It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CT State Police: "I'm the master" and "You're un-American"

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 09:27 PM
link   

oblvion

thisguyrighthere
reply to post by projectvxn
 


They've painted themselves into a corner with all the hyper and rhetoric from the state.

If they follow through it's going to be a mess that will cascade across the country.

If they capitulate it's going to be a mess that will cascade across the country.

If the people in CT just submit it's going to be a mess that will cascade across the country.

Any outcome is going to be a big deal. It's unfortunate that an ignorant political push to "do something" has created such a mess.

I only hope politicians think of this next time they get the urge to "do something".


I recently moved to the great state of Texas, I know and talk to many of the local PD and sheriff's deputies, we have talked about this several times.

Texas isnt going to confiscate firearms. Though to be fare the state government will never pass this kind of law in the first place here. Having said that, I specifically asked " in the event they do, what would you guys do?". I have been told repeatedly " we will not confiscate firearms from the people of Texas".

CT has backing from at least the 3 states I have spent more than a year in, Indiana Tennessee and Texas.

Fear not, it will not cascade into Texas, I can promise you that, these people arent playing, they will not give up their guns, and the local LEO's will not take them.

I grew up in and lived in Indiana for the better part of 35 years, they will not give them up, and the LEO's will not try to take them there either.

Tennessee will not give them up, if anyplace is like Texas it is Tennessee, they arent playing games either. They will not give them up, and the LEO's wont try to take them.

I cant speak honestly for any other states, as I havent spent enough time in them to know the people and the LEO's.

Anyone know these parts better?


I wish more gun er um enthusiasts would move to Texas. The rest of the US would be safer.




posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   

HanzHenry
Just because some legislators are TRAITORS, does not absolve cops for guilt of being traitors also by carrying out TYRANNY.

ANY COP who goes against the Bill of Rights.. deserve whatever happens to them.

BADGES ARE REDCOATS! been saying it for YEARS!

Or to put it another way, "I was just following orders" doesn't cut it.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
gee ok - Master uhhh rhymes w/ mater - a legend in his own mind - kinda gives ya warm fuzzy to think that these types would be rulling the roost in the hood or hook.

the MasterB@@@R should read the 2nd amendment - would go ballistic if I mention ..."a ready militia."

prolly not an oathkeeper - though he appears to be wearing a uniform.

OATHKEEPERS



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by mindseye1609
 


I get you are trying to think outside the box.. but nah. Americans had enough arms without the states trying to pass these laws.

The goal is probably to incite gun owners so they can claim they are violent and create a propaganda ball against all gun owners. If something happened it CT with gun owners responding to attempted confiscation with violence they might even make the laws patriotic and the police martyrs.

I mean they make an absurd and unconstitutional law with the punitive action being, you missed registration so now you have to hand over the guns, then if you dont do that you are a felon possibly facing 5 or so years?!

Its a provocation, believe that.
They know registration will not prevent the kind of crime that caused Sandy Hook. Nancy Lanza could have registered every gun she owned and it would have happened still.

They will either back down or reach some sort of compromise. Hopefully the people of CT won't compromise though. They shouldnt because that's how you lose ground.

Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.

Keep what you have with no concern by demanding things you dont have. Maybe its out of fear of being labeled nuts or something that pro second amendment people are so bad at playing politics.
edit on 2-3-2014 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 12:23 PM
link   

AntiNWO

HanzHenry
Just because some legislators are TRAITORS, does not absolve cops for guilt of being traitors also by carrying out TYRANNY.

ANY COP who goes against the Bill of Rights.. deserve whatever happens to them.

BADGES ARE REDCOATS! been saying it for YEARS!

Or to put it another way, "I was just following orders" doesn't cut it.


This is the reason I think the police are so overpaid in the first place. How many will be willing to walk away from their $150,000 + protected jobs when they likely couldn't secure something for 35k or less in the private sector.
Combine that with a tanking economy and most will do what they are told regardless of whether they know it's right or wrong. The few left that don't fall into this category will just follow suit because it will become us against them.
Feel free to chime in CT LEO's.

VinMan



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 





Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.


Yes, this will be very effective. Asking for full auto will not make you look extreme.

Have you considered nuclear weapons?



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 12:36 PM
link   

gariac
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 





Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.


Yes, this will be very effective. Asking for full auto will not make you look extreme.

Have you considered nuclear weapons?


I think the point was to put the anti gun party on the defensive. Not necessarily win the battle. Best defense is a good offense strategy.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Precisely why the state of Connecticut will need the help of DHS (and their fancy new MRAPS) to compel enforcement of the law.
State and local Police will also be involved but due to them all wearing military fatigues nobody will know which is which)
How many times have we heard "No, nobody is coming for your guns. Stop being paranoid!"?
They have the law in place to do precisely that and they will enforce this one.
There's been a recent rash of YT videos showing APCs and other military gear heading Eastward on trains.
I'll take bets right now they aren't going to the Ukraine but somewhere much closer.
Boston was the test run to check public reaction to martial law.
If the people of Boston's response is any indicator they will cheer their oppressors (excepting the 350,000 poor souls caught up in this ex-post facto farce of a law).

Connecticut's enforcement of this will act as a test run for the UN small arms treaty they intend to foist on all of America when they deem the time ripe.
Once this kicks off be prepared for a whole new propaganda offensive to be mounted on all fronts: mainstream media, alt media, social media and networking.
Don't be surprised to hear stories of Police being ambushed and killed by the dozen.
They may actually sacrifice some LEOs just to ensure public sympathy and to make the terrorist label stick.

Big events start will smaller ones - Connecticut was chosen due to it's limited size and the fallout from Sandy Hook.
What happens there may well set the course for our history as a Nation.
This is no minor blip on the screen folks, it's an ICBM headed right for us that history will later show to be a pivotal event.
The old American way and it's ideals of individual freedom and liberty must be consumed in flames for the New World Order to be brought to fruition.

A bigger psyop than 9/11 is in the making here, the fuse is set and the countdown begins.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Asktheanimals
Precisely why the state of Connecticut will need the help of DHS (and their fancy new MRAPS) to compel enforcement of the law.
State and local Police will also be involved but due to them all wearing military fatigues nobody will know which is which)
How many times have we heard "No, nobody is coming for your guns. Stop being paranoid!"?
They have the law in place to do precisely that and they will enforce this one.
There's been a recent rash of YT videos showing APCs and other military gear heading Eastward on trains.
I'll take bets right now they aren't going to the Ukraine but somewhere much closer.
Boston was the test run to check public reaction to martial law.
If the people of Boston's response is any indicator they will cheer their oppressors (excepting the 350,000 poor souls caught up in this ex-post facto farce of a law).

Connecticut's enforcement of this will act as a test run for the UN small arms treaty they intend to foist on all of America when they deem the time ripe.
Once this kicks off be prepared for a whole new propaganda offensive to be mounted on all fronts: mainstream media, alt media, social media and networking.
Don't be surprised to hear stories of Police being ambushed and killed by the dozen.
They may actually sacrifice some LEOs just to ensure public sympathy and to make the terrorist label stick.

Big events start will smaller ones - Connecticut was chosen due to it's limited size and the fallout from Sandy Hook.
What happens there may well set the course for our history as a Nation.
This is no minor blip on the screen folks, it's an ICBM headed right for us that history will later show to be a pivotal event.
The old American way and it's ideals of individual freedom and liberty must be consumed in flames for the New World Order to be brought to fruition.

A bigger psyop than 9/11 is in the making here, the fuse is set and the countdown begins.


Oh, there's no doubt DHS will be involved. May even be the prime reason for its creation. This is the Feds Agenda all the way. The states will go along to keep getting Fed $$. All the way down the line to the cop on the street.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

gariac
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 





Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.


Yes, this will be very effective. Asking for full auto will not make you look extreme.

Have you considered nuclear weapons?


I love how you took my comment out of context. Then you followed it up with an ignorant cliche.

I should have put want in quotation marks so you could understand my point I guess.
edit on 2-3-2014 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   

VinMan

gariac
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 





Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.


Yes, this will be very effective. Asking for full auto will not make you look extreme.

Have you considered nuclear weapons?


I think the point was to put the anti gun party on the defensive. Not necessarily win the battle. Best defense is a good offense strategy.


Im glad someone here understood the point. It was very obviously not to completely legalize full auto weapons, but to stop the onslaught against the arms people allowed to own.

The poster that responded knows that's took my post out of context. I already answered in the post that they probably dont do that out of fear of looking extreme. Anti 2nd people use the "what's next nukes" quip like some people toss out "Hitler" or "racist "

The funny thing is that if someone has the money they can legally buy full auto weapons and own them, but I guess he didnt figure that when he made the nuke remark.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Why does "Ashley" sound like a gay guy or a guy using an effeminate voice? That doesn't sound ANYTHING like an actual chick.

I'm not saying I blame him/her for disguising the voice. But I can't get past the phony voice.

But to the topic at hand, I wouldn't expect anything major to happen in Connecticut until 2017. It's possible this April to May could be bad, but I don't expect bureaucrats to get off their arses and start implementation of any of this.

I'm expecting that April 2017 will be bad for CT.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   

GogoVicMorrow

VinMan

gariac
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 





Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.


Yes, this will be very effective. Asking for full auto will not make you look extreme.

Have you considered nuclear weapons?


I think the point was to put the anti gun party on the defensive. Not necessarily win the battle. Best defense is a good offense strategy.


Im glad someone here understood the point. It was very obviously not to completely legalize full auto weapons, but to stop the onslaught against the arms people allowed to own.

The poster that responded knows that's took my post out of context. I already answered in the post that they probably dont do that out of fear of looking extreme. Anti 2nd people use the "what's next nukes" quip like some people toss out "Hitler" or "racist "

The funny thing is that if someone has the money they can legally buy full auto weapons and own them, but I guess he didnt figure that when he made the nuke remark.


Oh, you are a mind reader too. You know what I think. Amazing!

And of course you know no real shooter uses full auto for small arms, but a three round burst.

Now back to the xbox for you.



posted on Mar, 2 2014 @ 11:05 PM
link   

GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by mindseye1609
 


I get you are trying to think outside the box.. but nah. Americans had enough arms without the states trying to pass these laws.

The goal is probably to incite gun owners so they can claim they are violent and create a propaganda ball against all gun owners. If something happened it CT with gun owners responding to attempted confiscation with violence they might even make the laws patriotic and the police martyrs.

I mean they make an absurd and unconstitutional law with the punitive action being, you missed registration so now you have to hand over the guns, then if you dont do that you are a felon possibly facing 5 or so years?!

Its a provocation, believe that.
They know registration will not prevent the kind of crime that caused Sandy Hook. Nancy Lanza could have registered every gun she owned and it would have happened still.

They will either back down or reach some sort of compromise. Hopefully the people of CT won't compromise though. They shouldnt because that's how you lose ground.

Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.

Keep what you have with no concern by demanding things you dont have. Maybe its out of fear of being labeled nuts or something that pro second amendment people are so bad at playing politics.
edit on 2-3-2014 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


You know, as I consider this point. I can't help but wonder how much of the pro-gun lobby may actually be a controlled opposition.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   

VinMan

GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by mindseye1609
 


I get you are trying to think outside the box.. but nah. Americans had enough arms without the states trying to pass these laws.

The goal is probably to incite gun owners so they can claim they are violent and create a propaganda ball against all gun owners. If something happened it CT with gun owners responding to attempted confiscation with violence they might even make the laws patriotic and the police martyrs.

I mean they make an absurd and unconstitutional law with the punitive action being, you missed registration so now you have to hand over the guns, then if you dont do that you are a felon possibly facing 5 or so years?!

Its a provocation, believe that.
They know registration will not prevent the kind of crime that caused Sandy Hook. Nancy Lanza could have registered every gun she owned and it would have happened still.

They will either back down or reach some sort of compromise. Hopefully the people of CT won't compromise though. They shouldnt because that's how you lose ground.

Personally pro gun people have been so ignorant at politics. They are always on the defense. If they went on offense and say demanded they ability to purchase full auto weapons, etc then the anti gun lobby woukd have to spend their resources fighting what the gun owners want rather than having free range to grind away at the rights. Force a stalemate.

Keep what you have with no concern by demanding things you dont have. Maybe its out of fear of being labeled nuts or something that pro second amendment people are so bad at playing politics.
edit on 2-3-2014 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


You know, as I consider this point. I can't help but wonder how much of the pro-gun lobby may actually be a controlled opposition.


WOW. That sure stopped this thread in its tracks.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Having been born and raised in Connecticut, and coming from a LONG line of Connecticut Yankees, I"m saddened by the attitude the police are taking towards the second amendment. However, I have to say it's not a surprise to me. For the past few years, every time I've visited family in Connecticut, I was continually struck at how very far left it was becoming.

Cross Connecticut off the list of possible places for us to retire.
So sad.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:57 AM
link   

gariac
Yes, this will be very effective. Asking for full auto will not make you look extreme.

Have you considered nuclear weapons?


nuclear weapons like the Depleted uranium rounds the us government has been using?
the stuff that kills the shooter and the shootee?
they will be gunning folks down with that poison when they get down do it
eta
id say thats extremely extreme



edit on Monam3b20143America/Chicago33 by Danbones because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join