Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Connecticut Patriot Group Fights Back Against Confiscation Order: ‘We Are Armed… And

    Connecticut Patriot Group Fights Back Against Confiscation Order: ‘We Are Armed… And Are Familiar With the Finer Points of Marksmanship’



    The war on liberty is coming to a head in Connecticut, where tens of thousands of gun owners have refused to comply with their state government’s gun registration laws. Officials have literally ordered those who failed to meet the registration deadline to surrender their firearms or face arrest.
    The State of Connecticut is now demanding that gun owners across the state turn in all newly-banned, unregistered firearms and magazines or face felony arrest.
    The State Police Special Licensing & Firearms Unit began mailing out notices to gun owners who attempted to register their firearms and accessories with the state but did not do so in time for the Jan. 1 deadline of Connecticut’s newly enacted gun control law.
    The law bans the sale of magazines holding over 10 rounds and “assault rifles” manufactured after 1994 and requires that residents who possessed either before the ban to register them with the state.
    It doesn’t take a stretch of the imagination to understand that the enforcement of this law can only come at the barrel of a gun. Therefore, we can conclude that we may soon see SWAT-style raids on the homes of suspected law breakers. Because we’re talking about gun confiscation, you can be fully assured that the state will not be knocking nicely, and they won’t be asking residents to exist their homes.
    They’re going in full force.
    But Americans simply don’t take well to being told what to do, especially as it relates to their Second Amendment rights.
    These unreasonable demands, which have yet to pass muster with the U.S. Supreme Court, have prompted Mike Vanderboegh of Connecticut’s Sipsey Street Irregulars to go on the offensive. Earlier this week Vanderboegh publicly posted the names, addresses, phone numbers and provided direct access to pictures of all CT legislators involved with passage of the gun confiscation bill, saying that since the government has a list it “seems obvious to me that it is thus only fair to list those anti-constitutional tyrants.”
    The Daily Sheeple reports:
    Sometimes you just have to fight fire with fire. And that is exactly what Mike Vanderboegh has chosen to do. The state of Connecticut wants to make a list – a list of gun owners. So, Vanderboegh has created his own list – a list of those state legislators who are insisting that certain firearms be banned or registered.
    Here is the post, A Sipsey Street Public Service Announcement: The Connecticut Tyrants List:
    The state of Connecticut is making lists of firearm owners to raid. It seems obvious to me that it is thus only fair to list those anti-constitutional tyrants who will have blood on their hands the moment the first Connecticut citizen is shot by the CT state police while carrying out their orders. I will be sending these folks my own email later today.
    CT State Senators voting Yes on “An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety, also known as Public Law 13-3 or Connecticut Senate Bill No. 1160,” 3 April 2013. List includes home addresses. Photos and home phone numbers of these tyrants are available here.
    As promised, Vanderboegh followed up his list with an Open Letter to the Legislative Tyrants of Connecticut sent to all CT legislators where he extensively details the impact of Connecticut’s new law and which he closes with a plea to legislators in an effort to prevent the potential for violence that may result in the event of a state-mandated gun confiscation:
    (Excerpts via Sipsey Street Irregulars)
    To the CT State Senators And Representatives who voted Yes on “An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety, also known as Public Law 13-3 or Connecticut Senate Bill No. 1160,” 3 April 2013.
    And, yes, I said tyrants. You bought it, in the form of the woefully misnamed “Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety,” you own it, you are certainly — if you get your way — going to pay for it like it or not, so you might as well own up to it. Look in the mirror. That’s what a tyrant in the 21st Century looks like. Mather Byles, the Massachusetts Loyalist of the Revolutionary period — our first civil war — once famously asked, “Which is better – to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?” The Founders themselves were just as suspicious of unrestrained democracy as a means of tyranny. This is why they gave us a republic of limited powers and the rule of law, to limit those who would misuse democracy to create a new tyranny. Yet that is precisely what you’ve done. Own it.
    You know, in Greek mythology Cassandra, the daughter of King Priam and Queen Hecuba of Troy, was given the gift of prophecy. She could see exactly what was going to happen to her endangered city. Yet she was also cursed with the burden of never being believed. The frustration was said to have driven her mad. Never have I come closer to understanding Cassandra’s curse than these past months.

    We are at a crossroads. You, in the arrogance of your power and your ignorance of the people you seek to dominate are extrapolating from your own cowardice — you believe that just because the government orders these folks to knuckle under that they will do so BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT YOU WOULD DO. You mistake them, and your mistake is, in the fullness of time, going to get people killed. And who do you think these people who you victimize — these people who you will have state agents seek to round up and kill — who do you think they are going to blame for that? It doesn’t take Madame Lawlor and his crystal ball to predict that such people — victimized by their own state authorities in an unconstitutional law that likely will be found to be null and void anyway — will blame the people who sent the killers. Which is to say, you. (13)
    This is deadly serious stuff, this foray into an undiscovered country that you have so blithely entered upon, like blind men and women tap dancing in a minefield you scarcely comprehend. Fully eighty-five percent of the people you targeted with the law — the people that YOU AND YOU ALONE made into lawbreakers — have just told you by their noncompliance to take your unconstitutional law and stick it where the sun don’t shine. Does that not tell you ANYTHING? These people are ARMED.They are familiar with the finer points of marksmanship. They are principled in a way that perhaps only the Founders would understand — at the risk of their own lives. So what part of “Oh, HELL no” don’t you understand? You have been playing with titanic forces. You are going to send armed agents of the state to their doors to work your collective and collectivist will upon THEM? You have unintentionally sown the wind and if things go predictably south you will reap the whirlwind.
    BUT IT IS WITHIN YOUR POWER TO REVERSE. You own the weather machine, as it were. I’m not asking you to repeal the law, although that makes perfect sense to me. No, I realize that too much of your ego, your own false vision of omnipotence is wrapped up in it to do THAT. What I am asking you to do — no, what I am BEGGING you to do — is to use your power to suspend the enforcement of that Intolerable Act at least until it is ruled constitutional or not by the United States Supreme Court. “An unconstitutional law is null and void.” Do you really wish to risk death and destruction upon innocent people — upon us all — on a bet against the odds? Is your appetite for your own citizens’ liberty, property and lives that insatiable? Or now, as the likely unintended consequences of your actions have been directly explained to you, are you willing to reconsider the menu choices? What will your political fortunes be when the first shots are exchanged over this? When the first innocents are killed in carrying out your will? What will your arrogance, your ignorance, your insufferable pride be worth to you then? What will it be worth to any of us? Starting a bloody civil war seems an odd way to avoid “violence against children.”
    Praying that my advice fares better than Cassandra’s, I am, sincerely,
    Mike Vanderboegh
    Smuggler and alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters
    (You can read the full text here)


    The importance of what’s happening in Connecticut and how its citizens are responding cannot be understated. What we have here is a government that has directly violated the Second Amendment of the United States of America by legislating forced gun registration with the penalty of confiscation of said firearms and felony imprisonment for those who refuse to comply.
    They have now threatened all Connecticut residents with arrest if they refuse to turn over their firearms.
    In coming days and weeks, unless Mike Vanderboegh’s warnings are heeded, we will begin to see police-state raids of homes belonging to anyone suspected of owning an unregistered firearm or accessory.
    Keep in mind that this legislation has not yet made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, so Connecticut state officials intend to confiscate guns through the use of force and without a judiciary review of the Constitutionality of the laws they passed.
    There will be those in Connecticut who surrender their firearms. But a growing sentiment across the United States suggests that there will be those who will simply refuse to submit to the will of the state.
    If Connecticut goes through with this and sends heavily armed police personnel to the doors of Constitutional Law-abiding citizens it is not out of the question to suggest that we will see bloodshed and violence when these gun confiscations begin.
    The people have had enough and many Americans are preparing to stand their ground.

    http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-new...nship_02282014

    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Snipers On the Roof

    Snipers On the Roof

    March 1, 2014 - Main, Martial Law - Tagged: CT gun confiscation, dave hodges, egypt, kiev, martial law, new world order, protesters, putin, snipers on the roof, the common sense show, tyranny, ukraine, venezuela -30 comments

    Dave Hodges
    March 1, 2014
    The Common Sense Show

    Yet another bankster has bitten the dust. Former National Bank of Commerce CEO James Stuart Jr. was found dead in Scottsdale, AZ. I know that these “suicided banksters” had a family and assumedly people in their lives who loved them. However, it is hard to muster up much more than crocodile tears when one realizes how much misery the bankster elite have mustered up in the service of their greed and power hungry ways. It becomes even more difficult to generate sympathy when one realizes that there is a global unanimity of concerted effort to murder people who are merely expressing their hopes, desires and concerns in a public forum. At the risk of sounding like Karl Marx, the super elite’s murdering of protesters clearly illustrates that what we used to consider to be the “legitimate” authority, is now clearly the enemy of the people. The super elite are clearly not serving the needs of the people, they are serving their selfish desires to help themselves to the resources of the people. And when the people object, they are being summarily executed in increasing numbers.
    Just the sheer number of instances and the brutality in which freedom-loving people are being eliminated can speak to nothing else but this is a coordinated effort between and among the super elite on the planet to kill protestors by placing snipers on the roof.

    The Ukraine



    Photographed by journalists from Voice of Ukraine, we see pro-Russian forces firing upon unarmed protesters.

    The pro-Yanukovich forces are pictured above on a rooftop of an Ukrainian house on January, 22, firing upon unarmed protesters. According to Ukrainian journalists, working for the Voice of Ukraine, this is very common occurrence in which untold numbers of protesters are being murdered on a daily basis.
    Egypt

    Here in Egypt, government forces are displaying their favorite tactic in dealing with an unhappy citizenry.

    1st video at the page Link:

    Syria

    The Syrian civil war is known for its extreme brutality and mindless oppression. Here is footage of snipers on the roof, Syrian style, only this time, the sniper receives justice.

    2nd video at the page Link:

    Venezuela

    News emanating from Venezuelan protesters is consistently revealing that government forces in Venezuela are summarily executing its citizens from motorcycles. Authorities are also breaking down doors of apartment buildings and murdering “suspected” protesters. As a result, protesters are being murdered by the Venezuelan government without trial.
    Some citizens, who are luckier than most are simply being arrested for “suspicion” of protest and hauled away without any due process of law.

    Recently, government opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez surrendered to governmental authorities. He is charged with inciting violence and opposition to the government. His arrest led to even more protesting. Venezuelan citizen, Gauber Venot, stated “It’s important we have foreign media here. Our media is censored; we learn about our own country from outside sources.” So is ours Mr. Venot, so is ours.
    Of course, this is Venezuela and this could never happen in America. Perhaps one might want to revise this consideration in light of recently released American military documents.

    The United States

    I think the public has a right to know how its government plans to handle future protests. Is America the new Venezuela, Egypt, or Ukraine? A previously secret document which was leaked online; entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF).

    RIOT FORMATIONS

    H-42. Quick-reaction force teams should be established with a minimum response time. Because of the physical nature of riot control, individuals in riot control formations should not carry rifles. Nonlethal attachments should follow closely behind the riot control formation. Lethal coverage must be provided for this entire formation. (See FM 3-22.40.)
    DESIGNATED MARKSMEN
    H-43. During a nonlethal engagement, the use of designated marksmen provides confidence and safety to those facing a riot. If a lethal threat is presented, the designated marksmen in overwatch positions (armed with appropriate sniper weapons mounted with high-powered scopes) can scan a crowd and identify agitators and riot leaders for apprehension and fire lethal rounds if warranted. Additionally, they are ideally suited for flank security and countersniper operations. (See FM 3-22.40.).

    I am hard pressed to make this comparison any more clear. The parallels speak clearly for themselves.

    What will be the flash point where the “new” American policy in dealing with protesters will turn deadly?

    CONNECTICUT GUN GRABBERS AT WORK




    The above caption says it all.Today, tens of thousands of CT. residents are now felons. What will happen when American citizens, thinking they have the right to protest an unconstitutional law, march in the streets?

    If American authorities fire on protesters as the new detention camp documents claim they will, this can only end one way.
    First Kiev, then Connecticut.

    http://thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/0...s-on-the-roof/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Saturday, February 15, 2014

    An Open Letter to the Men and Women of the Connecticut State Police: You are NOT the enemy (UNLESS YOU CHOOSE TO BE.)

    The following letter was sent via email to members of the Connecticut State Police, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. There are 1,212 email addresses on the list. There were 62 bounce-backs.

    15 February 2014
    To the men and women of the Connecticut State Police and the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection:
    My name is Mike Vanderboegh. Few of you will know who I am, or even will have heard of the Three Percent movement that I founded, though we have been denounced on the national stage by that paragon of moral virtue, Bill Clinton. Three Percenters are uncompromising firearm owners who have stated very plainly for years that we will obey no further encroachments on our Second Amendment rights. Some of you, if you read this carelessly, may feel that it is a threat. It is not. Three Percenters also believe that to take the first shot in a conflict over principle is to surrender the moral high ground to the enemy. We condemn so-called collateral damage and terrorism such as that represented by the Oklahoma City Bombing and the Waco massacre. We are very aware that if you seek to defeat evil it is vital not to become the evil you claim to oppose. Thus, though this letter is certainly intended to deal with an uncomfortable subject, it is not a threat to anyone. However, it is important for everyone to understand that while we promise not to take the first shot over principle, we make no such promise if attacked, whether by common criminals or by the designated representatives of a criminal government grown arrogant and tyrannical and acting out an unconstitutional agenda under color of law. If we have any model, it is that of the Founding generation. The threat to public order and safety, unfortunately, comes from the current leaders of your state government who unthinkingly determined to victimize hitherto law-abiding citizens with a tyrannical law. They are the ones who first promised violence on the part of the state if your citizens did not comply with their unconstitutional diktat. Now, having made the threat (and placed the bet that you folks of the Connecticut State Police will meekly and obediently carry it out) they can hardly complain that others take them seriously and try by every means, including this letter, to avoid conflict.
    Some of you are already working a major case on me, trying to figure out how I may be arrested for violating Conn. P.A. 13-3, which bears the wildly dishonest title of "An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children's Safety." (What part of "protecting children" is accomplished by sparking a civil war?) Not only have I personally violated this unconstitutional and tyrannical act by smuggling and by the encouragement of smuggling, defiance and non-compliance on the part of your state's citizens, but I have further irritated your wannabe tyrant bosses by sending them standard capacity magazines in my "Toys for Totalitarians" program. I further have annoyed them by pointing out -- and seeking more evidence of -- the existence of Mike Lawlor's KGB file (as well as his FBI and CIA counter-intelligence files). In short, I have made myself a nuisance to your bosses in just about every way I could think of. However, their discomfiture reminds me of the wisdom of that great American philosopher of the late 20th Century, Frank Zappa, who said, "Do you love it? Do you hate it? There it is, the way you made it." Whether you will be able to make a case on me that sticks is, of course, problematic for a number of reasons which I will detail to you in the letter below. I have already done so to your bosses and include the links in this email so that you may easily access them.
    But even if you are not working on my case you will want to pay attention to this letter, because tyrannical politicians in your state have been writing checks with their mouths that they expect you to cash with your blood. We have moved, thanks to them, into a very dangerous undiscovered country. Connecticut is now in a state of cold civil war, one that can flash to bloody conflict in an instant if someone, anyone, does something stupid. So please pay attention, for Malloy and Co. have put all your asses on the line and are counting on your supine obedience to the enforcement of their unconstitutional diktat.
    I apparently first came to your attention with this speech on the steps of your state capitol on 20 April 2013. It was very well received by the audience but virtually ignored by the lapdog press of your state. If I may, I'd like to quote some of the more salient points of it that involve you.
    "An unconstitutional law is void." It has no effect. So says American Jurisprudence, the standard legal text. And that's been upheld by centuries of American law. An unconstitutional law is VOID. Now that is certainly true. But the tricky part is how do we make that point when the local, state and federal executive and legislative branches as well as the courts are in the hands of the domestic enemies of the Constitution. Everyone who is currently trying to take away your right to arms starts out by saying "I support the 2nd Amendment." Let me tell you a home truth that we know down in Alabama -- Barack Obama supports the 2nd Amendment just about as much as Adolf Hitler appreciated Jewish culture, or Joseph Stalin believed in individual liberty. Believe what politicians do, not what they say. Because the lie is the attendant of every evil. . .
    Before this year no one thought that other firearms and related items would ever be banned -- but they were, they have been. No one thought that the authorities of your state would pass laws making criminals out of the previously law-abiding -- but they did. If they catch you violating their unconstitutional laws, they will -- when they please -- send armed men to work their will upon you. And people -- innocent of any crime save the one these tyrants created -- will die resisting them.
    You begin to see, perhaps, how you fit into this. YOU are the "armed men" that Malloy and Company will send "to work their will" upon the previously law-abiding. In other words, this law takes men and women who are your natural allies in support of legitimate law enforcement and makes enemies of the state of them, and bully boy political police of you. So you all have a very real stake in what happens next. But let me continue:
    The Founders knew how to answer such tyranny. When Captain John Parker -- one of the three percent of American colonists who actively took the field against the King during the Revolution -- mustered his Minutemen on Lexington Green, it was in a demonstration of ARMED civil disobedience. . . The colonists knew what to do and they did it, regardless of the risk -- regardless of all the King's ministers and the King's soldiery. They defied the King. They resisted his edicts. They evaded his laws and they smuggled. Lord above, did they smuggle.
    Now we find ourselves in a similar situation. The new King Barack and his minions have determined to disarm us. We must determine to resist them. No one wants a new civil war (except, apparently, the anti-constitutional tyrants who passed these laws and the media toadies who cheer them on) but one is staring us in the face. Let me repeat that, a civil war is staring us in the face. To think otherwise is to whistle past the graveyard of our own history. We must, if we wish to avoid armed conflict, get this message across to the collectivists who have declared their appetites for our liberty, our property and our lives -- WHEN DEMOCRACY TURNS TO TYRANNY, THE ARMED CITIZEN STILL GETS TO VOTE.
    Just like King George, such people will not care, nor modify their behavior, by what you say, no matter how loudly or in what numbers you say it. They will only pay attention to what you DO. So defy them. Resist their laws. Evade them. Smuggle in what they command you not to have. Only by our ACTS will they be impressed. Then, if they mean to have a civil war, they will at least have been informed of the unintended consequences of their tyrannical actions. Again I say -- Defy. Resist. Evade. Smuggle. If you wish to stay free and to pass down that freedom to your children's children you can do no less than to become the lawbreakers that they have unconstitutionally made of you. Accept that fact. Embrace it. And resolve to be the very best, most successful lawbreakers you can be.
    Well, I guess at least some of my audience that day took my message to heart. As Connecticut newspapers have finally begun reporting -- "Untold Thousands Flout Gun Registration Law" -- and national commentators are at last noticing, my advice to defy, resist and evade this intolerable act is well on the way. The smuggling, as modest as it is, I can assure is also happening. This law is not only dangerous it is unenforceable by just about any standard you care to judge it by. Let's just look at the numbers mentioned in the Courant story.
    By the end of 2013, state police had received 47,916 applications for assault weapons certificates, Lt. Paul Vance said. An additional 2,100 that were incomplete could still come in.
    That 50,000 figure could be as little as 15 percent of the rifles classified as assault weapons owned by Connecticut residents, according to estimates by people in the industry, including the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation. No one has anything close to definitive figures, but the most conservative estimates place the number of unregistered assault weapons well above 50,000, and perhaps as high as 350,000.
    And that means as of Jan. 1, Connecticut has very likely created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals — perhaps 100,000 people, almost certainly at least 20,000 — who have broken no other laws. By owning unregistered guns defined as assault weapons, all of them are committing Class D felonies.
    "I honestly thought from my own standpoint that the vast majority would register," said Sen. Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, the ranking GOP senator on the legislature's public safety committee. "If you pass laws that people have no respect for and they don't follow them, then you have a real problem."
    This blithering idiot of a state senator is, as I warned Mike Lawlor the other day, extrapolating. It is a very dangerous thing, extrapolation, especially when you are trying to predict the actions of an enemy you made yourself whom you barely recognize let alone understand. I told Lawlor:
    You, you silly sod, are extrapolating from your own cowardice. Just because you wouldn't risk death for your principles, doesn't mean there aren't folks who most certainly will. And, not to put too fine a point on it, but folks who are willing to die for their principles are most often willing to kill in righteous self-defense of them as well. You may be ignorant of such people and their ways. You may think that they are insane. But surely even you cannot be so clueless that, insane or not from your point-of-view, such people DO exist and in numbers unknown. This is the undiscovered country that you and your tyrannical ilk have blundered into, like clueless kindergarteners gaily (no pun intended) tap-dancing in a well-marked mine field. The Founders marked the mine field. Is it our fault or yours that you have blithely ignored the warnings? If I were a Connecticut state policeman I would be wondering if the orders of a possible KGB mole throwback were worth the terminal inability to collect my pension. Of course, you may be thinking that you can hide behind that "thin blue line." Bill Clinton's rules of engagement say otherwise.
    The odds are, and it gives me no particular satisfaction to say it, is that someone is going to get killed over your unconstitutional misadventures in Connecticut. And if not Connecticut, then New York, or Maryland, or California or Colorado. And once the civil war you all apparently seek is kicked off, it would not be -- it could not be -- confined to one state.
    This is not a threat, of course. Not the personal, actionable threat that you may claim. It ranks right along with -- no, that's wrong, IT IS EXACTLY LIKE -- an ex-con meeting me in the street and pointing to my neighbor's house saying, "Tonight I am going to break in there, kill that man, rape his wife and daughters and steal everything that he is, has, or may become." I warn him, "If you try to do that, he will kill you first. He may not look like much, but I know him to be vigilant and perfectly capable of blowing your head off." That is not a threat from me. It is simply good manners. Consider this letter in the same vein. I am trying to save you from yourself.
    For, like that common criminal, you have announced by your unconstitutional law and your public statements in favor of its rigorous enforcement that you have a tyrannical appetite for your neighbors' liberty, property and lives. It doesn't take a crystal ball to see that this policy, if carried to your announced conclusion, will not end well for anybody, but especially for you.
    Now let's examine those numbers in the Courant story. You know the size of the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. Wikipedia tells us that "CSP currently has approximately 1,248 troopers, and is headquartered in Middletown, Connecticut. It is responsible for protecting the Governor of Connecticut, Lieutenant Governor of Connecticut, and their families." There are but 1,212 email addresses listed on the state website to which this email is going, which presumably includes everyone including secretaries, receptionists, file clerks, technicians, etc. Now, how many shooters for raid parties you may find among that one thousand, two hundred and forty eight that Wikipedia cites, or whatever number will be on the payroll when something stupid happens, only you know for sure. I'll let you do the counting. They are daunting odds in any case, and as you will see, they get more daunting as we go down this road that Malloy and Company have arranged for you. (By the way, don't forget to subtract those on the Green Zone protective details, for your political masters will certainly see their survival as your mission number one.) So, how many folks would your superiors be interested in seeing you work their will upon? And of these, how many will fight regardless of cost?
    Let's assume that there are 100,000 non-compliant owners of military pattern semi-automatic rifles in your state. I think it is a larger number but 100,000 has a nice round ring to it. Let us then apply the rule of three percent to that number -- not to the entire population of your state, not even to the number of firearm owners, but just to that much smaller demonstrated number of resistors. That leaves you with at least 3,000 men and women who will shoot you if you try to enforce this intolerable act upon them. Of course you will have to come prepared to shoot them. That's a given. They know this. So please understand: THEY. WILL. SHOOT. YOU. (In what they believe is righteous self defense.) Now, if any of them follow Bill Clinton's rules of engagement and utilize the principles of4th Generation Warfare, after the first shots are fired by your raid parties, they will not be home when you come to call. These people will be targeting, according to the 4GW that many of them learned while serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war makers who sent you. This gets back to that "when democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizenry still gets to vote." One ballot, or bullet, at a time.
    This is all hypothetical, of course, based upon the tyrants' appetites for these hitherto law-abiding citizens' liberty, property and lives as well as upon your own willingness to enforce their unconstitutional diktat. And here's where you can do something about it. The first thing you have to realize is that the people you will be targeting do not view you as the enemy. Indeed, you are NOT their enemy, unless you choose to be one.
    Again, an unconstitutional law is null and void. Of course you may if you like cling to the slim fact that a single black-robed bandit has ruled the Intolerable Act as constitutional in Shew vs. Malloy, but that will not matter to those three percent of the resistors -- your fellow citizens -- whom you target. They no longer expect a fair trial in your state in any case, which leaves them, if they wish to defend their liberty, property and lives, only the recourse of an unfair firefight. So to cite Shew vs. Malloy at the point of a state-issued firearm to such people is, well, betting your life on a very slender reed.
    Thus, my kindly advice to you, just as it was to Lawlor, is to not go down that road. You are not the enemy of the people of Connecticut, not yet. The politicians who jammed this law down the peoples' throats are plainly flummoxed by the resistance it has engendered. In the absence of a definitive U.S. Supreme Court decision do you really want to risk not being able to draw your pension over some politician's insatiable appetite for power?
    There are many ways you can refuse to get caught up in this. Passive resistance, looking the other way, up to and including outright refusal to execute what is a tyrannical law that a higher court may yet find unconstitutional and therefore null and void. Do you really want to have to kill someone enforcing THAT? Just because you were ordered to do so? After Nuremberg, that defense no longer obtains. (You may say, "Well, I'm just a secretary, a clerk, you can't blame me for anything." Kindly recall from Nuremberg one other lesson: raid parties cannot break down doors unless someone like you prepares the list in advance. In fact, you have at your keyboard and in your databases more raw, naked power than any kick-in-the-door trooper. And with that power comes moral responsibility. Adolf Eichmann didn't personally kill anyone. But he darn sure made up the lists and saw to it that trains ran on time. When the first Connecticut citizen (or, God forbid, his family) is killed as a result of your list-making, do you think that because you didn't pull the trigger that gives you a moral pass?)
    So I call on you all, in your own best interest and that of your state, to refuse to enforce this unconstitutional law. There are a number of Three Percenters within the Connecticut state government, especially its law enforcement arms. I know that there have been many discussions around water-coolers and off state premises about the dangers that this puts CT law enforcement officers in and what officers should do if ordered to execute raids on the previously law-abiding.
    You have it within your power to refuse to initiate hostilities in an American civil war that would, by its very nature, be ghastly beyond belief and would unleash hatreds and passions that would take generations to get over, if then.
    Please, I beg you to understand, you are not the enemy, you are not an occupying force -- unless you choose to violate the oath that each of you swore to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. For their part, the men and women who will be targeted by your raids took an identical oath. Can you think of anything more tragic than brother killing brother over some politician's tyrannical appetite?
    I can't. The future -- yours, mine, our children's, that of the citizens of Connecticut and indeed of the entire country -- is in YOUR hands.
    At the very least, by your refusal you can give the courts time to work before proceeding into an unnecessary civil war against your own friends and neighbors on the orders of a self-anointed elite who frankly don't give a shit about you, your life, your future or that of your family. They wouldn't pass these laws if they thought that they would have to risk the potential bullet that their actions have put you in the path of. They count on you to take that bullet, in service of their power and their lies. Fool them. Just say no to tyranny. You are not the enemy. Don't act like one.

    Sincerely,
    Mike Vanderboegh
    The alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters
    PO Box 926
    Pinson AL 35126
    The patch of the Connecticut Three Percent, given me on the occasion of my speech in Hartford, 20 April 2013.


    http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogsp...-women-of.html
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Official CT State Police spokesman says that state police would participate in door to door gun confiscations

    The State of Connecticut says that all citizens must register rifles and high capacity magazines, or be charged will a felony. As many as 100,000 people could face heavily armed police smashing down their doors and be charged with a felony.
    The legislature of CT says that a registration is needed so they can know where the guns are. Yet at the same time, they are sending threatening letters to gun owners. So they already have records of who has purchased certain guns. The fact is, that the CT legislature fully intends to confiscate hundreds of thousands of firearms anyway. The registration process will simply make it easier to confiscate, because you acknowledge that you still own a firearm that the state already suspects that you own.
    CT State Police Spokesman Lt. Vance says that state police would comply with an order from the state to conduct door to door gun confiscations.
    Experts claim that as many as 350,000 people are in violation of the law, and over 100,000 of those people could face felony charges. That means over 3.6% of the entire adult population of Connecticut has been transformed into a felon by the new registration law. Roughly one in twenty Connecticut homes could have their doors smashed in by heavily armed law enforcement seeking to confiscate firearms.
    CT State Police Spokesman Lt. Vance can be reached at at (860) 685-8290.




    http://topconservativenews.com/2014/...confiscations/

    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •