Confiscation has begun in Connecticut.

[steve4102]

theres only ten states that have more than 50% rates of gun ownership. how are gun owners supposed to vote in pro gun representatives if they are the minority in the population? 16.7% in Connecticut so really what could they do up against the 'NEWS'?

and we are also the minority nationwide so...? if it can be blamed on voting or lawmakers being allowed to decide its inevitable like you say, the thing is I'm pretty sure its just illegal for executive actions or voting or whatever the #### to just repeal constitutional law or something but I'm not a lawyer so what do I know?

I don't think you can blame the people who live there and want to keep their guns and not jump through hoops for being lazy and ''letting this happen'' at all. they are outnumbered when it comes down to a vote.

You are forgetting an important fact. Not all voters that do not hunt or own guns vote Democrat, the main problem is that there ARE Plenty (to Many) gun owners that do vote Democrat. If all the gun owners in MN and CT were to vote Republican the Democrats would be defeated.

He is a statistical example.
In 2008 IL Democrat Senator Dick Durbin received 3.5 Million votes, his Republican Challenger received 1.4 million votes. That sad fact is that in the State of IL there are almost 2 million FOID card holders. That is very sad indeed and MN, & CT are in the same boat.

[ZardozCZ]

Ask them if they want their city as safe as Chicago, then see if there's any intelligence in the eyes to reason with. If not, there's nothing there to work with. If there is, show them how well gun control has worked there, that ghe same results follow stricter gun ownership and that more gun ownership reverses crime.

[steve4102]

Ask them if they want their city as safe as Chicago, then see if there's any intelligence in the eyes to reason with. If not, there's nothing there to work with. If there is, show them how well gun control has worked there, that ghe same results follow stricter gun ownership and that more gun ownership reverses crime.

As there is little or nothing to work with her in MN as well.

[ijosef]

In general, accepting any more gun control than we already have is folly. I'm obviously preaching to the choir here, but I always say the same thing when someone asks me why I won't support more gun control in light of all the recent tragedies. After the Newtown massacre, my SO was adamant that the gun community would just have to accept more controls and restrictions so such things didn't happen again. Aside from the logical fallacies present in that viewpoint, I stated my rebuttal as such:

1. Gun enthusiasts are rightfully a paranoid lot when it comes to gun control.
2. We've had many layers of gun control over the past century, none of which have made a difference in reducing gun violence.
3. What gun control? National Firearms Act of 1934. Gun Control Act of 1968. Parts of the Firearm Owner's Protection act of 1986. The now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons ban.
4. We will "solve" nothing if we allow a new slew of regulations to pass (high cap bans, universal background checks, mandatory registration, etc)
5. We know, through history, that proponents of "common sense" gun control will not stop once they achieve their goals because the goalposts will keep moving. 6. Gun control leads to more gun control leads to more gun control. A total ban is always the end goal.

I feel for the people in Connecticut who are suffering under this draconian ban. It's sad that while championing the liberties of other special interest groups and redefining positive law privileges as "rights", we are simultaneously trampling the natural rights of others.

[Lumpy]

Ask them if they want their city as safe as Chicago, then see if there's any intelligence in the eyes to reason with. If not, there's nothing there to work with. If there is, show them how well gun control has worked there, that the same results follow stricter gun ownership and that more gun ownership reverses crime.

Except you get the same rebuttal that you get when you point out that in insanely violent Mexico it's nearly impossible to legally own a gun: it's all the neighboring state/country's fault.

[Texastransplant]

I couldn't care less if 99.9% of the great state of Minnesota voted to take every one of my firearms. It would still be wrong and they can come get them if they dare. Why? Because this isn't a pure democracy. We are a Republic in which certain rights are recognized, not granted, by our Constitution, one of which is to keep and bear arms, which shall not be infringed! Molon Labe!

[steve4102]

I couldn't care less if 99.9% of the great state of Minnesota voted to take every one of my firearms. It would still be wrong and they can come get them if they dare. Why? Because this isn't a pure democracy. We are a Republic in which certain rights are recognized, not granted, by our Constitution, one of which is to keep and bear arms, which shall not be infringed! Molon Labe!

No offence, but you sound just like the Union boys on the Iron Range with their Obama and Frankin bumper stickers plastered all over their vehicles. Any and all conversation with them about the 2nd Amendment, always starts and ends with " I'd like to see em try".

These are the same guys that still have the same box of 30-30 shells that they have had since, forever. Don't shoot, don't practice, don't care and can't hit ****. Beer bellied blowhards that will run for cover faster than fast if they actually ran into agents that, TRY.

Democrats, go figure.

[Texastransplant]

I couldn't care less if 99.9% of the great state of Minnesota voted to take every one of my firearms. It would still be wrong and they can come get them if they dare. Why? Because this isn't a pure democracy. We are a Republic in which certain rights are recognized, not granted, by our Constitution, one of which is to keep and bear arms, which shall not be infringed! Molon Labe!

No offence, but you sound just like the Union boys on the Iron Range with their Obama and Frankin bumper stickers plastered all over their vehicles. Any and all conversation with them about the 2nd Amendment, always starts and ends with " I'd like to see em try".

These are the same guys that still have the same box of 30-30 shells that they have had since, forever. Don't shoot, don't practice, don't care and can't hit ****. Beer bellied blowhards that will run for cover faster than fast if they actually ran into agents that, TRY.

Democrats, go figure.

Wow. Calling me a Democrat to my face would most likely cause us to have a serious discussion. All Texan here. Go troll elsewhere.

Yankees. Go figure.


ETA: Sorry if my southern sensibilities cause you distress. Where I'm from, we have and will stand up for liberty. I don't know you, so I won't take the moral low road by insulting you back. Just know that I moved here, so we're in the same dang boat. I'd rather stand with you Minnesotans in this fight than be pissed off by sniping from our own ranks.

[mrp]

Where I'm from, we have and will stand up for liberty.

Really? Tell me, before you came here, did you stand up for liberty by carrying your firearm:

- on the premises of a polling place on the day of an election

- on the premises of a racetrack

- in a business that derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages

- on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place

- on the premises of a hospital, or on the premises of a nursing home

- in an amusement park

- on the premises of a church

- at any meeting of a governmental entity.

I've carried at all these places here in Minnesota except a racetrack, and that's only because I've never been to a racetrack.

[bensdad]

Where I'm from, we have and will stand up for liberty.

Really? Tell me, before you came here, did you stand up for liberty by carrying your firearm:

- on the premises of a polling place on the day of an election

- on the premises of a racetrack

- in a business that derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages

- on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place

- on the premises of a hospital, or on the premises of a nursing home

- in an amusement park

- on the premises of a church

- at any meeting of a governmental entity.

I've carried at all these places here in Minnesota except a racetrack, and that's only because I've never been to a racetrack.

In a manner such that people could see it?

[Nougat]

“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” (Marbury vs.Madison, 1803.)

“Every law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.” (Thomas Jefferson)

“There is no position which depends on clearer principles than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.” (Alexander Hamilton)

“Clearly, a federal law which is contrary to the Constitution is no law at all; it is null, void, invalid. And a Supreme Court decision, which is not a ‘law,’ has no ‘supremacy’—even if it is faithfully interpreting the Constitution. So it is the height of absurdity to claim that a Supreme Court decision that manifestly violates the Constitution is the ‘supreme law of the land.’” (William Jasper)

so regardless of voting democrat or not at all it really shouldn't matter(its not like your elected officials that you could get to win even if you are the minority are required to do what they said or what they suggested their ideals were) ? I'm really pretty sure its illegal now. so what is it that people are supposed to be able to do when the rulers overstep their bounds? I suppose whatever it was that they could do has also been outlawed?

[Texastransplant]

Maybe not, but they're working on it. In the mean time, I've never had to:

-Apply to the local police for permission to buy a pistol or "scary" rifle
- get all wee-weed up everytime the legislature convenes
-Worry about how my friends and neighbors felt about me owning firearms, because they did too
-Listen to a colleague rant about how gun owners should be dragged from their homes and shot.
-Worry about my wife, who can no longer keep a loaded firearm in her car because she doesn't have a permit.
-Shovel ridiculous amounts of snow in arctic temperatures for months, so forgive me if I'm a little pissy.

Ya'll have a real problem with commies up here. Please don't call me one. I've enjoyed being on this board until now.

[steve4102]

Maybe not, but they're working on it. In the mean time, I've never had to:

-Apply to the local police for permission to buy a pistol or "scary" rifle
- get all wee-weed up everytime the legislature convenes
-Worry about how my friends and neighbors felt about me owning firearms, because they did too
-Listen to a colleague rant about how gun owners should be dragged from their homes and shot.
-Worry about my wife, who can no longer keep a loaded firearm in her car because she doesn't have a permit.
-Shovel ridiculous amounts of snow in arctic temperatures for months, so forgive me if I'm a little pissy.

Ya'll have a real problem with commies up here. Please don't call me one. I've enjoyed being on this board until now.

All very good points.

Sorry if I ruffled your feathers, I tried to distance you personally in my earlier post by starting it with , "No Offence". Guess that didn't work.
It's just that comments like that are all to common around here and none of those making such have the balls or the resources, both mentally and physically to follow through. Yet they do and they continue to Support the DFL with their Union Blinders On. I call em "Big Talkers".

[Texastransplant]

Maybe not, but they're working on it. In the mean time, I've never had to:

-Apply to the local police for permission to buy a pistol or "scary" rifle
- get all wee-weed up everytime the legislature convenes
-Worry about how my friends and neighbors felt about me owning firearms, because they did too
-Listen to a colleague rant about how gun owners should be dragged from their homes and shot.
-Worry about my wife, who can no longer keep a loaded firearm in her car because she doesn't have a permit.
-Shovel ridiculous amounts of snow in arctic temperatures for months, so forgive me if I'm a little pissy.

Ya'll have a real problem with commies up here. Please don't call me one. I've enjoyed being on this board until now.

All very good points.

Sorry if I ruffled your feathers, I tried to distance you personally in my earlier post by starting it with , "No Offence". Guess that didn't work.
It's just that comments like that are all to common around here and none of those making such have the balls or the resources, both mentally and physically to follow through. Yet they do and they continue to Support the DFL with their Union Blinders On. I call em "Big Talkers".

I hear you. Back home we'd call them "All hat and no cattle." I'll never understand why anyone would vote Dem.

[photogpat]

Not everyone who holds a permit-to-carry votes republican, supports the 2A, or cares about politics. As someone above pointed out, not all gun owners are republican either.

Thats why I'm a single issue voter at the moment. Won't get behind the entire platform of any party.

Its too easy to typecast gun owners in the media. I like throwing them up on their ear.