State Police To Gunmakers: No More Advice On Designs

by Categorized: Firearms Date:

Back in May, a month after Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed the state’s gun control law, Stag Arms of New Britain came up with a modified design and took it to the state police firearms unit to see whether it would pass muster.

The unit was helpful, even making a design suggestion that would help assure the gun would not be classified as an illegal assault weapon. Stag prepared to make the rifle, a .22-caliber version of the military-style AR-15.

Then in June, the state legislature tightened the law in order to correct a few problems. Stag returned with an updated model, seeking an opinion.

But this time, the firearms unit had a different answer.

“I was told to get a lawyer, figure it out and if I’m wrong I’m going to have to deal with it,” said Mark Malkowski, the Stag Arms owner and president. “It’s my responsibility to interpret…I was told we were no longer allowed to bring prototypes in.”

That means Stag, and any other manufacturer seeking to design a rifle within the rules, and any retailer who offers that product in Connecticut, must take a risk when it comes to figuring out a regulation — a high risk, since selling assault weapons could be viewed as a crime.

It seems reasonable to ask a law enforcement agency to tell citizens what is and is not legal. We expect that of town building departments, tax authorities and countless other local, state and federal offices.

Part of the problem is time. The firearms unit, with four state police detectives and about a dozen civilian employees, is performing a heroic task these days. This is far from the only law the unit must enforce, but this law alone has kept the place on overdrive since the instant Malloy signed it at lunchtime on April 4.

“The first six weeks was pretty much insanity,” said State Police Det. Ken Damato, who helped Stag initially and responded to the manufacturer’s second request for an interpretation. “People were calling us for interpretations and we hadn’t even read the bill ourselves.”

On top of the initial rush of retail and distribution issues, the unit, located in Middletown, must also oversee the process of setting up permits and registrations for rifles, magazines and ammunition purchases. The unit is sending out directives and continues to answer questions.

“We get anywhere from 20 to 50 inquiries a day from different retailers,” said Damato, who is also a lawyer. “We try to give them an understanding of what their obligations are under the law.”

The line is drawn, though, for manufacturers seeking a yea or nay opinion on new designs — and not just because of time concerns, Damato said.

“We’re not engineers,” Damato said. “We’re not arbiters of weapons construction. Stag or any other manufacturer is clearly capable of reading a law which sets forth in great detail the identifiers of an assault weapon, what is now classified as an assault weapon, as well as us. They don’t really need us to be vetting their products, nor is that really our function.”

Malkowski and Nick Discenza, a Stag sales manager who worked with the firearms unit, see it differently.
“He was very apologetic and said the state police are no longer part of the vetting process,” Discenza said of Damato. But Discenza added, “How can you not tell people what they can and cannot make?”

It’s a good question and in this case the gunmakers — including the National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry group that’s troubled by the policy — are right.

Malkowski points out that he’s not coming to the firearms unit with concepts, drawings and ideas, but finished prototypes that actually fire bullets. The company is ready to present a design with a new type of grip that may or may not meet the law, he said, depending on the size of the shooter’s fingers. That’s obviously a tough call.

Malkowski and Discenza wondered whether the unit received an order after the media widely reported that state police offered advice the first time around. That might make sense, since it’s no secret that Malloy and many legislators are in a running tiff with the gunmakers, and some resented Stag’s efforts to design a new AR-15 under the law.

But Damato said, “We’ve received no directive from staff command that we’re not to communicate with manufacturers.”

This is an easy fix. The firearms unit, to repeat, is performing heroically under battle conditions. These are men and women, sworn officers and civilians, who understand the products, speak the language and have the respect of the industry — unlike the elected officials who created the law.

Attorney General George Jepsen should determine who, exactly, is the final arbiter of firearms design, presumably the state police firearms unit. That agency must be given enough resources to do its job immediately, including overtime and hiring if necessary.

And the agency must be empowered to give an up or down answer any time a gunmaker comes in with an actual prototype — not a concept, a gun that fires.

If the state wants to put 3,000 jobs at risk in the name of perceived public safety, it can do that. It can’t ask those 3,000 people to risk their legal health by figuring out a law that’s hard to interpret even for the agency in charge of doing so.

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

271 thoughts on “State Police To Gunmakers: No More Advice On Designs

  1. Time for Change

    Perhaps Mr. Malikowski and other gun manufacturers will finally wake up and move the heck out of this anti-gun, anti-business state.

    Mr. Malikowksi’s company is demonized twice over by most liberals. First, he is perceived by most liberals as one of those evil rich business owners that most liberals love to hate and seek to punish in any form possible, and second his company manufactures a product that most liberals want banned despite the fact that they are protected by both the U.S. and state constitutions.

      1. daffy nition

        “Did you really think that we want those laws to be
        observed?” said Dr. Ferris. “We want them broken.
        You’d better get it straight that it’s not a bunch of
        boy scouts you’re up against – then you’ll know that
        this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We’re after
        power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you’d better get wise to
        it. There’s no way to rule innocent men. 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. Who wants a
        nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that
        for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can
        neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively
        interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers
        – and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once
        you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal
        —Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

        1. Yogi Bear

          Anyone who agrees with Ayn must also also be a crazed Benzedrine addict. I agree with Time for a Change about leaving.

          1. Kim

            thank you for your usual emotional, ridiculous, completely subjective ranting billy boggs. You continually try to hide behind other names, but it doesn’t work. We get you, gollum troll

          2. Wayne J

            ‘yogi’ apparently has the same mental status as his moniker, and from probably indulging in his buddy ‘boo boo’ way too often.

          3. bobbygordon

            Your sick… the man made an excellent point and backed it up with solid philosophy…
            And all you can come up with is a gratuitous accusation of drug addiction.

        2. Marv wiese

          @daffy nition You, Sir/madam? Are absolutely right! And it’s sad. The creators of our constitution debated for quite some time to get just the right wording on paper, so that it would never be miss-understood. Appears they didn’t see the Liberals coming.
          Oh and “Yogi Bear” below….I don’t like name calling…Damn! I want to….But you already state just how stupid you are. Do “they” pay you to write that baloney? To quote Kim.”..your usual emotional, ridiculous, completely subjective ranting billy boggs.” Well said Kim!

        3. Charles Ross

          That quote by Ann Rand may be the new Bush/Obama motto.

          Re deciding on legal guns; I California, the decision is left to the Attorney General Department of Justice (sic). Recent local case, Sheriff in Sonoma County, CA, arrested guy for assault rifle (not clear on gun but may be civilian M-14 which ls (?used?) to be legal. Sheriff did not know; asked DOJ; they did not know. Last I heard sheriff/DA still trying to hang the guy.

        4. James I. Van Blaricum

          Stag, let the state know that you will move your company out of state if they don’t get their ducks-n-a row. Ask them if that horried, no since law is more important than the money they stand to lose in taxes, spent income of your workers, that pay taxes on wages, state income taxes, their property taxes, food, clothing, utilities, etc., etc. if they move with company (which I pray you offer them )! And all monies spent in local stores, the list goes on & on. Plus the fact that they are missing out on helping you as a firearm company to make a safer and more efficient product that could benefit all concerned, if at all possible.
          And if you decide to make a move, (I haven’t checked with any State Officials) but I’m sure Indiana would be more than happy to receive your company & all workers with opened arms.

          1. Governator

            Come on down to Texas. We are welcoming business with open arms. Tell them Rick said to move on in!

          2. Joe V. Edwards

            How blind are men when they see guns as harmful to man and in their relentless, mindless attacks on guns, end up harming only men. The 3000 or so employees of Stag Arms likely represent 7000 – 10,000 souls including spouses and dependents. These 3000 have good jobs in hard times. They represent skills vital to any modern economy and the market for their products has never been higher. Only the most ignorant of any species could take a WIN -WIN – WIN situation like this and make it a total loss while calling it progress and justice. J.V. Edwards III

          3. John

            I second the “Come on down to Texas” and invite the 3000+ employes and family as well. We have the room for you all!

        5. bob

          Daffy nition : You are 100% correct!!! My father told me when he was a kid the Prohibition was in effect. He said alcohol was legal one day & then the next day itwas illegal just because some guys in D.C. pass a law making it illigal, thats a joke. The general public continued making,selling,& drinking it anyway. The local,county,& State Police didn’t really even enforce the law because they knew it was rediculas; they just looked the other way or took bribes. You can’t have something legal one day & then signe a bill & make it illegal the next day it just does not work. On another note I want to applaud the 55 County Sheriffs from Colorado that are sueing the state of Colorado!!! Thank God for men like you!!!!!! I pray & hope Colorado repeals there dumb-ass, stupid law they just signed into affect .

          1. Doc Holliday

            You should read Okrent’s “The Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition”

            We can learn a lot about the gun grabbers by reading how the government, with the help of a few individuals, snuck prohibition in through the backdoor…

            And it’s overall effectiveness: There were more ethanol alcohol caused deaths in the the first year of prohibition than there were in the year before. And this was before the government started poisoning denatured alcohol with things like mercury and intentionally killing people. Then there was sacramental wine, which was exempted from the ban, and, suddenly the 1% had to have a church of some sort in their houses.

        6. George Washington

          Sugar in soft drinks: No good

          Political parties: No good

          Wooden teeth: Really no good

          Swords: Good

          Guns: No good

          Horse manure coming from the mouths of conservatives: No good

          1. Kim

            thank you for your usual emotional, ridiculous, completely subjective ranting billy boggs. You continually try to hide behind other names, but it doesn’t work. We get you, gollum troll.

            Your pathetic attempts at poetry are as meaninful as your empty posts

      2. Yogi Bear

        I also agree so I say please get the freak out of my state. go take your killing machines to a killing friendly state.

        Go and try not to let the door hit your butt.

        1. Marv wiese

          I’m goin’ to do it! Look, mr. stupid “Yogi”. I’ll bet you’re fat and you blame THAT on your knife and fork also. Since when has ANY machine killed anyone without someone as stupid as you behind it?

          1. Yogi Bear

            So you denigrate fat people, now? I am 300 lbs and I have been trying to lose it for years.

          2. DR

            You hit it on the head. I bet Yogi never had a firearm in his hand and wouldn’t know one end from another. Best way to loose weight is to cut downon eating. Been there done that

          3. Bill

            Marv, don’t you love the way “Yogi” blithely sidestepped the point of your comment and went to “Oh, you are denigrating fat people now?” Yogi, the point of the comment is that your fork and spoon aren’t what make you fat; your choice to overuse them did. Based on your replies, you appear to be the kind of person who would expect other people to willingly put their lives on the line for your sorry ass. Why is it that you believe that your fears should be the basis for running everyone else’s lives? Just for fun, go here:

            This is the chart that shows the murder rates in the country, what type of crime was committed and what weapons were used in the commission of those crimes. You’ll notice that TWICE as many people are killed, according to the U.S.B.O.S. data, by being beaten to death with personal weapons (815 in 2009; defined as hands and feet, or pushed) as are killed each year by assault rifles (352 in 2009 killed by rifles; assault rifles are a sub-set of that figure). Look at the data for knives (1,836 in 2009) and blunt objects, including hammers (623 in 2009) too.

            Do you really think that a gun law is going to make the bad guys say, “Aw, shucks, you passed a gun law….here’s my guns.” I’m sure MS13, of The Bloods or Crypts or maybe the Hell’s Angels will just show up and turn in all of their weapons. Are you really that stupid??

            Just like your silverware did not make you fat, guns are not guilty of killing people, the people using them to do so are. If we had properly enforced the gun laws that already exist, the vast majority of mass shootings in the last several decades would have been halted.

          4. Kim

            Yogi is billy boggs, jimmyboggs, et at. And he is the worst kind of hypocrite – he owns 2 shotguns while actively fighting against the second amendment.

            He is a troll trying to stir up emotions. Don’t get sucked into his childish games – simply point him out as the fool he is. And don’t do business with him

        2. Sonus

          Hey Yogi, if you are ever in need of a cop, be sure to tell to leave his “killing machine” at home.
          Or ship it outta state or somethin’.

        3. Nun Yad Ambiz Ness

          Do you really believe the bull scat you’re spewing, or are you just doing it to get a rise out of folks? Me personally, I think you have the intellectual equivalent of your namesake after hitting a few picnic baskets laden with fermented breads.

      3. Tony

        All of New England is bunch of indoctrinated Sheeple. I cant wait until they all pay a heavy price and reap the benefit of their stupidity. Once again, I hope all of New England breaks off and falls into the ocean. the whole world would be better off.

        By the way New Englanders, if you have a reply, Wipe your A_ _ with it. Good riddance

        1. Bill

          Hey Tony – Not all of us New Englanders are “indoctrinated Sheeple”. There are lots of us who are Constitution-loving, gun carrying conservatives, working to get back to what our forefathers envisioned for this country. If you want to paint us all with your big brush, so be it; but when the hammer comes down – and it will – there will be plenty of us in NH that will rise up and restore America.

          1. Wayne J

            Bill – maybe, maybe not. But what we see here in the midwest is great guys and gals like you have let the left almost completely take over the state governments. not that the people in illinois have any guts either.

        2. Ben Warford

          Hey don’t be making generalized statements about NE. In New Hampshire we are very LIBERTY minded. We would love to have ANOTHER gun manufacture in NH. Don’t forget where America was started. We started the first revolution and we may well start this one.

        3. M40

          Tony… that’s just ignorant and you KNOW it.

          Like ALL states with big cities, we New Englanders suffer from city votes that outweigh those from the suburbs and rural areas. As soon as you step outside the cities, you’ll find largely conservative people who own guns and want to see our country and constitution restored.

        4. AJ

          Not ALL of New England is like The communist state of Connecticut which BY THE WAY isn’t considered part of New England by New Hampshire! We just consider Vt, NH and Me to be New England having given the rest to some Communist Conspiracy Plot!
          I SWEAR there is something in the water down there that makes those people think that they can legislate morality and by passing laws they can control people and that is what this is an effort to control people’s behaviors. This is PEOPLE CONTROL not GUN CONTROL!
          It is NOW, Has Always BEEN.and will Always BE about PEOPLE CONTROL and the struggle for POWER!
          SINCE Cain and Able people have been using force and various objects to do bodily harm to each other. the ONLY thing that has changed is the means of force. We have struggled to control that means of force with little success.
          I GUARANTEE IT WILL ONLY TAKE GETTING MUGGED ONCE to turn Yogi into a MOST staunch advocate for gun rights. Getting put into the hospital will to most people. If it didn’t then he is a much bigger fool than he even makes himself out to be here!

      4. Henry Hoku

        Guns are an historic right to own in America. The nation was founded with the promise to arm in our struggle for independence. Let the 2nd amendment remain forever as a becon for other developing cultures.

        I have grown tired of the liberal hogwash.

      5. lajolla

        Agree on which side? To be aload to build what you want ? or get ride of the all AR’s all together.?

    1. Stan

      I’m a liberal who is tired of being demonized by conservatives. I work fulltime, purchase healthcare for my family, volunteer regularly and attend church. I run a small business on the side. I don’t hate anyone, and neither do any of my friends or associates. Why does the fact I’m opposed to assault weapons make me such a bad person? I don’t want to ban all firearms, just those designed for combat rather than sport. I taught my son marksmanship. I grew up hunting out west. Please, can we refrain from the name calling and labeling? We all want what is best for our children, just have different opinions. The hate I see coming from the right has gotten out of control, as evidenced above.

      1. Topher

        What is the difference in firepower between an AR and a Ruger Mini 14? Absolutely nothing. Yet, the Mini 14 is legal and the AR is not. Also, your liberal, hypocrite leader Malloy is allowing manufacture of AR’s in Connecticut for sale in other states. They can be purchased in New Hampshire, a little over an hour away.If a felon or a nut like the psychos that the government lets run loose want one, they don’t have to go far. If Malloy was being a purist he should have forced the closure of all AR production in Connecticut. BTW I don’t own an AR and don’t want one. I just marvel at legislative stupidity.

        1. Time for Change

          He didn’t do what you suggest and stop all production because he wants their money.

          It is the ultimate in hypocrisy when on the one hand you are saying they are too dangerous to be sold in Connecticut, but you can make them here so long as you sell them in the other 49 states as long as we get your money so we can spend it.

          1. Tony

            Gun rights are a touchy subject? Whats so touchy? If your a Liberal sissy dont handle the big bad Guns. But when your house is being broken into while your asleep don’t call the Police who have guns and certainly don’t call your neighbor that owns one (by the way he would be there before the Police get there to clean up the mess) because you have already stated that guns are bad.
            We can only hope it happens to you Liberals so you just might come to your senses. Liberal are so confused, maybe you stupid Libs should vote for Hillary next, If you think things are bad now!

      2. Jim

        Stan, like you, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Gun rights are a touchy subject as you probably know. I have several AR platform rifles all used in sporting competition and I also hunt with them. They are durable, accuarte and easily serviced by me, a non-gunsmith. That’s why I like them. With the push of two pins they can be converted into a .22 LR to a 50 BMG. The flexibility of this rifle is outstanding. I too grew up shooting with my father and grandfather. It is my link with them and only brings up fond memories. I was presented with my first AR as a Christmas present from my grandfather. My dad was a law enforcement officer his whole life so I have a profound understanding and respect for all firearms. I have instilled that in my family as well. We all target shoot and my son and I hunt. I have since given my first AR to my son and hope he continues the tradition with his family. I do not like it when someone runs amok with any firearm, it gives all gun owners a black eye because so many people who know nothing of firearms come out of the woodwork and call all gun owners “nuts”, “fanatics” and other harsh names. So it’s easy to see why some people are touchy. I never generalize with people, I am socially liberal and believe in personal responsibility. I don’t blame entire groups of people for the views of a few posters. I can sympathize with your feeling of repression because I’ve had to face it as well.

      3. Matt from CT

        Because Stan, you started the name calling — defining certain rifles as bad simply on their looks, not their functionality.

        You want to ban firearms designed for combat? Would that include the single shot flintlocks from the revolutionary war?

        Bolt action rifles used in WWI?

        Semi-automatic rifles used in WWII and Korea?

        Or is it simply modern, ergonomic stocks that date from the mid 1940s that are “designed for combat?”

        The reality is there is nothing that makes an AR-15 anymore dangerous than other semiautomatic rifles that have more traditional gunstocks — well, perhaps with the exception of individuals with disabilities or less then average upper body strength for whom the modern gunstocks have real advantages.

        The hate is strong on both sides — the actions of Connecticut’s legislature on gun control were every bit disgusting for both process and ideology as the actions of Texas’ legislature in recent weeks on abortion. The only difference is whether you’re irrational from the right or irrational from the left which issue you decide is just a difference of opinion.

      4. gunstuff

        Point taken. But for the sake of fairness and accuracy wouldn’t you agree that the Second Amendment wasn’t written to protect sport shooting or hunting?
        Also, as the gun community has been trying to correct for years, the semi-automatic rifles that are being banned are not assault weapons, nor are they military weapons. In fact, in its 50 years of existence the semi-automatic “AR-15″ has never been adopted by any military in the world.
        True, they have a military lineage but so what? Thousands of things that we deal with in our every day lives can be traced down to a military origin.
        You don’t like these genre of rifles, and that’s okay, but why should the rest of us be forced to live like you? Why didn’t our elected officials instead pass a law stating that if you used such a weapon in the commission of a crime your punioshment would be doubled? At least that would have been more fair than the collective punishment (a Marxist ideology) they enacted.
        In my opinion SB1160 was the line in the sand. Anyone that voted for it, regardless if your an elephant or a donkey, should be voted out and all those that voted against it should be kept in. Period.

        1. Kim

          well said gunstuff. Be prepared for verbal abuse from many posters, most of them pseudonyms of billy boggs the gollum of these threads

        2. Yogi Bear

          Gun stuff:

          We all must accommodate each other as best we can or simply be in perpetual conflict. The resolve of conflict is through Congress and/or Court decisions.

          In CT, the majority ruled that we will have limited distribution of firearms. Your side has sued and it will be resolved in the future. BTW, it really doesn’t matter how weapons are defined . I would like to see them all banned.mi’ll never get what I want. But you will not get what you want, either. Ultimately, we will find a compromise. But arms sales as we have known it is ending. The movement is to strive for a safer society and safer means less guns or no guns.

          If you could find a way to prevent guns from seeping into criminal hands, I might revisit my opinion. But you can’t and it will never happen. A full 60 percent of crimes in which guns were used were purchased legally.

          Have a nice one.

          1. navdan

            For those who want to only ban assault weapons: Why? All rifles combined (with “assault rifles” being a subset) account for 3% of gun homicides in the U.S. To be consistent, you should naturally want all firearms banned, since they account for far more gun deaths.

            And for those who want ALL guns banned: Again, why? I presume it’s to stop innocent lives from being lost…probably life from being lost in general. Well, there’s approximately 10,000 gun homicides a year in the U.S. The average estimate of self-defense uses with firearms every year is anywhere from 800,000 – 2.5 million times. Even the least forgiving estimates from gun control groups put the estimate at 80,000 – 100,000 self-defense uses per year. Essentially, at a MINIMUM, 8X as many people are protected by using firearms legitimately than are killed. So, if you ACTUALLY value life, instead of paying emotional lip service in the form or feel-good but useless legislation, why in the world would you want to ban firearms?

          2. Yogi Bear


            As part of my logic, I have relied on the progress that other developed nations have used regarding firearms in society. England virtually did away with guns. So did Australia. Less murder rates due from guns. And so far, the English or Australian armies haven’t placed their population under martial law since the people no longer have the capacity to defend themselves.

            I rest my case for the evening.


          3. Sonus

            . I would like to see them all banned

            You know, places where the police and military control all instruments of coercive force are called Police states

          4. navdan

            @Yogi Bear:

            It is true that gun violence rates are down there. But both Australia and the UK had their violent crime rates skyrocket after the ban, and both countries’ violent crime rates are FAR higher than the U.S.

            I’m going to make up numbers to make a point that holds true for me:
            If I have a 0.05% chance of being a victim of gun violence with a legal way to protect myself with a gun I know how to use, or a 1% chance of being a victim of a home invasion where a couple criminals “only” have knives and bats, and I have no good way to protect myself or my family other than hiding and hoping, I’m going to choose what’s valued in a free society: the natural right of self defense.

            And if you take out the massive numbers of homicides in the U.S. that are DIRECTLY to do with urban area gang violence with illegally-begotten guns, you would see *drastically* lower gun death rates than are typically reported — and that’s a society and culture problem that has extremely little to do with me or the vast geographic majority of this country. Banning guns would significantly affect law-abiding citizens, and would eventually, and only in the long long term, start affect the way that SOME urban thugs would commit violence.

          5. 2nd Amendment Forever

            “We all must accommodate each other as best we can or simply be in perpetual conflict. The resolve of conflict is through Congress and/or Court decisions.”

            You are incorrect. Where is it in our Constitution that the people of this country are to accomodate anyone? I know most liberals believe in ‘equality’ for the masses, but it is not Constitutional.

            You are correct in that there will be continual conflict on this issue. Those that oppose our Constitutional rights will always want to rule over those that stand up for them.

            Answer this; if there is so much disagreement with the 2nd Ammendment as it is written, why can’t they get enough votes in the CONUS to ammend it? Simple answer, but you probably cannot come close.

            I think all manufacturers of firearms and their accessories should start looking at relocating to more friendlier States where they will get great employees and not have to put up with the ‘Socialist’ politics of the East and West coast states.

            Come to Indiana, relocate to Texas, how about Kentucky? These are just a few of the States that would welcome the opportunities you offer to their unemployed and to their local economies.

            Would sure like to see how places can even survive when you take 3000 jobs away.

            Molon Labe

          6. Yogi Bear

            Navdan: you mentioned that violent crime skyrocketed after banning guns. I am only addressing gun deaths. I am not interestd in why other forms of violent crime increased. It could have been caused by any variety of issues,

          7. Bob-baz

            Yogi bear It seems to me you have missed the point . You restrictive laws that only the law abiding citizens will honor, the criminal element will not only disobey but use these ill conceived statues to their ad vantage , so the good citizens wouldn’t able to resist their efforts. The police take time to respond and you have a choice weather to be a victim or defend yourself, wouldn’t you like the choice of what to defend yourself with? I would sometimes a double barrel shotgun is not enough.

          8. D.Moon

            The problem with your “majority” is it’s unconstitutional, period. I don’t care what a liberal posted court justice says, I can read, and I know what “unalienable” means. I have read the Founders letters and I know the intent of the 2nd Amendment. It is intended for the people to have military type firearms as a deterrent to tyranny. Every state with lax gun laws has lower crime rates than those with strong gun control, that is a fact. The Constitution was put into place to prevent a misguided, or knee-jerk “majority” from destroying the rights of the people, whether or not they are currently the “minority” does not matter. If the Constitution was followed as it should be, then even if 99.99% wanted to ban them, they could not. If you don’t like them, don’t buy them. If you are worried about crime, make gun crimes (real crimes, not if the hand guard hangs down 1/4 inch too much, I mean real ones) punished harshly. Whats wrong with America being the place the founders envisioned? Nothing other than Communists and Socialists want to ruin it for true Americans. They are traitors and enemies of the state as far as the Founders are concerned. I side with the Founders.

        3. D.Moon

          I meant the “Bill of Rights” portion of the Constitution, before someone jumps on and says you change the Constitution all the time. The Bill of Rights was supposed to be “etched in Stone”.

      5. Ken

        NONE of these guns were designed for combat so you are basing all your opinions on an entirely false premiss. The gun this article was talking about is a 22. Arms designed for battle, heck even the guns our police departments use, are select fire weapons capable of full auto fire. NONE of the guns banned by the liberal gun grabbers, yes that IS what they and by association YOU really are, are select fire weapons.
        Nothing in this law can or will ever prevent another mass shooting, its not even what theyre intended to do. The whole intent was for our liberal Demoncrats to outdo other liberal demoncrats.
        YOUR opinion, shared by our legislature has infringed upon the rights, basic civil rights, of likely hundreds of thousands of CT gun owners. This law effects every single gun owner, not just those who happen to like plastic stocked semi autos, but the guys who only shoot 5 rounds a year in November to hunt deer, it effects people who target shoot with revolvers & 22s. People can no longer teach their kid marksmanship without taking an 8 hour class just to buy ammo, let alone a 22 rifle, which requires a long gun certificate of eligibility which requires an 8 hour course.
        Its not hate you see from, not only the “right” but all knowledgeable gun owners. Its frustration at being blamed for the actions of ONE loony bird, not unlike banning a type of car because a drunk used it to run over a bunch of people. Its frustration at being the focus of YOUR rage, or hate, of gun ownership.
        If you dont like being labled a gun grabbing left wing liberal idiot, then stop being and associating with them. Vote them out. Bring justice back to our courts & legislature. Do something besides whining because you dont like being called exactly what you are.

        1. Hersch

          @yogi You realy need to check into things before you say that down under did not ban firearms i was just over there and there are a lot of people that has and own firearms sorry you lost on that one Hersch

        2. Kim

          Yogi Bears’ pseudo-intellectual defense of his gun-grabbing status has been proven wrong over the last two years on these blogs, time and time again. These arguments – and the sensible responses from those whoe believe in the consititution – have been pointed out to billy boggs/yogi katz, et al many, many times. He is aware that violent crime goes UP in those foreign countries he loves to refer to as those who have banned private gun ownership. His statement above that he doesn’t care says it all in a nutshell – his liberal, anti-gun views are based purely on feelings and not a whit of objectivity or commonsense, and the truth has no place in his mind or his rants.

          Any of you who are trying to reason with him will fail – he’s a troll and either doesn’t get it or refuses to follow the facts in his quest for feelings-based government and socialism for all. On top of that, he owns two shotguns making his gun-grabbing efforts the perfect example of hypocrisy. I welcome your attempts to educate him as there are others who read these pages who may benefit from your reasoning and facts – yogi/bill/jimmy is NOT one of them.

          Keep up the good fight.

          A very good friend of mine in Dallas responded to my concerns about the direction this country is heading, when I sent him a link to Thomas Sowells’ artice “Is This America”. His response is telling, and one that is growing in popularity even among those who would NOT have agreed even 1 year ago. I will not mention his name here for obvious reasons, but his words follow:

          “I have to admit that this has not been the “America” that I missed so much when I was in Wales or in India for quite some time, and that it is highly unlikely that such a country will ever be again on this earth. I probably had a complete misunderstanding of what the US was at that time, being in various ways a hell of a lot more naïve than I am today, but even taking that into account, the sense of security most US residents felt when wandering through their own neighborhoods – or even through most randomly chosen neighborhoods in the country is simply no longer reasonable or possible. Additionally, the incredible ease with which anyone could find gainful employment is not likely to return – certainly not within my lifetime. And you can absolutely forget any of the “dollar a day” vacations we used to find touted in various travel brochures and articles.

          We are no longer free to speak our minds. We are no longer free to do a number of things that once defined the difference between the US and the rest of the world. When I was in college I saw the beginnings of the change – intolerance to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly became commonplace. When my generation started to move into positions of political power I thought the old American ideals would return. How wrong I was! Our current government is, arguably, the most frightening in terms of eliminating personal freedom of any I have witnessed in my life, even including the McCarthy era.”

          My friend is – and has always been – a very wise person. The above words reflect that and should be considered a harbinger of what is to come unless real patriotic ferver and sentiment once again flows freely through this country.

      6. ACR

        >>volunteer regularly and attend church

        How about we ban your church, but not other churches?

        Same difference seeing as both religious and firearm rights are both given to the individual.

        1. M40

          Background Checks for Islam! Liberals have swung this door wide open… so I have ANOTHER RIGHT we should tax and regulate in the EXACT same way we handle the right to bear arms. The irresponsible and/or violent outbursts of a few deranged individuals can now be CLEARLY seen to justify new laws. I propose the following “COMMON SENSE MEASURES”… and if they save the lives of innocent children…

          – Effective immediately, EVERY Muslim must obtain a PERMIT TO PRACTICE ISLAM. These permits will need to be renewed every few years and will cost the permit holder $100. Revenues from this permit process will be used to combat extremism.

          – All Korans shall require a serial number so that we may track them and make sure they are legally used. The state and federal governments shall build and maintain databases of all Korans. Any Muslim found in possession of a Koran without a permit shall be subject to arrest, fines and imprisonment.

          – Thorough background checks shall be conducted on all permit requests. No individual with a criminal record, a history of violence or any form of mental illness should EVER be allowed access to Islam. History CLEARLY shows what happens when Korans fall into the wrong hands.

          – Every mosque shall submit extensive paperwork to obtain federal permits allowing them to preach Islam and/or distribute Korans. These ‘dealers’ of Islam shall be held to very strict standards and extreme penalties if they do not stay within federal guidelines.

          – It will NOT be easy for Muslims to stay within the law. We will write approximately 20,000 confusing laws governing and regulating the “free” exercise of Islam. Any Muslim that violates any of these laws will have their permit to practice Islam revoked permanently, and will face fines and/or imprisonment for violations.

          – Mosques will submit detailed records to the federal government showing daily attendance. Any discrepancies in record keeping will result in permit suspension, and the mosque will be shut down until they sort it out with the Bureau of Religion, Media and Thought Control. Multiple discrepancies will result in permanent revocation and possible imprisonment.

          – Transport of Korans and other religious paraphernalia shall be strictly regulated. All Korans shall henceforth be sold with locking mechanisms to ensure that they do not fall into the wrong hands. Korans shall be transported in locked cases between the home and religious institutions. While in the home, they shall be locked at all times unless they are in use.

          – Anyone wishing to carry an unlocked Koran in public shall obtain a special permit. Carriers Shall keep Korans hidden at all times. Public display of a Koran shall be considered a threatening gesture, and the offender shall be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.

          – The federal government will regulate the ‘design’ of the Koran. Certain passages will be deemed ‘especially dangerous’, and shall be outlawed from new Korans and considered illegal to sell or transfer. Older Korans containing these passages may be ‘grandfathered’ and can be registered. A special permit will be required for those who wish to own or carry grandfathered passages.

          – Other dangerous passages in the Koran can likewise be considered as incitements to violence, and limits should be imposed. We will therefore set an arbitrary limit of 10 dangerous passages per Koran. Korans containing more than 10 of these passages will be illegal. Various states may set their own arbitrary limits as to which passages are allowed and how many are permissible (15, 10, 7, 6 or whatever is deemed suitable).

          ALL of this is now WELL ESTABLISHED as perfectly legal under liberal Democrat ideology. They have argued that NONE of this is considered a violation of civil liberties. As Democrats have repeatedly pointed out, these are “COMMON SENSE MEASURES” to avert the actions of a deranged and violent few.

          1. wesley

            The above law is a sensible law and is necessary even if it only saves one child’s life.

          2. Patrick Henry

            Well said, M40. If it will save ONE life, it is our duty to impose these laws. State and federal legislatures should meet immediately in the middle of the night and pass this as an EMERGENCY MEASURE, the details of which can be sorted out and decided upon AFTER enactment of the law.

            The President and VP should undertake a tour of America with the families of victims of extremism and intolerance. I’m sure there are pictures of some victims who might resemble Obama’s son (if he had one).

            Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be designated as point persons to sell this idea to the black community: after all, they always have the interests of the black community at heart and have been wise and sage advisers to that community for decades now.

            The sooner we get this started the safer I will feel – how many more deaths must we endure at the hands of extremists before our government does the responsible thing?

      7. Cate007

        If you knew anything about firearms, you would know that firearms designed for combat are already banned. Combat firearms are fully automatic; what the media has tagged as assault weapons are in truth simply semi- automatic hunting rifles in fancy dress. According to the article, Stag Arms intended to manufacture a .22 version of the AR-15; the only time anyone would use a .22 in combat would be if it was the only firearm available. Of course, the same could be said of a .25 calibre black powder single shot pistol.

      8. daffy nition

        You call it *hate*. It’s actually called dissent. LIEberals can’t stand the truth or any idea that it contrary to their agenda.

        Liberalism is a disease. A fatal disease.

      9. Yogi Bear

        Stan: I too an a liberal but I want all these Neanderthals to pack up and go. Get the freak out of my state.

        I hate them. They are selfish, no good pigs who only want to continue the disease of of murder. Guilt by association.

        1. Mike Stevens

          The can come from both sides as you can see from Yogi. This is not your state by the way.

        2. Kim

          yogi aka billy boggs. The same billy boggs who attached someone last week for not using his own name. That’s right, the hypocrite is here talking to himself as Yogi, Megel, tao.

          1. Kim

            yes you are billy/yogi. In fact, a reader paying attention on these threads alone can tie you to these names. As usual you can’t keep track of yourself and have acknowledged who you really are by responding to comments directed at billy boggs and/or jimmy boggs.

            Your inability to be honest, to acknowledge truths, or to be civil on these threads, is becoming more obvious to more readers billy. Your denial of who you are doesn’t pass muster, as usual.

            It’s not paranoia if it’s true. Truth – something that eludes you katzboy

        3. zakukillerz

          You talk about murder what about the thousands of children that are murdered by abortion every year. I have a better chance of protecting myself and my family with a gun than the children that are murdered every year by abortion have to protect themselves. You say you want to protect childrens lives well refocus off the guns and refocus on the deaths of the children. Hypocrisy at its finest.

        4. Patrick Henry

          You said that incorrectly yogi/bill/jimmy: Change “I am a liberal BUT” to “I am a liberal AND” because what follows is precisely the liberal theology, not the exception

      10. Cymond

        Stan, why do you support banning guns based on the shape of their grip? How does that make any sense?

        Please, if you think you understand “assault” weapons, please explain to us the details of what makes them different from other rifles. Be specific.

        The simple fact is that almost EVERY part of our modern life has some heritage in military technology. GPS was originally built for military navigation. The Jeep SUV was a military vehicle. Motorcycles became popular because the US gov’t bought Harley Davidsons in WW1 and veterans bought them when they came home from the war.

      11. Kim

        Stan: are you trying to convince anyone that Yogi Bears comments are from someone on the ‘right’? You are probably just billy boggs using ‘Stan’ as a name here, just like billy is using ‘yogi’, tao and others.

        If you are incapable of acknowledging that there is hate on both sides of the equation, then you SHOULD be demonized as a liberal

        1. Yogi Bear

          Kim or whoever you are: read what you just wrote. I showed this to some friends and we all cracked up. So thank you for giving me a belly laugh this evening.

          1. Kim

            You have friends, billy/yogi? Now THAT is scary, and probably your usual lie.

            If you and your ‘friends’ find my comments amusing, I’m not surprised. Reason and common sense never sit well with liberal fools – it’s great that you’re pointing that out in YOUR comments

      12. Kevin

        We all want what is best for our children and our country, but maybe our view of things are not the same, not bashing you, just take a look at a different angle to all of this gun control stuff, from somebody that lives out in one of those flyover states miles from the next town.

        Disarm the honest citizen, great, that sure has helped the crime problem, read a letter I sent to Diane Feinstein about all this gun control, oh, by the way we are from Texas,
        A letter sent to Diane Feinsein about a female NRA member,
        Well just let me give you a little view of America,
        I have had an AR for over 34 years, my wife of over 28 years has use this weapon as her primary deer hunting rifle , hog hunting rifle, varmint hunting rifle, and weapon for self defense. It is small, light, and compact. She is very good with it, very good with it, and you tell us that now it is an assault weapon that you want to ban. This is my wifes personal defense weapon. In a defensive situation, why would you limit the size of a magazine? Just asking, and I expect a response. When I leave the house to go to work, I leave the most efficent weapon that I have to protect my wife from harm. Why would I limit her to a pistol or a shotgun to protect herself? I will not. She has used this rifle to put a deer in the freezer every year for the past 27 years, multible wild hogs, and has protected our livestock from coyotes and other predators with it. And I am damm confident that she can protect herself and our property when I am away at work with it.
        This is America, we will not have you or anyone else telling us what our needs are for self protection or otherwise, besides it is not any of your damm business.
        I hear what you are trying to do, your “if I could have had 51 votes I would have told Mr. and Mrs. america to turn them all in”. You need to understand who you are talking to, we are the citizens of the United States of America,
        We are not doing anything wrong
        We are paying our taxes
        We are going to church
        We vote everytime and support canditates and organizations that reflect our views with our pocketbooks
        Most importantly, we will not put up with any infingment of our rights.

        The root cause of everyone of these mass killings is a broken institutionalized mental health system, lack of school security and gun free zones, not my wifes rifle.
        If you spent half of your effort focusing on solutions to the root cause of these problems instead of pushing your gun control/gun ban agenda we could actually do some good and prevent these tragedies.
        South Texas

        Everything the progressive liberal left proposes on this issue has an end goal of complete erosion of our second amendment rights and disbarment of the American Citizen. They are just doing it a little at a time.

        1. Truth

          Kevin, let’s not forget that Feinstein has a permit and carries a handgun for personal protection. This, on top of her taxpayer-paid bodyguards. The height of hypocrisy

        2. Ken

          I’m a gun owner and support your position 100%, but I keep wondering why so many gun owners who are opposed to this immoral gun control law insist on informing us that they go to church? I’m a hardcore atheist, but neither that fact nor fact of your churchgoing are relevant to the issue of gun control!

      13. Concerned

        Your not a Bad person! You are part of the 98% of the Law abiding US Citizens!
        My question is: so when is the city mayor going to take the illegaly owned hand guns (pistols) away from the criminal gang bangers, that illegally have guns and lock the criminals up and take them off the streets!
        If you haven’t noticed, law abiding citizens like you are not shooting at people randomly! Honest law abiding citizens like you that do legally own and are familure with a gun, protect there families and others every day! If you do not want to own a gun to protect your family, I suport you in that decision!
        But I am not going to hope and plan on not having a way to protect myself quickly after 3 criminals break down my door, while they then, will of course, calmly wait for me to dial 911, while I then calmly give an address to an operator for help, then wait 15+ minuets for police to show up. Most criminal attact plans have them in and out out in less than 3 minuets! If you can get to a phone, dial a number, and clearly, calmly, give a operator an address, while the criminals are shooting/ assaulting your kids, assaulting your wife, and torturing you for a combination for the safe. All under 3 minuets in a unanounced planned attack,.. You have magical powers that are beyond human. (Enjoy your gun free zone, emergency whistle, & 3 seconds to react when they break in!)
        I WILL exersize my Second Amendment Right and Grab my Loaded, (One in the chamber) pistol or “Scarry Black” Semiauto sport Rifle that I legally own, and am trained with!
        Even if you get the phone call off to police, the criminals are still going to do what they want, THEY ARE CRIMINALS! If they respected the law they would not be at your house in the first place!

        If this situation unfortunately happens to you, you will have, if you are lucky, 3 seconds to react, I choose to Grab my gun first, not the phone.
        Crimes happen in Seconds while the Police are Minuets away! Education is a terrible thing to waist!!!
        I guess the main reason for your concern is because you might not understand what you are saying! “Assault” weapons are already banned and not available for sale to regular civilians and havent been since 1936, and are select fire, either 3 rnd bursts from 1 pull of trigger, and or are fully automatic: when you hold the trigger down for as many rounds as you want.
        Gang bangers generally use pistols 99+% of the time. Long guns of any kind are extreamly rare in these situations. The only people actually armed with “Assault” weapons (1 trigger hold= as many bullets as you want) are Law Enforcement. But they call these FULLY AUTOmatic Rifles “Personal protection” Rifles. The regular joe legally owns a semiauto rife,.. 1 pull= 1 bullet only!

      14. david robinson

        You, like the majority of liberals refuse to understand the true meaning behind the second amendment and why it is so important that people have the right to self defense, own, bear and choose. Any sane person who believes in the right to own firearms also believes that the punishment for there miss-use should be extremely harsh. The anti-gun democratic / socialist now in power say that the reason behind increasingly tougher gun restrictions is to make us all safer. But if that were the true reason, why are most of the laws pertaining to gun related crimes not Federal crimes and why is the theft of someone’s firearm usually if not always a misdemeanor?

      15. Mike Kramer

        Stan – You sound like a liberal that I (a conservative) can live with; glad to see you work, own a business, etc. The problem I have is with the notion that any semi-automatic is an “assault” weapon. In fact, any firearm can be used to “assault” someone, even your deer rifle. But deer rifles are not so good for self defense because firing, and reloading to fire again, is slow. On the other hand a semi-automatic (and I’m NOT talking about a true military “machine gun”) allows the user to fire more than one shot without consuming valuable time manually reloading the gun. In a desperate “life-or-death” self-defense situation a few hundreds of a second can mean the difference between living or dying. Nonetheless, the efficicacy of using a semi-auto in self defense is lost by many liberals. And guns are quite frequently used for the good purpose of self-defense and to stop crime.

      16. Marv wiese

        Stan, I appreciate and respect your position in your community. The items that are being banned are NOT assault weapons. True “assault weapons’ are FULLY automatic. They have been regulated and under laws since 1939. Those kind of laws have not been enforced. Why make new laws that ONLY hurt the law abiding people? And will NEVER effect those that chose to break those laws?
        You ask what is best for our children. If the law makers want to do something progressive they should team up with the NRA and Allow them to conduct their training classes they have available. Having trained and armed personnel at schools WILL make those crazies stop and think and keep them from attacking our children. Don’t punish those of us, the law abiding people.. Please!

        1. Marv wiese

          I forgot to mention. The instruction/courses and training are being offered FREE by the NRA.

      17. Sonus

        You have no clue how long American military/police and civilians have actually used the same firearms do you?
        I’ll tell you. Pretty much since the first shot of the Revolutionary War.
        Brown Bess Muskets. Kentucky Long Rifles. Remington Navy Model 1861. Colt Single Action Army Revolvers. (AKA the Peacemaker). Henry Lever Action Rifles. Colt 1911A1 Pistols. Springfield 1903A3 Rifles. Smith & Wesson Model 10 M&P,(Military and Police) Beretta 92/M9 Pistols.

        That’s just a tiny sampling.
        All used for “combat”.
        And “sport”.

        And yes, some may think you’re a bad person if you attempt to deny them their civil rights.
        Or if you use terms like “assault weapons” to deliberately confuse the issue.

        (Of course, it’s possible that even after months of discussions about the issue, you’re still ignorant of basic terminology.)

        Ignorance can usually be dispelled by studying a subject. Are you too lazy to study?
        That’s rhetorical.

      18. Tony

        Attend Church, and vote for Obama and call yourself a Liberal. WOW your brilliant.

        What an uninformed, un-discerning dope!

      19. Harry Anchorite

        Few care whether you are personally opposed to assault weapons or not. However, if you want to ban them, then we have a right to ask why, and if you insist that a ban will reduce crime then we have a right to ask for your evidence, and this is where your effort collapses. You may not realize this if you get most of your information from PBS, NPR, the New York Times, etc., but supply side gun control, including assault weapons bans, is a failure. No public policy has failed to reduce violent crime so many times in so many different jurisdictions as has gun control; check the research of Gary Kleck, Joyce Malcolm, John Lott, etc., etc., etc. Or simply look back at the statistics for Chicago and
        Washington DC; both have been the nation’s “murder capitals” while also having some of the nation’s most restrictive gun control.

        Liberals become bad people when they attempt to impose their policies on others, most especially when those policies are based on prejudice and ignorance.

      20. Adam

        The founding fathers phrased the second amendment to the Constitution SPECIFICALLY for arms (as in firearms) not just for “sporting” or “hunting” rifles. We can see this clearly from the third amendment saying that we have the right to refuse to have a soldier/police… Etc in our home without our consent in peacetime OR wartime. How do you refuse an armed soldier without being equally armed?

      21. Subaraptor

        Name one firearm that was not invented for military use. EVERY firearm from the musket to the lever action, to the bolt action, to the revolver was invented for military combat use. Every firearm that you have EVER touched. You killer, you.

      22. perry

        you say you go to church ,then why are you still a lib need i mintion abortion and homos,last time i looked in the bible the lord was against both.and if you say you are to then why are you still a lib,or support them.

      23. Readyrudy

        First let me educate you. What is an ASSAULT WEAPON?
        The civilian AR15’s are NOT assault weapons they are merely a cosmetically copies of a REAL assault weapon used by the military, police, and other government agencies named the M16.
        These are nothing more than semi-auto rifles. REAL assault rifles have selectors capable of switching from SAFE, SEMI, and AUTO. The civilian AR’s DO NOT have this AUTO select option and the actual receiver is forged in such a way that it cannot be converted.
        But, just because they LOOK like a military M16, the liberals have used that to indoctrinate you to believe this AR is a bad ASSAULT WEAPON.

        1. wesley

          “Assault rifle” is a boogyman name created in 1975 to demonize the commonly used “battle rifle”. There is no military or manufacture class of fire arm called “assault rifle”. The short barrel M4 carbine would be more appropriately called a self-defense fire arm or a “homeland defense rifle”. The second amendment was written and ratified to prevent the national government from taking MILITARY ARMS from the people. Yes, even cannon and grenades. Imagine how much better our nation would be if politicians had not been allowed to ignore the Constitution and trample our rights, yes, the ones given to we humans by God. Read. Learn. Understand.

      24. Gun_nut


        It sounds like you are claiming to be a liberal (and certainly are on guns) while living an otherwise conservative lifestyle. But you have bought into the line being sold by by the true liberals, who certainly do deserve to be demonized.

        The issue of gun control is driven by those who really do want to ban guns. This piecemeal only ban this one or that one is not their end goal. The liberals you no doubt vote for have said they don’t believe in private gun ownership. Obama has advocated a total ban on handguns and said he does not believe in private gun ownership. The same can be said for nearly all anti-gun leaders. Their primary rhetorical tool is “we only want to ban …, not all guns”. But they have pushed to ban guns based on being too powerful (which would ban most hunting rifles), too concealable (small gun), too cheap (accessible by the poor), and on and on. Classic divide and conquer.

        The role of government is not supposed to be social manipulation or banning anything someone thinks is a good idea. But government has gotten completely out of hand. So much so that they now feel threatened by not having a total monopoly on force.

        As long as you are advocating leaving the people defenseless at the mercy of a malevolent, self-serving government, you should expect some derision.

      25. lturn9

        The Ar15 is what I assume you are saying is a “Assault Weapon” designed for combat? You should know that the AR15 is the most popular target rifle being used in USA at the moment. Go to any range an you will see many of them being used for target practice. True “Assault Weapons” (fully automatic) like the M16 have been illegal since 1934 unless the government is paid a Fee (tax) to own it. Seems a little Fee makes things OK.

        Anyway, the AR15 so often described as an “Assault Weapon” but it is not very different from any .22 semi auto rifle many kids were given for Christmas or their birthday when they showed they were responsible enough to own and use it, often when they are 12 or 13. Any 22 Semi Auto rifle has the same characteristics as the AR15. They both are semi-automatic, both use a clip to feed bullets although some .22 rifles use a tube to feed the bullets. The AR15 does have a bayonet lug – do you suggest the AR15 should be illegal because it has a bayonet lug? Ever hear of anyone being killed with a bayonet lug? Same for a pistol grip. same question – anyone ever use a pistol grip to kill a bunch of kids in school? Nope. What you have are nuts who have stolen (mostly) a gun from someone and used it to kill people.
        You haven’t mentioned getting rid of the nuts pulling the triggers of the “assault weapons” have you? Why is that? you still cannot define what an assault weapon is. You may not like the label, but you are a typical liberal waving a poster and chanting a chorus but your arguments are full of holes. The end game of all Anti-Gun laws is the ultimate removal of all guns from the public’s hands. Many politicians have said this much. If they make AR15s illegal the list of illegal guns will grow. If a AR15 is illegal, ALL semi auto guns can be made illegal using the same corrupted logic. And if all guns are taken, many of us will lose the means for self protection. You go to church? God never said we should not protect ourselves. Self protection is a God given right. And guns are necessary to give us the means to protect ourselves from larger, younger or more numerous criminals.

      26. Bob Shirley

        Because, Stan, there is no parity between your mistaken beliefs and the beliefs of pro-Second Amendment gun owners. Those weapons designed for “combat” are specifically what the Second Amendment was intended to protect. You think because you have a job, care for your kids, “volunteer” and go to church, it gives you the right to infringe upon MY rights? I don’t think so. What do you “volunteer” for? I volunteered for Iraq, you jackwagon.

      27. Leon

        Stan, what good is a “sporting” bolt-action hunting rifle against a team (aka “gang”) of thugs breaking into your home with so-called “Assault” or “combat” weapons? Your only chance of surviving that encounter would be to see them before they decide to target your house and pick them off at a distance, probably requiring the aid of night-vision equipment, which isn’t cheap … and THEN, since they weren’t on your lawn or in your bedroom yet, YOU would be up the legal creek without even a floating popsicle stick, in worse shape than George Zimmerman. So, to claim self defense, and live to be tried and acquitted, you need to be able TO SURVIVE, WHICH MEANS HAVING AT LEAST AS MUCH FIREPOWER AS THE INTRUDERS, OR AT LEAST ENOUGH TO TAKE ENOUGH OF THEM DOWN TILL THE REST OF THEM GET THE IDEA THAT YOUR LOOT IS NO LONGER WORTH THEIR LIVES AND HIGH-TAIL IT OUT OF THERE …. and since nobody anywhere, even wearing police badges or judges’ robes, can predict when or where that will happen, your right to own however much firepower you think you need is the crux of the issue, and that is precisely why so many people, myself included, think every gun law passed since the ink dried on the Bill of Rights has been unconstitutional … because to require permission from a judge or police dept or governor or federal agency to exercise a RIGHT TO YOUR OWN SELF DEFENSE, WHILE AWAITING THE ARRIVAL OF POLICE TO YOUR LOCATION, is GOVERNMENT TYRANNY IN ONE OF IT’S MANY VERY SIMPLE DEFINITIONS ! ANOTHER IS THE GOV’T. ALLOWING ITS PEOPLE TO HAVE AND DO WHAT WE ORDINARY FOLKS ARE NOT (BODY ARMOR BALLISTIC PLATES, TALKING ON HANDHELD RADIO OR PHONE WHILE DRIVING, ETC.) I’m in agreement with the NH folks above about starting the next revolution, which I am sure will happen in my lifetime (I’m 53 now, and I’ll find a way to deploy and launch lead at 120 if I have to !!!)

    2. Yogi Bear

      Time for change: you are half right. Most “liberals” don’t want the gun farts around. But we do want go business growth. Don’t try and lump everything you donz’t like all in one.

      I am normally an even-tempered person on issues until I hit a flank wall of ignorance and inflexibility. When this happens, my fighting Irish goes up. I am happy to talk moderately on the issues. But I have found especially on these blogs, a rough crowed and I will answer appropriately.

      Any civil discussions? Bring it on. I’m ready.

      1. John

        But aren’t you the one being “ignoran[t] and inflexib[le]” here? You’re simply rejecting all rational arguments and name-calling those you disagree with. I’d hardly call that “even-tempered” or “moderate”.

        You just jump to “Neanderthals” and “gun farts”. Nothing even-tempered about that.

        1. Kim

          John: You’ve assessed billy boggs (aka yogi bear, et al) correctly. Always attacking and name-calling others then accusing them of attacking and name-calling. Does this same thing in several critical areas.

          1. Hersch

            yogi you are wrong about Austraians there 5.2 percent of adults that own firearms for hunting, pest control, target shooting,and collecting so please check things out before you insert foot. Hersch

        2. Yogi Bear


          Ok, I’ll withdraw my crude remarks. We all try to convince each other of the propriety of our positions. Without success, of course. I could argue all the data in the world that says why I am correct. But you simply won’t listen. You could go on ad infinitum arguing gun protection. You won’t get anywhere with me.

          So here we are; on opposing sides of the line. When I get nasty as I have here before, it is because I have read pretty nasty remarks pro gun rights. I don’t need to win any friends here. Neither do you. But for the sake of our arguments, I will suspend my nasty side for now.

          Read it, Kim.

          1. Kim

            billy with more excuses for childish, boorish behaviour. And yet ANOTHER promise to ‘suspend’ his mean-spirited posts. Wrapped up in the usual ‘I could argue all the data in the worldl’ – while NEVER providing any.

            Yawn! As always, billy, your actions will speak louder than your words. Time will show your true self – and if history is any judge, that time will be relatively short.

            I’d love you to prove me wrong, billy. And that’s the truth

      2. Al

        There can be no moderation when it comes to civil rights. If you don’t want an AR don’t have one. You may as well admit that criminals will carry whatever they want. There is no law that you can enact to stop them. So you have absolutely no right to even comment on this topic unless you are willing to put your money where your mouth is. Place a large “Gun Free Zone” sign in your front window. Keep it there and I will listen to you. You have to prove to me that you are real.

    3. Jeffrey L. Frischkorn

      Yep… Why so many firearms companies are so entrenched about staying where they’re not welcome is a mystery. Of course, it’s expensive to move. Of course, some valuable employees won’t be able to pack up and leave. That being said, how long will these firms allow themselves to be brow-beaten, slammed, vilified and treated like lepers before they realize that not only do the states they are don’t like them but that gun owners in OTHER states are prepared to boycott their products until they DO come to their senses?

      1. Yogi Bear

        The Heat Is Rising

        The heat is rising, through the days
        Another wave, of scorching haze
        Even weathermen, have taken breaks
        “Gone fishing,” their  sign it say.

        The laws of men, are jerry-rigged
        Force of habit, so it seems
        The boys have dug up, Jim Crow again
        No need for guess work – it’s still the skin.

        A kid shot dead, for being black
        For buying candy, at the shack
        He looked suspicious,  just going home
        No law was broken,  when you stand your ground.

        The gun was made, for all to arm
        They say it keeps, you safe from harm
        Just shoot to kill, and you’ll be safe
         Any time, and any place.

        Special interests, for all these guns
        Are pushing laws, on everyone
        To buy a hand gun, freedom too
        Then profit from, me and you.

        The heat is rising, through the days
        Another wave, of scorching haze
        The court adjourns, the trial done
        No law was broken, ‘neath the Florida sun.

        1. mr. parker

          That’s right, no law was broken. Trayvon was another thug in the making. He had his life cut short because he became the assailant in a confrontational situation.
          Look at his real history and his cell phone pictures. If things had turned out the way they usually do, Martin would be in court and receive 2-3 years or less for battery. His mother would be testifying that Trayvon was a good boy and was turning his life around. Zimmerman could’ve appeared as a witness after he got out of the hospital, most likely with lifelong injuries.

          Good people of all races are sick and tired of criminals having all the rights. SYG laws, when they’re applied, help prevent lawsuits from ruining someone’s life after they’ve justifiably used deadly force. Look into that further and you’ll see that many minorities have defended their actions with SYG.

          Look at the FBI firearm statistics and see that more people were killed with blunt objects and shotguns than “assault” rifles. Don’t listen to Crazy Joe who is out of control with his Risperdal or President Nixon, er I mean Obama, the historical failure who is all about politics and is trying to stir up his base of low information voters.

        2. Josh

          Is that your indisputable imperical data? All you have done now is attempt to blame the issue on race, which no one knows was the cause of that particular confrontation aside from the “racist” and God. Hardly the iron clad data you referenced earlier.

    4. Michael Wade

      All gun companies should move out of CT. Infact gun companies should refuse to sell firearms into the state of CT and that should include the Police, oh maybe you could sell them revolvers and lever action carbine, no simi autos.

    5. Mr John R. Land

      Wakeup the police and politicians don’t want you in there state…
      MOVE! Now before the confiscate the company assets. You
      will go to work and they padlock the company doors…

    6. Dicky

      Stag Arms and every other firearm manufacturer in the state of Conn should leave and go to a friendly state like Texas or Wyoming. And then every US gun maker should boycott selling firearms to all Conn law enforcement.After all they want a gun free state so lets give it to them.

    7. soljerblue

      If they’re looking, we’d be happy to have them in Alabama. All they need do is contact the governor’s office.
      Here’s the link:

      We already have Creedmoor Sports just in from Cali, and this is perhaps one of the top four or five gun-friendly states. We’d be happy to have Stag, or any others.

    8. TheKid

      Come to Mississippi. We would welcome you and your jobs with open arms and you won’t have to jump through hoops.

    9. DG

      Simply put, couldn’t have said it better. If an anti-2A state doesn’t want a manufacturer there then the manufacturer should move to a state that does. Furthermore, refuse to sell any or your product to that state, legal within the state or not, law enforcment sales included.

    10. Harold Miller

      It sounds to me alot like national helmet laws, if law enforcement can’t determine a firearms legality how can they enforce the law?



    12. Thorolf

      Mr. Malikowski would find that Indiana would welcome his business with open arms !
      Here in my home town of Marion, Indiana I am sure that Stag Arms would find that they would have absolutely No such horrendous laws to deal with since we do Not have any anti-assault weapon laws we are very pro gun here, with liberal concealed carry statutes as well as having The castle Doctrine law to protect our citizens.
      Mr. Malikowski would also find that his business might be given reductions in taxes in exchange for bringing his jobs to marion! He could likely even find a suitable factory building already constructed here , since we have several sitting vacant!

      Mr. Malikowski , contact the mayor in Marion, Indiana and explain your plight. I am confidant that you will be happily surprized !!


    13. jt

      The answer is simple. The gun manufacturers should just pack up and leave. The people who passed this law wanted the recognition and their fifteen minutes of fame are not at all concerned about the welfare of the citizens, i mean, come on, the people who commit these crimes are going to get the guns elsewhere and anyone who thinks differently is either stupid or a politician. Malloy is a one time governor and everyone knows that. He latched onto this whole gun issue at a very emotional time and he and the political people of this state jumped on the bandwagon. It is sand commentary of how things are run here. I think there are much more pressing problem in the state like welfare, a failed education system, crime, unacceptable taxes, a bus route to nowhere that cost half a billion dollars. Lets face it, this state is in a mess and no is doing a thing about it. But, why should they when they can just raise taxes and let the average working person pay the price of their excess.

    14. kirke veeder

      Come to Kansas! We haven’t lost our minds here-Yet ! Lots of potential employees on Lay-off from the aviation industry.

    15. George Washington

      Cigarettes: No good

      Sugar in soft drinks: No good

      Political parties: No good

      Guns: No good

      Wooden teeth: No good

      Guns: No good

      Swords: Good

      Horse Manure coming from conservatives: No good.

  2. saxon

    Correct in the article. this is like an architect asking for plans approval for a building and being told, build it and it it is wrong we will cite you? Does the State fire marshal still approve fireworks shows and carnivals in advance or only arrest if they are wrong?

    1. Kim

      exactly right, Saxon. If there was any doubt about the motives of the governor and legislature in CT, this alone should resolve that. Whatever it takes, get rid of the manufacturers AND the constitution

    2. Al

      The Fire Marshals are present throught a show. They are the best fireworks fans around. And they help enforce safety rules. We can’t watch the patrons, they can.

      1. Kim

        I’m bright enough to know that yogi bear and saxon are billy boggs talking to himself again. The well phrased posts are a clue – the unbridled ignorance and knee-jerk reaction to insult instead of reason, clinches it.

        Cowardly-ignorant-pathetic: the billy boggs trinity

  3. Topher

    Even before the gun legislation passed in April, I would call my local, large police department as well as the clerks at the state police firearms unit and they often had no idea as to the legality of a certain firearm. They would tell me to call some officer at the state police “vault” in Meriden for an opinion. How can the legislators pass laws that even their own enforcement personnel don’t comprehend? Of course, the legislators themselves don’t know what is going on.

    1. Kim

      The IRS is the poster child for this kind of activity. Even THEY don’t understand the laws they write – and it’s intentional, make no mistake

    2. 2nd Amendment Forever

      Laws were never intended to prevent anything nor can they. Their only effectivness comes because there are still people that abide by them. Enforcement of the law is the only solid way to make an impact. Get rid of Prosecuters too lazy to make good cases and decide to plea bargin in order to get a conviction. Remove Judges that will not sentence criminals to the max when they are found guilty of violent crime. Replace Legislators that side with Criminal Rights instead of Victims Rights.

      If you aren’t going to enforce the current laws to the fullest extent, get the hell out of it. Telling a child they had to pay a price for disobeying and not following through only shows them they can get away with disobeying. Making the child actually pay for it will cause them to pause the next time they think about diong it. They may do it again, but then when they pay again they will most likely start to fall in line.

      Having all the laws in the world will never prevent crime. It will in most likelyhood create more criminals since they will no doubt continue to erode our Rights that are protected under the Constitution. I for one will never bow to those that think they are going to control me by taking away my rights.

      On a side note. I serverd for 23 months in Vietnam and would never have trusted the so called ‘assualt wepons’ these bozo’s have on their list to protect myself. Also, the Military usually adopts the smaller semi-auto versions of personal protection weapons (i.e. Colt 1911, Berretta 92F) after they have been in production for a while and are already in the civilian market. Only the Full Auto weapons were actually designed for Military specific purposes. Thanks to the criminals of the 20’s and 30’s, these weapons (most notibaly the Thompson 45 cal Sub-Machine Gun) were banned for civilian use. Although that in itself is unconstitutional, it was accepted and should not have been.

      Sorry to go off course, but my thoughts wandered.

  4. Gun Owner

    I feel this confusion is a preamble to complete confiscation. If law enforcement or legislative entities cannot figure out this law, the next step is complete confiscation to eliminate any “doubt”. People ask: why do you need an AR-15 to hunt with? Well, why do you need a Corvette to drive to work with? Why do you need a one million dollar house to live in? Because people want nice things to call their own. Because one person finds an object offensive, does not give them the authority to deem it unecessary for public ownership. Granted, not all Liberals are bad, just the ones who have been voted into power who feel compelled to pass judgement on all of us based on lust for recognition as the one(s) who brought down a “mighty lobbyist”….that being the NRA. Sorry for the repeat statement hear, but I feel this point should be resonating across the state to make both “sides” aware of what is really going on hear…

    1. freedom lover

      Every action by both the federal government and the CT government is geared towards total ban and/or confiscation. It’s obvious by the repeated statements like ‘we aren’t against priviate ownership of guns’ and ‘we believe in the Second Amendment’ or the famous ‘Nobody is going to take your guns (Obama)’.

      If their lips are moving, they’re lying

    2. jt

      Well put. The people that commit these crimes are not sane and no law is going to stop them. Malloy, well, he turned out to be a total disappointment. His arrogance actually astounds me. But i think in the long run this whole gun issue is going to hurt him. i mean he is really so far in over his head. This issue on guns is only a smoke screen to hide his incompetence. He still can’t balance the budget without borrowing. Only an idiot would raise the gas tax by four cents. Think about how much money that really amounts to in a year. Have someone ask him to explain his logic there. Now fall is approaching and we have to be concerned with oil prices. My God, it just doesn’t end, yet he rambles on.

      1. Brian C. Duffy

        4 cents a gallon increase on July 1. So why did it increase 20 (Twenty …2-0) cents a gallon over the last week. Someone protests in Egypt; a toilet overflows in a Louisiana oil refinery. The Wall St oil speculator crooks can’t wait to jack up the price. They are more than happy to let you blame the tax increase. 4 cents……if it were only so!


  5. Donna

    They don’t actually want anyone to figure anything out. They will simply arrest, fine or otherwise put these businesses out of the state. That’s the plan and they’re sticking to it. I recently read the zoning laws for above ground pools in my city. They were so confusing that even though I read every word of every page, I still had no idea what the laws were. Why can’t they just write them in plain and simple terms?

  6. Wondering

    I wonder how many years of non- confiscation of guns by government must pass
    before the whining gun fetishists give up their delusion of “complete confiscation”?
    Two years? Five? The answer is probably Never.

    1. izzybizzy

      “We are told NOT to judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics.”
      We are encouraged TO judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics”

    2. Kim

      wondering: confiscation has ALREADY occurred. Ask the residents of New Orleans who had their guns confiscated after the big storm flood New Orleans.

      Any questions? Are you willing to admit that the concerns about gun confiscation are valid? Or will you continue down the ‘whiny’ liberal path of blind obedience and complete ignorance of reality?

    3. Gun_nut

      If the anti-rights people were no so committed to making lists of all gun owners, you might have a point. But the anti-rights crowd insists that universal registration is critical, while it serves no useful purpose except to make confiscation workable. So you have no point.

  7. Brian C. Duffy

    “If the state wants to put 3000 (gun) jobs at risk.”

    Let’s turn to Texas. Does anyone think Rick Perry is worried about how many (abortion) jobs are at risk with their new restrictions looming on the horizon?

    Dan, Would you be making a similar argument in the Fort Worth Telegram?

    1. 2nd Amendment Forever

      Perry has the right idea. Abortion is not a right protected under the constituion. This will also week out the ‘providers’ that have no moral conceous (like the idiot in Pensylvania) from killing live children and their mothers.

      Besides what does this topic have to do with your liberal law protecting the murder of children. I understand you are probably okay with that since children are killing each other every day in Chicago, New York, and California, but where is your outrage on those deaths. When you can clean up all the gang and drug kilings in those places, then you can come back and talk about how you can prevent gun crimes, Until then, shut up.

  8. Bang Bang

    When the state police have the power to investigate and arrest somebody for owning a gun, it has the responsibility to determine whether that gun is in compliance with the law. That a manufacturer is spending the money in this god forsaken state to build a prototype, and seek a determination whether in the eyes of the cops, this gun is legal to own, is not a bridge too far. This law is so poorly written by a bunch of ninnies who don’t even know guns or the differences in them.

    If they have the power to arrest, then the cops should have to say whether a manufacturer is producing something that will get their customers arrested. The lame excuses and whiney responses about pressures on their time are pathetic and girly.

  9. Don

    Registration? Forget out it. Just another tool for data mining so when the cops have a call to your house, or there’s reported shooting in your area you’re top on the list. We need to call in Swat, this house as assault guns with many registered high cap mags. Just think of what they can do? Oh my god, the danger they could cause. Stash your stuff, bide your time and when you retire out of this Nazi tax everything state you’ll be free again. Our State Troopers are nothing more than black shirt bully sticking goones, ready to capture a Courant headline with an assault weapons bust.

    1. izzybizzy

      ”Our state troopers are nothing more than black shirt bully sticking goones, ready to capture a Courant headline with an assault weapons bust.” — I’d like to see you say that one of the trooper’s face. And, by the way, goons is NOT spelled with an ”e” in it, genius.

      1. freedom lover

        izzy – or should I call you billy boggs – your statement about not having the courage to speak honestly to state police only proves what Don said. Being billy, you’re not bright enough to realize that

      2. Yogi Bear

        Izzy: observe how bright Kim, the freedom lover, is. He thinks I’m you but you know, it takes all kinds and Kim is quite a piece of work.

        Funny thing ; he is obsessed with who I am. I sign autographs on Mondays only.

        1. Kim

          gee billy, that took less time than even I thought it would. Good for you. Also nice of you to take ownership of the ‘obsession’ accusation that I’ve been leveling against you for a year.

          Like I said, nothing to offer but enmity

          1. Yogi Bear

            I haven’t yet said anything bad about you. But if you want me to, as I suspect you do, just give me a little sign and we’ll walk the walk and talk the talk.

            I only said that you were a pie e of work. I didn’t say “shit.”

  10. JonV

    “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is 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. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kinds of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of lawbreakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”

    Dr. Floyd Ferris from ‘Atlas Shrugged’

  11. thomass

    “It seems reasonable to ask a law enforcement agency to tell citizens what is and is not legal.”

    It does but it is in a conventional wisdom way IMO. They’re police not lawyers. In California we have a problem that police, in the field, often believe guns are illegal that are not (re: in configurations that have never lead to a conviction in court). In NY state after passing their new ridiculous gun law, the State Police gave bad legal advice and told people to turn in their newly banned weapons. If NY gun owners listed to good advice they’d have know they had the right to reconfigure their weapons to be in compliance.

  12. Randy

    So in other words, the state makes a complicated law, riddled with contradictions, and other errors, and then refuses to provide clarification to manufacturers making an honest attempt to follow and obey the law.

    Soon it will be impossible to be legal, and everyone will just disobey all laws.

  13. Randy

    As the new laws task State police with the job of writing regulations interpreting these new laws, they are in fact the ONLY ones that know what they have decided is, and is not illegal.

  14. Cymond

    By refusing to certify which designs are legal or illegal, the end result is very much like the “bullet button” in California. Without a clear, iron-clad ruling of “legal” the manufacturers and buyers are left with a mountain of FUD – Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt – about the legality of their rifle designs. Any rational person will be cautious about doing something that might be illegal. Hence, when the Police refuse to say “this is legal” or “this is illegal”, the average person is not sure, and the average person is not willing to do something that might be illegal. The end result is that it doesn’t matter if something is legal, as long as everyone is too afraid to try it.

    Everyone talks about the “power” of the “big gun lobby”, but in California, the Bullet Button was invented by small-time private gun enthusiasts who wanted a way to build a legally-compliant AR-15. It was only much later, after these small businesses were successful (and were not shut down/arrested), only later did the big companies start selling California “bullet button” rifles.

  15. Bob

    When 911 happened we went after the person not the airplane.
    When Oklahoma City happened we went after the person not the box truck.
    When the Boston bombing happened we went after the person not the crockpot,

    So why are we going after guns?

    1. Yogi Bear

      Bobby boy; you are making no sense and any intelligent person will not waste time with essentially your false comparison.

        1. Yogi Bear

          Why do you insist on sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong. I was addressing someone else.

          Or is it that obsession thingy.

        2. Kim

          Learned that from you billy. You obviously think you have a monopoly on intruding into others’ conversations. And an open license to plagiarize others’ words (such as ‘obsession’). More accusing others of what you do – surprise, surprise. There’s at least 3 instances in this thread alone where you stuck your nose where you weren’t being addressed – you don’t like it, don’t do it

          1. Yogi Bear

            Ya, and would you pluck my frick?

            Did your wife ever know you were propositioning Carl Solomon for days? You only stopped after Jimmy Boggs painted a portrait of you.

          2. Kim

            why are you referring to yourself (jimmy boggs) in the third person, billy boggs? are you too deranged to realize that you use multiple names on these threads and often get them confused, or do you really have over a dozen personalities?

            And you lasted even LESS time than I gave you credit for. It’s nice to be proven right time and again, when I point out your hypocrisy and lies. Such a pathetic little gollum-like creature.

            And haven’t I already explained to you that I stopped doing whatever it is you think you remember, when YOU performed in Carl’s place? Stay away from the bong, billy k

  16. Pingback: Daily Headlines — Daily News

  17. Pingback: Connecticut Headlines — Daily News

  18. BigFED

    How about just NOT allowing the sale of your product in “hostile” states, to ANYONE, especially any law enforcement agency in those states. Those companies do NOT exist based on LEO sales, they are there from civilian sales. If those states hate “Modern Sporting Rifle” so much, then the police shouldn’t have them either.

  19. Pingback: CT State Police Aren’t Engineers | Shall Not Be Questioned

  20. Pingback: Connecticut State Police to gunmakers: No more advice on law | Pro 2nd Amendment Boycott – P2AB

  21. Pingback: Ct police to gunmakers. No more help from us on designs

  22. Pingback: SayUncle » No more help from police

  23. thepunisher

    I’m sick’n-frick’n tired of the powers at be hawking their moral superiority and arrogance at the public and honest business people that only want to comply w/ such a stupid law. That’s why I left the People’s Republic of Kalifornia decades ago. Even in Illinois, there is more sense than the eastern left coast. To give the People’s Republic of Kalifornia credit, they passed some laws early in Y2K that prohibited additional guns from being added to their “assault weapons” list – and even governor Jerry “Moonbeams” Brown – as the Attorney General gave gun owners a break (before he ran for governor) by helping the “Bullet Button” along in that state.

    I’m sick’n-frick’n tired of the of the disinformation and bold-faced lies that keep spewing out of the mealy-mouths at the Brady Center whores, their shills, and their media surrogates promulgating the same lies for the past forty years that debase gun-owners and blaming them for the violence perpetrated by criminals or telling the law-abiding that THEY are responsible for criminal behavior – the crimes of the very few are equivocated against the multitude of law-abiding citizens. This is at the least – moral perversion akin to Josef Goebbels propaganda that began 80-years ago, resulting in the deaths of over 50-million people. Old Josef must be jumping w/ joy in his grave seeing the left-stream National Lap-Dog Media double down a litany of lies every day.

    I’m sick’n-frick’n tired of hearing know-nothing politicians spreading the same lies, and using their willing mass-media accomplices to spread their filth. I’m sick’n-frick’n tired of so-called “conservatives” doing nothing to counter or call the former individuals and groups to the mat for their slanders and libels. The republicans are equally as responsible for the mess that we are in when they speak of compromise – the actuality being loss of our rights going back the Assault-Weapons-Ban in California, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Colorado, and Connecticut – etc… I consider the Republican traitors like Bob Dole, George HW Bush, Chuck Quackenbush, George Deukmejian, John Danforth, Mitt Romney, George Pataki, Arlen S.P.E.C.T.R.E., and many others. Two of the compromisers are Lindsey Graham, and not to be left out: John McCain. The majority of anti-gun democrats make no bones about running a mile to screw us, while the squishy Repubicans smile in our faces, while holding the dagger ready to stab us in the back afterwards.

    So if the firearms companies are in a squeeze, MOVE! And move fast! It’s time to move all gun companies in NY, CT, MA, MD, and NJ to friendly states like Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine (if they’re in the northeast). It’s time for Remington and (Mossberg?) to leave New York State and move to one of the “Free” states in New England if they don’t want to go out west. Follow the Magpul example and leave hostile territory for keeps. Politicians only care about money and it’s time to take the honest taxpayer’s money elsewhere.

    Remember: it’s not about revenge –
    It’s about punishment!

    1. freedom lover

      I left Kalifornia for the same reasons, punisher, including being sick and tired of supporting all the freeloaders

    2. Ralph. Bartow

      There are Two problems with a business leaving a state .
      One … Even if where they wanted to go to was eager for said company, the initial expense of getting property, building, moving, hiring, training etc. etc. would drastically increase the price of said merchandise. That is just a quick list of cost.
      Two … Why give the idiots ground and a base from which to work. Example Colorado they learned what govt intrusion is and are fighting legally to reclaim their rights and their state. Oh and by the way to the liberals out there, they are winning! That is what really burns don’t it. Lol

  24. Bruce Hudeck

    Several posters already stated the obvious,…Stag needs to get te hell out of CT. !

  25. Jesse

    Please ALL gun manufacturers move to states that respect you. Invoke mass firings and give your business to states who want it.

    I want to see citizens of NY, CT, MA all losing jobs. I want states like Nebraska and Kansas and Texas to charge a premium for pipelines running to the northeast. Increasing cost of fuel in the greater NYC area.

    I want them to charge extra to NYC grocery stores. I want the craphole of a city and metropolitan area to tear itself apart since they are not self reliant.

  26. Jesse

    All conservatives need to pull up roots head to VT, NH, and ME. Mass exodous of the cities to conservative areas. Draw a new line in the sand.

  27. Martin

    The gun grabbing government of Connecticut obviously does not want Stag Arms in their state, time for Stag move to a free state, Stag should leave to where it can find a more friendly business atmosphere, a place like Texas, without the crushing regulations, lower business taxes, no state income tax; but with government incentives to move they will do much much better. Plus Less money for the statists in Hartford to pay for EBT cards and other welfare lay abouts, a win win.

  28. richard.dugger

    You spout about saving lives but will do anything possible to ensure abortions are here to stay. That’s hypocroicy at its ground roots. You liberals call yourselves “progressive” but the truth is you’re actually regressive. Point; homosexual ism, is degenerative because it cannot reproduce… Point; why then is pedafilia wrong if SO many people are arrested each day because they like it, is sodomy progressive? Ban guns because they kill people, what about the drunk driver that kills a family and inside a year they are driving drunk again, what about knives????? ( look at the UK’s weapon of choice since they have banned guns, also crime rates). You liberals are making normal abnormal and abnormal normal. Get rid of GOD because its unconstitutional well show me where in the constitution states that! Liberals have an open mind and will listen to others… long as its in line with their demented ideas…

  29. Pingback: Connecticut State Police To Gunmakers: No More Advice On Designs - Liberty Crier

  30. Tim

    Uhh, it’s not really that hard. By law, the ONLY illegal rifles are those that are 16 inches or less! Pretty easy to NOT be classified as a “firearm”! Maybe “Stag” needs MY help since they can’t weed through a paragraph of law intelligently enough.

  31. BambiB

    If a reasonable person cannot figure out what the law means, the law should be ruled by the courts as “void for vagueness”. Strike the entire law. Recall the officials who voted in favor of it (as is being done in Colorado). Restore the Second Amendment.

  32. Barry bin Inhalin

    How purely cowardice of the Malloy Administration and how truly predictable (expected really). I truly hope that all firearm manufacturers leave CT ASAP. Put the (unionized) machinists out on unemployment where the Democrats want them at Colt, Stag, Mossberg and the host of other companies that pay good, solid manufacturing wages.

    1. Kim

      Not only should firearms companies leave CT, but so should ANY company that manufacturers products that can kill. Sikorski, Pratt & Whitney are all good examples. They should ALL leave this state.

      Maybe then liberals will start to get the picture

  33. Pingback: If You Build It, They Will... Arrest?

  34. Paul Dionne

    If the companies that made firearms all moved out of CT, the state would loose lots of tax revenue. CT has never been pro-guns, but the manufacturers have stayed there. With their new laws, it’s time to move. Come to NH, we are pro-gun with low taxes!

  35. Bob


    Stag can move to Pennsylvania like Kahr Arms did.
    We are a gun friendly state and have qualified gunsmiths and a technically trained workforce to assist any arms manufacturer grow and prosper.

    Ladies & Gentelmen,

    Welcome to Pennsylvania.

    You may now lock & load.

  36. Lone Star Stae

    Pack up and come to Texas!! We will support you 100%! If they want to be prey, so be it!

  37. Bill Kelly

    Stag Arms, you are welcome in Tennessee. The air and water is clean, housing and energy is inexpensive, and citizens love their country and are willing to work hard for a days pay. And we love your products.

  38. fred

    Gun jobs that have actually left Connecticut so far = ZERO. PTR has said that SOME of their 45 (Forty Five) employees will move with them. That is, if they ever stop telling us (over and over again) about their plans to move and actually do move.

  39. BAB

    get out wile you still can before they say you cant bring your buss to fl wear other manufactures of guns are happy and not haseled.

  40. Bill

    its time the forearms industry to pack up nd leave that communist Hegelian dialectic whack job liberal state , run by corrupt liberal democratic mob bosses. the state will finally implode on itself with all those greedy liberal Ashkenazi Khazar Jews running it. When ?I lived in state in the early 1980’s it was really a nice place, no state income taxes, freedom to own weapons was not even an issue, and then the Khazar Jews started rolling in from Wall Street, and Westchester county, n.y. and the whores crept themselves into government political offices and the change began , but with the help of filthy dirty RHINO republicans scumbags like Governor Weichert. I remember that fat slob political hack, he was disgusting and delusional. but with the help of the Khazars he was elected. and now thirty years later, look what Connecticut has become,a cesspool, of every unclean dirty spirit and political whores all pandering for more power and money because their state is becoming more insolvent each passing day, all the big cities are run by democratic lying bags of liberal marxist trash. the state is named after the constitution and called the constitution state, what a crock of crap that is, their is nothing constitutional about it, its all lost to people who dont care any longer about their own freedom.the constitution state my ass.

  41. Kris Littledale

    OK….So this Libertarian–used to be a Conservative, but they got to be too Big Brother for me–is trying to understand these so called Liberals–they seem more like Facists to me.

    Q) So….Why did Ct ban the Modern Sporting Rifle?

    A) To keep our children and citizens safe (according to the lying politicians.)

    But in truth, keeping our children and adult citizens safe is certainly a desirable goal, so let’s look at some additional ways we can do this. Hey….I’m like anybody else. I want our citizens to be safe.

    1) Cars. They kill FAR more adults and children every year than rifles. Cool Beans!!!! BAN ALL CARS!!!! Side benefit–this is a good green cause and will cut down on global warming. CARS MUST BE BANNED!!!

    2) Cell phones. OUR kids are dying by the dozens because they text while driving. We tried outlawing texting or talking while driving, but it didn’t work. BAN ALL CELL PHONES!!!

    3) Fast Food. Fast Food is a huge contributor to juvenile obesity. Our kids are going to be dying in their 20s and 30s from heart attacks, strokes, high blood pressure and other diseases caused by obesity. BAN McDONALDS NOW!!!! The head of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to do this, but he got his ash handed to him for trying ban large soft drinks. But I am sure out Ct politicians can do better. McDonalds is HISTORY!

    4) Golf. Many people are beaten to death with golf clubs every year. Not to mention the poor innocent geese that those evil golfers so often kill with those “engines of death” called golf clubs. Golf clubs have to go! BANNED!!!!

    5) Baseball bats. More people are killed every year with baseball bats than with Modern Sporting Rifles. I know baseball is the American Pastime and all, but those darned baseball bats are just FAR TOO DANGEROUS to let just anyone own. BANNED!!!!!!!

    6) Knives. Veritable killing machines!!! They kill vastly more people every year than Modern Sporting Rifles. THEY MUST GO!!!!! BANNED!!!!!!!!!!!

    There! I’ve identified 6 “ENGINES OF DEATH” that are more dangerous than Modern Sporting Rifles. When these 6 “ENGINES OF DEATH” have been BANNED (for everyone including the cops) I will turn my Modern Sporting Rifles in for destruction. Until then, why won’t the Facists who call themselves Liberals learn to leave me alone the same way I have left them alone through over 50 years of gun ownership?

    Why is it that the “Liberals” are always looking to ban things they don’t like but are HORRIFIED when people want to ban things that they like?

    I’m not in favor of banning abortions. I’m not in favor of banning God or churches. I’m not in favor of banning books. I don’t even want to BAN Liberals. Why do they want to ban things I believe in?

    1. Chaz

      Easy question to answer. Because we are not intelligent enough to know whats good for ourselves. You should be relieved and praising them becaue they know whats best for us. They can clearly protect us from ourselves.

      Hopefully the sarcasim isnt lost on some………..

    2. fred

      Kris Littledale, sorry to inform you, but knives, baseball bats, and golf clubs ARE illegal per current Connecticut law:

      Sec. 53-206. Carrying of dangerous weapons prohibited. (a) Any person who carries upon his or her person any BB. gun, blackjack, metal or brass knuckles, or any dirk knife, or any switch knife, or any knife having an automatic spring release device by which a blade is released from the handle, having a blade of over one and one-half inches in length, or stiletto, or any knife the edged portion of the blade of which is four inches or more in length, any police baton or nightstick, or any martial arts weapon or electronic defense weapon, as defined in section 53a-3, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument…

    3. Kim

      Kris, you left out one of the biggest killing machines in the country and state: the medical profession. Let’s ban doctors and hospitals as well

  42. Chaz

    Government at its finest. Lets make more laws we dont understand, dont know how to interpret or enforce and say, “Hey. Well figure it out when we charge you an ruin your life”.

  43. stacy peck

    hey stag don’t sale to BAN states here in the south we buy all we can get !!!!!! i think we could make up the diff of what you would not sale to them .the people in ban state’s time to pack your bags

  44. Hoot

    Hey, I’ll move to Texas if you will. I have admired both the Stag Arms Co and the Republic of Texas for some time now and believe it would be a match made in the south.

  45. Right To Bear

    I have one message for Stag Arms…..Get out and come to Texas!!!! Ricky Perry should give any incentive he can to bring them here. We would love to have you.

  46. Jeff

    The Republic of Texas welcomes all arms manufacturers to the land of Freedom and independence. Give them the “Crockett” Speach and come on down.

  47. Rick Burr

    It’s like everything else these days. Elected officials making decisions for the masses with very little appropriate knowledge to do so. Making decisions based on popularity and their next term of employment ! Like limits to the size of “clips” is really gonna “curb” anything !! Come on ………………

    Anyway, it seems to me that that this legal interpretation issue should be an ATF determination issue, I would think ?

  48. Rockyvnvmc

    This article is about the American legal and political term. For fully automatic military rifles, see Assault rifle.
    Assault weapon is a political and legal term that refers to different types of firearms and weapons, and is a term that has differing meanings, usages and purposes.

    In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain cosmetic, ergonomic, or construction features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled; the spent cartridge case is ejected and another cartridge is loaded into the chamber, without requiring the manual operation of a bolt handle, a lever, or a sliding handgrip. In this context an assault weapon often defined as having a detachable magazine, in conjunction with one, two, or more other features such as a pistol grip, a folding or collapsing stock, a flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug.[1] Most assault weapon definitions are limited to rifles, but pistols or shotguns may also fall under the definition(s) or be specified by name.

    The exact definition of the term in this context varies among each of the various jurisdictions limiting or prohibiting assault weapon manufacture, importation, sale, or possession, and legislative attempts are often made to change the definitions. Governing and defining laws include the now-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban,[2] as well as state and local laws often derived from or including definitions verbatim from the expired Federal Law.

    The term “assault weapon” is sometimes conflated with the term “assault rifle” which refers only to military rifles capable of selective fire, including fully automatic fire and/or burst fire.[11] In the United States, fully automatic firearms are heavily restricted and regulated by federal laws such as the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, as well as by state and local laws.

  49. Andrew Hunter

    Does anyone remember what happened when the British Loyalists came over here, demanded the colonists surrender all guns, and blocked the arms trade we had going? We had a few dozen old rifles hidden away, and some clever fellows super-modified them to fabricate the Kentucky LongRifles which essentially won the fight. Well here we are AGAIN , with British Loyalists (sheeple under the United Nations) passing law to control us and remove guns AGAIN, and we’re going to revolt AGAIN, slaughter the unrighteous swine, and bathe in the blood, making it clear, YET AGAIN, that we are not to be fucked with.

    1. fred

      Does anyone remember what happened in America in 1942 when 100,000 Japanese people where rounded up and shipped to concentration camps? Nothing happened. Their guns did not help them. The second amendment did not help them. They stayed in the camps for years.

      1. wesley

        The Americans of Japanese ancestry in 1942 trusted their government. Socialist Democrat F D R violated the citizen’s civil rights and no one stood up to stop him. And it keeps going downhill. Vote out all Socialist Democrats first, and then the Republicans, a third party will stand up!

      2. Kim

        fred: the Japanese people made a choice. Those of us who believe in the second amendment would likely make a different choice. Your argument is pointless

  50. Victor H

    Stag FireArms needs to move its plant to a more friendly gun state. Do you really think that the State Police is going to approve any of their weapons after the Governor signed that radical gun bill. Quit kissing their asses
    and take your business elsewhere. Let them lose the tax revenue and see how they like it. Politicians will sell their soul for a vote and more gun control. These liberal politicians have one thing on their mind and that is gun control at whatever cost. Sooner than later these politicians will realize that they can’t tax the people enough to make up for the tax base they lost when the gun manufacturers move out of state.

    1. fred

      State tax revenue from the gun industry is only $81 million per year. Since there are 1.6 million workers in CT this amounts to about 50 cents per worker in extra tax. Not a problem. Thousands of jobs must leave for this to happen. Thus far zero jobs have left the state.

      1. Kim

        leave it to a lib like fred to trivialize $81 million. How much tax money does Pratt & Whitney or Sikorski pay into state coffers, fred? If CT wants to be ‘moral’, let’s get rid of the war suppliers as well

  51. Robert Augeri

    What a lot of police officers don’t realize the same politicians who what to take away of limit size of magazines are the same ones who will take away police officers guns. The law enforcement community should wake up to what is happening in America. Take the UK only certain police office can carry or use guns. This is the same country that during World War 11 Americans had to send rifles to them. The UK still have a bunch of idiots for there leaders. The Muslims are taking over and coming to America if we all this and the violence. So all of the Peace Officers and Police Officers if you do not believe in the Second Amendment God help all of you. When you retire and have to turn in your weapons I will not feel a bit sorry for you stupidity.

  52. charles

    How about if Mr. Malkowski stays put in conneticut continuing to carry out his lawful rights under the constitution to manufacture firearms and these corrupt polititions nove the hell out hows that for a solution.

  53. Rick

    Now is the time for all good men, and women, to come to the aid of their constitution! The question is, will we have enough? Thomas Jefferson said,”The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time WITH the blood of patriots AND Tyrants”. Obama has or is trying to circumvent the Possee Comatatus act, that shows exactly what he is planning, turning the United States Armed Services against it’s own citizens! I have a dream, no quote intended, that one day this Country will return to the one I was born in 68 years ago, when after Pearl Harbor, the flag (Old Glory) and the Constitution, and the National Anthem would bring tears to one’s eyes! No one respects it like that any moor, their just words! No one now wants to take responsibility for their own actions! Just look at the George Zimmerman case, they won’t even accept the decision of our criminal justice system! I for one think Obama is in violation of his oath to support, uphold and defend the constitution ! Fellow Patriots, I implore you to refuse to give up The Rights, that so many have fought and died for. I certainly shall. Will YOU? If there is no one standing by my side, then I will be another Patriot to die in the defense of the Country I love!!! And, I hope and pray that there are enough American Service men and women who will have the resolve to disobey an order to fire on their own Countrymen!! May God Bless America and the ones who defend her.

  54. Kris Littledale

    What? None of the Liberals here agree with my statement that we need to BAN cars, golf clubs, knives, baseball bats, McDonalds, and cell phones? WHY NOT! Don’t you want to “save the children” and “make us all safer”????????

    Sounds like a classic case of Liberal logic……..Take other people’s stuff away…..JUST DON’T TAKE MY STUFF AWAY.

    Liberals………………..HYPOCRITES TO THE CORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Very appropriate for Ct.

    1. fred

      Knives, baseball bats, and golf clubs are already banned per current Connecticut law:

      Sec. 53-206. Carrying of dangerous weapons prohibited. (a) Any person who carries upon his or her person any BB. gun, blackjack, metal or brass knuckles, or any dirk knife, or any switch knife, or any knife having an automatic spring release device by which a blade is released from the handle, having a blade of over one and one-half inches in length, or stiletto, or any knife the edged portion of the blade of which is four inches or more in length, any police baton or nightstick, or any martial arts weapon or electronic defense weapon, as defined in section 53a-3, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument…

      1. Seth

        First of all, not all knives are banned. You can still be killed with a knife 1 and 1/2 inches long that isn’t spring loaded. If someone came behind you and held a small knife to your throat they could still get your jugular and windpipe with it.

        Second, baseball bats and golf clubs are not specifically mentioned either. At best they would fall under “other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument.” However, that would be a judgement call for a police officer, though I doubt you would be arrested walking down the street carrying a baseball bat or golf club.

        So please stop saying that they are illegal, unless you can provide a news article about a round up at a golf course of illegal golf clubs.

        While Kris is a bit zealous, he does have a point. After all if it saves one life…
        Of course, you don’t hear about all the law-abiding lives firearms have saved. If it takes the life of a criminal to save the life of a law-abiding citizen, then I think it’s worth it. There are people out there who don’t care if they hurt others, and some who want to hurt others. This is not a perfect world where everyone loves each other. It’s a human world and we are not perfect.

  55. Concerned American

    I’m with you. The problem is the change is slow and consistent. We just keep getting used to the change and slowly forget the way it used to be. Every time we loose something, us true Americans ask ourselves is it time that we give up something to fight for what we beleive in. It’s easier to march the streets when you don’t work to feed your family or to pay off what you worked hard towards. I really think the fight wouldn’t be as hard as you think. Do you really think a soldier would fire upon a red blooded American? 95% of soldiers share the same views as us. The fight would probably turn against the real problem. The ones trying to change this country. Non-Americans, 49%ers, and people against the constitution. Considering that they don’t like guns, they would be arming themselves with rainbows. I think you and I need to keep telling our loved ones how it used to be before our schools teach them how it should be. Maybe we should tattoo the constitution on our right arm so we all know who the good guys are.
    God bless the USA!

    1. Rick

      Thanks, concerned Citizen! I know that it is insidious, but this is where I draw the line. We are talking abut a basic human Right, God given, and insured by some of the most intelligent men on our planet; Our Forefathers. Even animals are born with an ability for self defense. At least I know I’ll have one with me. And, no I don’t think US services will fire on their, but the have! Remember the “Bonus” dispute and General Douglas McArthur?

  56. GW

    Gun control is attempting to control an inanimate object. We should be concentrating on criminal control. There are lots of crimes and murders committed with knives, why is there no call for knife or hammer control? Because it is obvious that they are inanimate objects, and that the person using the object is at fault. Why different for guns?

  57. Don

    Ruger is opening a new shop in N.C. I know Texas and many other states are looking for manufactures to come to there state and build. Take the jobs and tax dollars from these states and leave them to rot.

  58. Coyote76

    I ain’t a lawyer, but I dated a law school student at one time and sat through an evening class. The class talked about a builder who wanted to tear down an existing building and replace it, only to be told that if he did so, he be sued in court. The gist of the lesson was that you can “sue for a directed judgment” which requires the court to render a decision as the legality of an activity in advance of the actual act taking place. More money for the lawyers, but there are avenues.

  59. scott

    When they see us arguing amongst ourselves… must bring them joy…..united we stand…divided we fall….so stop the dumb shit!!!

  60. Walter Lynem

    I agree with Scott, when are they going to wake up, and move to a better place for building that type of weapon. Why can’t the government stay out of peoples business. Here we go again the government telling what can and can’t be done. Elections come once every 4 years. Thank about that elected Officials.

  61. Kris Littledale

    Thanks Seth! My posts were “tongue in cheek” but I’m glad you saw the point I was trying to make. LOTS of far more dangerous things out there than evil black rifles. Why don’t any of the politicians want to ban these other MORE dangerous things????????? I mean, after all, it’s all about “protecting the children”……RIGHT???? In reality it is all about politicians doing the only thing they do well….useless posturing. If the politicians ever want to get SERIOUS about public safety I would consider giving up my evil black rifles. Until the politicians get serious why should I give up ANYTHING??????

  62. bigjet

    Stag, what in Gods name are you doing in that wreched state? Get out of there and to a place that supports you and the founders. Your business will flourish.

    Who is John Galt?

  63. Joe M

    Hey New Englander’s!

    Remember Lizzie Borden — NO GUN but one hell of an AXE wielder! Take away all of the Guns in Connecticut (including the Police ) and re-arm them with sling shots and pea shooters.

  64. Frank MAIESE

    All you have to do is move your company do here to the Sunshine State other Firearms companies have. We qould love to see your company down here we have places and people to get you up and running in no time…..
    As they say Just do it.!

  65. j

    come down south….we love gun manufacturers – and the tax dollars , jobs and positive market impact that come with them

    1. fred

      Bob, What about your Wisconsin Senator Tammy Balwin? She is anti-gun and rated F bty NRA. What if she says something? You know these gun makers are very very sensitive to even a few words from a politician. She might hurt their delicate ears by saying something unkind about guns.

  66. Sensei Bill

    Something for gun haters to think on during a home invasion robbery, physical assault, car jacking, rape etc, The criminal element will by nature seek to take from the law abiding. The only deterrent is the ability of defense, when you take that away, crime goes up.

    Guns were taken away In England in 98/99 in the 10 years following, gun crime went up 89%.
    People killed in by guns in England during the same time went up 104%

    In Australia politicians promised their citizens that they would be safer now that these “horrible weapons had been taken off the streets”. However, that was not the case! Since Australia banned semiautomatic rifles, shotguns and pump action shotguns, the gun crime rates increased substantially throughout the country.

    Murders committed with guns increased by 19%.
    Home invasions increased by 21%.
    Assaults committed with guns increased by 28%.
    Armed robberies skyrocketed with an increase of 69%.

    An Australian reporter states …”many former gun owners blame the government and their gun control laws for the increases in crimes. They feel helpless in their own homes, unable to protect themselves. In fact, home invasions were so rare prior to the gun ban that the nation did not even have a legal definition for what a home invasion was”.

    Conversely … Analyzing National Crime Victimization Survey data in the United States, criminologist Gary Kleck concluded “robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or to suffer an injury than those who used any other methods of self-protection or those who did not resist at all. In the 1990s, Kleck and Marc Gertz found guns were used for self-protection about 2.5 million times annually. The late Marvin E. Wolfgang, self-described as “as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country,” said, “The methodological soundness of the current Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it. . . . I cannot fault their methodology.” A study for the Justice Dept. found 34 percent of felons had been “scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim,” and 40 percent had not committed crimes, fearing victims were armed.

    For all still on the fence, I would ask you to read this, it makes a pretty strong argument.

    “The Gun Is Civilization” By Maj. L. Caudill, USMC (Ret)
    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.
    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.
    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
    The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat – it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed.
    People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
    Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
    People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
    The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.
    When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation… And that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
    By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)

  67. fred

    John Howard prime minister of Australia from 1996 to 2007 published this op-ed in the NY Times Jan 16, 2013:

    “today, there is a wide consensus that our 1996 reforms not only reduced the gun-related homicide rate, but also the suicide rate. The Australian Institute of Criminology found that gun-related murders and suicides fell sharply after 1996. The American Law and Economics Review found that our gun buyback scheme cut firearm suicides by 74 percent. In the 18 years before the 1996 reforms, Australia suffered 13 gun massacres — each with more than four victims — causing a total of 102 deaths. There has not been a single massacre in that category since 1996.

    Few Australians would deny that their country is safer today as a consequence of gun control.”

  68. kelly

    Used to be that John Wayne would say ” sure we gonna give you a fair trial, then we gonna hang you” and there was peace in the land.
    Today we have got soft, we are invaded by weakness.
    CT is among the first of the States to fold to liberalism: no one is responsible for anything anywhere anytime whilst the politican criminals in charge feather themselves and plunder the public to their own good.

Comments are closed.