stormchaser says:

      What right did he have to handle the weapon?

      Sounds like illegal search to me.

      1. avatar Darkstar says:

        Not sure about CT, but a lot of states have a provision where an officer CAN temporarily disarm a permit holder during conduct of official duties. Here in TN it’s implied consent to do that if your a handgun carry permit holder. Not saying it’s good or bad, just the way it is.

        1. avatar ADAM RO says:

          that’s ridiculous, an officer should empty his gun if we have to empty ours.

          people say that an officer just wants to go home safe to his family. So do we !

        2. avatar Pascal says:

          Same in CT. Most do not in the times I have been stopped.

      2. avatar ADAM RO says:

        Yes. officers should have to empty their firearm if we emptied ours. that’s the only way to “keep everyone safe”

        James Madison, the author of the Second Amendment, stated that citizens are to be more armed than the government.

        the passage of time did not get rid of our founding concepts and laws.

        1. avatar Rick O says:

          I think the larger question is, “What EXACTLY are these cops afraid of?” If a citizen complies with the law and undertakes the process to obtain a concealed carry license, then the odds are pretty low that citizen is a threat to him.

      3. avatar Hannibal says:

        Federal caselaw has pretty clearly established that a police officer can disarm a suspect- and that’s what you are on a traffic stop- temporarily. This does not require probable cause. A “search”, however, does require probable cause and searching a gun (as oppose to simply taking it) for a round-count seems to come mighty close to a search. I wouldn’t do it… but then again I generally wouldn’t disarm someone on a simple traffic stop unless they’re acting weird. But maybe this guy was?

  9. avatar JohnO says:

    Didn’t take long to get the test case.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      Now let’s see what gun rights group comes out swingin’.

      1. avatar Rick says:

        Renewing subscription.

  10. avatar Nine says:

    Can’t we get around it by putting ‘Cartridges of Ammunition’ in the magazines instead of just the bullets?

    They always say bullet.

    1. avatar Dickie J says:

      Interesting idea. What about sabot rounds? They’re technically not “bullets.”

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      If you have blanks, I would think so. No bullet there.

  11. avatar Reece Briere says:

    If the magazine isn’t registered, then that’s an issue, and if he had more than 10 in it, that’s “illegal” too. According to the article, the officer didn’t ask if the magazine was registered which I would think should have been done. Also, if you had a magazine that holds more than 10, you aren’t supposed to load more than 10, so if he had number 11 chambered (why didn’t he?) Then there shouldn’t have been a problem.

    1. avatar rawmade says:

      Maybe he forgot to chamber it so it was just sitting in the mag?

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        I’m thinking that’s probably the case. I would expect that from someone dumb enough to tailgate a police car.

    2. avatar Pascal says:

      Since registration was until Dec 31st, and the state says it may be backlogged for as much 6 months to get all the paper work put together, please tell me, how would the police officer would even be able to enforce the registration? There is no number to call, there is no database to check. He did what he needed to do.

      He could have informed him of the law and allowed him to keep the 10 round and his gun “not locked in the trunk”

  12. avatar Cubby123 says:

    Meanwhile rapist murderers,gangbangers,killers roam the streets but thank god we got this law abiding citizen with the extra bullet! Now we can all sleep at night!

  13. avatar Cubby123 says:

    Wait I’m loading my Thompson ,let’s see 97,98,99 there 100 .Now what did you say about magazines?

    1. avatar peirsonb says:

      The Thompson: 100 rounds of .45 ACP expended at a rate around 1200 rounds per minute… much win.

  14. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    If he gave out a summons and didn’t arrest him, them what is the point? The law is meant for “safety”, right? Oh, I forgot, he broke the LAW and must be punished no matter what to prove a point. Then make gun owners even more afraid of owning guns while criminals took up with whatever they want.

    The summons actions they do in the Northeast are idiotic. If they are not dangerous enough to arrest on the spot, then why waste a judges time? One word why, revenue.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      The law as written gives you one chance and that first time is a fine. Second one is D Felony

      1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

        Meaning that the law is not really meant for “Safety” it is meant to beat the peasants down and keep them in place.

  15. avatar Gunr, from Oregon says:

    Why didn’t the officer seize the magazine, if it has held illegally? What proof does the officer now have if Watson denies there was a magazine at all in the gun?

    1. avatar vioshi says:

      His word. Which will always hold up in court, unless you have an e$pecially good lawyer.

      1. avatar Gunr, from Oregon says:

        Dumb ass me! I should have known.

      2. avatar Gyufygy says:

        And probably, you know, a dash cam.

  16. avatar Quantum Zen says:

    Funny thing is, the officer handed “the perp” his “Large Capacity Magazine” back and told him not to insert it back into the pistol. CT’s new law states that you can only carry an LCM in public if it is inserted into the grip of the pistol. Yes, you read that right, no LCM, even if it’s dialed down to only 10 rounds can be carried as a spare. And if it sticks below the bottom of the pistol’s grip greater than one inch, the LCM cannot be inserted into the pistol at all regardless of having 10 or fewer rounds. Also, the LCM cannot be legally inserted into a pistol for carry purchased after the 4/4/13 cut-off date when the law was rushed into effect.

    This is the bullshit we are dealing with here in the UnConstitution State.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      The law says you can have an LCM with 10 rounds in the gun. You can +1 because nothing in laws says you cannot.

      Your spares must be 10 rounders or less only

      The law is written such that most factory pinky extensions are fine

  17. avatar Andy says:

    A way around this law is buy a ten round mag for when you carry in public , and leave the higher capacity mags at home unregistered , that way you will have them when the 2nd Revolution starts , and yes it is coming sooner than later too many people getting fed up with all matter of screw ups by government and feel the need to get the yoke of the government off their necks ! Be prepared and ready. Keep your powder dry.

  18. avatar BC Graff says:

    Wonder if there will be more than 3% next time.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      I see that 3% figure all the time. What does that mean? Only 3% of the colonists supported the revolution or only 3% actually showed up with a musket? We are a nation of roughly 330 million. On any given day we have roughly 3 million active duty military. Does that break down to 3%?

      And if only a total of 3% of the entire colonial population of America supported the revolution what we had then was actually a tyranny of the minority. If the other 97% of the people were perfectly happy being subjects of the crown then the 3% were committing crimes against humanity.

      See why I question that whole 3% thing?

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        They say 1/3 were loyalists, 1/3 were indifferent, and 1/3 were for independence. Of the 1/3 for independence, only about 10% actually fought while the other 20% supported. Hence, the 3%. I don’t know if it’s actually historically accurate… but it sounds cool.

  19. avatar Gw says:

    Connecticut: “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”
    Anyone care to hazard a guess as to the purpose and intent of this particular LAW?

    That is, beyond that of a LAW, written into a legally binding Contract / Compact called a ‘Constitution’ as a declaration of a specific ‘Right’ of the Citizens?
    That is, beyond a written statement in recognition of a particular ’Right’ of all Freemen predating and preexisting every form of ’government’ ever established in America?
    That is, beyond that of a LAW written as a further restriction on those few and limited ‘powers’ granted by the Citizens to persons within and acting on behalf of ‘government’ — and in order to prevent misconstruction and abuse of said few and limited ‘powers’?
    That is, beyond the ’Right’ of the Citizens whom those within and acting on behalf of government are Morally, Ethically, Legally by Contract and Personally bound under oath to Secure for the Citizens?

    While a ‘constitution’ was once in essence the ‘will’ of the people…in this current ‘new-age’ interpretation by the Illiberal, Digressive Statists, their attendant functionaries, familiars and dutiful armed minions — the ideas, ideals, principles, standards and values as set forth in written documents under those archaic notions of a Constitutional Republic form of government have all but entirely been relegated in more than a few regions in these once-United States to little more than mere sentiments expressed on worthless pieces of paper by ill-informed and now long-dead white guys.

    There is of course, at least a passing curiosity as to whether or not it ever occurred to Officer Friendly that… upon ’noticing’ the presence of one more round in the magazine than currently ‘allowed’ under the ‘new law’, there was the option available to have simply thumbed the ‘illegal’ round out; handed it to the otherwise law-abiding Citizen; explained the ’new law’; and sent him on his way.
    Guess not.

  20. avatar First Shirt says:

    I find it remarkable just how easily virtually anyone at any level of Government; city, county, state, federal, can violate the Supreme Law of this Nation. The Constitution. Our country has undergone a metamorphosis over the last 100 years or so. S-l-o-w-l-y our Constitutional, God-Given rights have been whittled on like a stick. Now, we hardly have a stick left to get a grip on. All of our rights revolve around the 2nd Amendment. Without the ability to force the government(s) to comply with their own constitutional laws, we are doomed to the ranks of the oppressed. History is replete with examples of precisely what we are going through now.

    If you live in an “Open Carry” state I urge you to exorcize that right everyday. Every day, everywhere. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same. If you do not you will lose that right, just like so many other States and cities. Folks, this is deadly serious business we discuss here. It is not Yankees vs. Southerners. Most of us are old enough to have studied World War 2 in school. Remember how the Nazi’s came to power and what they did afterward. We in the USA are not immune to tyranny.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Hear, hear!

      The world will fall into servitude should our lamp of Liberty be snuffed out. Never before in the history of mankind has the might and apparatus been available for tyranny on such a global scale. If we fail to restore our Republic before these generations pass, the machinery and broken people will be waiting for the next ambitious, power hungry thug to take the reins. A darkness never before seen will be unleashed unto the World.

      1. avatar Robert Farago says:

        Which would suck.

      2. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Party pooper!

      3. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Lol @ both of your comments. 😀

  21. avatar Skyler says:

    This is why the government should not be given the power to license the right to keep and bear arms. It gives another reason to harass innocent and peaceable people.

    1. avatar First Shirt says:

      I don’t believe they intend to “harass” us. Rather, enslave us. These politicians aren’t stupid. They know exactly what each and every syllable in the Constitution is and what it means. To them, that damned Constitution interferes with their Grand Plans.

    2. avatar peirsonb says:

      They were never GIVEN the power, they took it. In fact, from what I can tell given my lack of reading comprehension skills, I’m pretty sure they are specifically denied that power. Something in there about shall not be infringed. Until somewhere along the line they got the bright idea to start shouting “Regulation is not infringement.”

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        And don’t forget that somewhere along the line, 9 Supreme Court justices (I refuse to capitalize their title at this point) became the Supreme Law of the Land because they and only they “interpret” the United States Constitution to fit their agendas any way they see fit.

        The fact that the United States Constitution was written in plain English for any literate person to read and understand is not enough in their “enlightened” minds … because only a law school graduate who has decades of experience practicing law like themselves can understand it.

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          Oh, I don’t forget, it may be one of my single biggest gripes 🙂

          Again, reading comprehension, but I don’t see “judicial review” in there ANYWHERE…..

        2. avatar Roscoe says:

          Marbury vs. Madison

        3. avatar peirsonb says:

          Marbury vs. Madison – the case in which the Supreme Court TOOK judicial review. It is never granted to them in Article III.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Exactly, peirsonb! The court usurped power not delegated to it.

          I recommend that everyone take the time to read the linked site all the way through. It’s pretty good, IMHO.

  22. avatar Michael says:

    I believe you do not have to inform the police you are carrying a weapon when stopped in CT.
    So 11 in a magazine and none in the chamber is illegal. 10 in the magazine and 1 in the chamber is OK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Interesting comment from one reader that the high capacity mag must be in the gun. so the cop giving him back the loaded magazine that was not in the gun means he is now guilty of another offense.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      If the mag is empty and out of your reach, you are legit. In this case, he told him to stow it in the trunk.

  23. avatar Bob says:

    Perfect example of a bad cop — enforcing an obviously tyrannical law. No victim, no crime.

    Any cop who charges anyone with a victimless crime is a bad cop.

    1. avatar ropingdown says:

      Actually, I think the name for an LEO who enforces victimless crimes is Lieutenant.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        ROTFL! You owe me a keyboard. 😀

  24. avatar shawn says:

    I hope the NRA defends this person for free. It is not like they have received any money this past year for things like this.

  25. avatar Mannie says:

    After we sort out this crap, we need to track down each and every cop who enforced these tyrannical laws, and throw them in prison.

  26. avatar joe says:

    we’ll see what happens. If the officer doesn’t show up to court the charges will be dropped.

    1. avatar Rick says:

      The officer not show up in court?

      Figure the odds on that happening.

  27. avatar chris kuhar says:

    Hey chris Mallory or johnny reb. Last I checked us Yankees here in Pennsylvania stopped yall died in your tracks and beat your asses all the way past the mason Dixon. Us yankees up here in Pa don’t take very kindly to anyone infringing on our rights period and we sure as hell wont go down without a fight. Unlike conn, new york, new jersey who just rolled over and took it.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      +1. Yankee, I liked what you wrote. Keep up the good fight and carry on! 🙂

      John from Virginia and Kentucky heritage

  28. avatar Matt says:

    You beat me to it Pascal!

    Another link, less detailed though.

    Everything seems to have gone ok in this except for the officer telling him that he could not carry his gun and the reported pat down in the above link. I’d say over all the officer handled it better than I would expect from most CT cops, especially since he didn’t immediately volunteer that he was carrying a gun.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Matt, you do not need to declare you are carrying in CT.

      Not all cops in CT are bad. This worked out the best way it could have. He will pay a fine and will be informed of the law, end of story.

      However, it goes to show. There are many, many, many far too many gun owners who are clueless of the law — living in a bubble. These are the same people who will make poor choices at the voting booth as well also not having all the information. The more informed gun owners of CT have to make sure that ALL gun owner understand what is going on now and on election day.

      1. avatar Matt says:

        Oh yes, I know that I do no have to declare it, but nothing sounds like a better excuse for being ‘nervous’ (aka: militant, aggressive, confrontational, etc) on the part of the officer than “He didn’t inform me he was carrying a firearm right away, how could I not assume he is up to no good at that point!” With all the new laws and the extra risk they may or may not put officers and the general public at, I just expect that most police will be operating under a heightened state of alert and tension until things smooth out and it becomes status quo.

        1. avatar Michael says:

          You may not have to declare that you are carrying, but in some states when the Police run your driving license it will come up that you have a Concealed carry permit. Not sure if CT does. I escaped CT 14 years ago. Everyone who I know who has been stopped while carrying has had a good experience.

  29. avatar crzapy says:

    The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

    Ayn Rand

    1. avatar Mark says:

      >> One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

      Yes, and many of these laws are very vague. So the average person perhaps violates 3 or so per day without even knowing it? The Soviet legal system was intentionally built that way for political control. Our inched to this point by do gooders. Same result.

  30. avatar Carl says:

    The funny thing is that these laws only affect the law abiding. It is like they are preventing some sort of pre-crime.
    In the prevention end (in their minds) that mass shooting start with Joe Law Abiding blowing a blood vessel pulling his Glock out of the bedside table and blowing everybody in the vicinity until he runs out of ammo. He has no extra magazines, no extra ammo. In their minds, problem solved.
    The thing that they don’t seem to think through is that every one of these mass shooting were prepared and thought out and whether someone has 10 qty 30 rd magazines, 30 qty 10 rd magazines or 60 qty 5 round magazines or 300 loose rounds & single shot the outcome is the same.

  31. avatar dan says:

    In a FREE country according to its Constitution once written……unless you injure or damage a person’s body or property….there is no crime…..color of law has been turned into a ‘black hole’ of evil….all the regs ,codes, ‘laws’ in the various states are for the most part…UNCONSTITUTIONAL…and deny citizens of the states FREEDOM and LIBERTY to do what they want….responsibility ..and under natural law you are only held resposible for your actions when they have harmed another s body or property…..we may never see the true light of liberty ever again….then again…1776….they thought the same….imho

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Amen! Current history is proving that 1776 action is, in many cases, the best and most expedient path to freedom. People must believe in true Liberty. People must be dedicated to radically accepting the responsibilities and risks of true Liberty. Lastly, people must be willing to personally fight for it. Many present day Americans are too lazy for the responsibilities of freedom. They are too cowardly for the risks of freedom. The only people that we can make a difference with are those who are lazy and scared due to their ignorance of true Liberty. The willfully lazy and cowardly are worthless material from which to fashion a free nation again. Is our Republic lost? I don’t know for sure but I wholeheartedly hope not. If I really thought it was then I’d probably move out of the country.

  32. avatar Anonymous says:

    We should all go on a march. All of us just go to CT. Bring your guns.

    1. Let us know when you are coming. I can fire up the grill and make up some extra beds in the house. 🙂

  33. avatar Mark says:

    I was born and raised a Southerner. I have lived several places though. Southern is more of a state of mind than anything. Not so much where your born. During the war the people that came from the North to fight for the South, and vise verse for example.They are what they were fighting for. Not what side their residence was on. That invisible line doesn’t mean shit. Like the inbred Jokes. I’ve seen more in PA than in any southern state Ive ever been in.

  34. avatar Kyle says:

    It is very sad, but people in these states NEED TO BE CAREFUL. Do not carry more than the legally permitted magazine or number of rounds in the magazine. As for those above saying lie to the police, only do that if you are literally 100% sure that you can get away with it. Don’t lie about something where if they search your vehicle and/or your person, you can get caught. Better to just politely exercise your right to remain silent.


  35. avatar Dave says:

    Nice to see such ignorance is alive and well in the US. I am a gun owner living in CT. I’m also a 57 year old extreme conservative, business owner, and life member of the NRA, gun collector, and competition 3 gun shooter. I own MANY, or the items this liberal fool of a governor has unconstitutionally banned, and I’m not alone. There are thousands of us donating our time and money to battle this in court, and you’re narrow minded ignorant insults speak volumns of you as Americans. Same tired crap of no good yankees, when you’re too stupid to accept that even you have had your gun rights curtailed over the years. This fight is all of ours. Every American, in every state, but you sit in self rigehtous judgement over people you have never met. But know this. When it comes your turn to defend your rights, we’ll be there in support, even though you choose to turn your backs on us. We will donate, and offer counsel with what we have learned during this costly challenge in court. I know a hell of a lot of wonderful people in NC and Tennesee, and I’m sorry that some of you represent the good people of the south. I’ll leave you in peace, so you can contine to revel in the destruction of the constitution. After all, their only going to come after the damn yankees….right?

  36. avatar ted vincent says:

    s dogood is right you yankees stay up north and wallow in the mess that you yourselves created. oh and keep the red sox there as well !!!!!

  37. avatar Lucid Transition says:

    Stop voting in retards and this wouldn’t happen to begin with.

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