Decrying estimates that “scores of thousands of Connecticut residents failed to register their military-style assault weapons with state police by Dec. 31,” The Hartford Courant published an editorial Friday declaring “State Can't Let Gun Scofflaws Off Hook.
Aware that “willful noncompliance ... is doubtless a major issue,” The Courant floated the wishful thinking “that many gun owners are unaware of their obligation to register military-style assault weapons and would do so if given another chance.
“But the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law,” The Courant concluded, calling on the state to use the “background check database” to identify who has not obeyed, and to go and get them.
If ever there was proof that citizen disarmament demanders are lying when they scoff at legitimate fears that background checks provide a registration capability, this is it. And if ever there was further corroboration that they intend using that registration to enable confiscation, The Courant just removed all doubt.
“If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences,” they pronounce.
Perhaps The Courant's editors and those they’re egging on would do well to also consider consequences those who want to enforce the law should be prepared to face, as Mike Vanderboegh explained in an open letter to the Connecticut State Police posted this morning on the Sipsey Street Irregulars blog.
Citing a Feb. 10 article in which The Courant estimated “as of Jan. 1, Connecticut has very likely created tens of thousands of newly minted criminals -- perhaps 100,000 people, almost certainly at least 20,000,” Vanderboegh went on to note “CSP currently has around 1,248 troopers.”
Simply as a matter of resources and logistics, the state will be hard-pressed to allocate the manpower, budget, jail facilities and court case load capabilities to do more than scratch the surface to try to frighten everyone by making examples of a few. If The Courant is going to demand they apply those resources to all, perhaps the editors would flesh out what compliance with their call to action consists of, starting with realistic costs to arrest, prosecute and incarcerate every noncompliant gun owner, the number of total hours and dedicated personnel needed to execute that plan, how many decades it will take to accomplish, how many businesses will be disrupted by losing valuable employees, how much tax revenue the state will lose by taking productive taxpayers out of circulation and turning them into dependents, how many families will be forced into dependency to further burden assistance rolls, and what violent criminals who prey on victims are going to be doing while the state dedicates all those resources to destroying all those principled citizens their edicts turned into overnight “felons.”
Logistical considerations aside, have The Courant editors got an estimate for how many heretofore law-abiding gun owners the state will need to actually kill before their demands can be met? And that’s all assuming those defying the edict on principle are willing to allow a force they so demonstrably outnumber to destroy their lives. When faced with utter financial ruin, the effects of punishment extracted on themselves and their families, the lifetime criminal record, the lifetime ban on a right that supposedly “shall not be infringed,” and the prospects of being locked up for years with psychotic and dangerous violent criminal scum in institutions where terrifying brutality, prison rape, head-busting guards and total loss of personal freedom are all daily realities, it’s not unreasonable to ask why would anyone go gentle into that good night.
Well, they could just surrender and save themselves all that, some will no doubt answer.
True, and some no doubt will. But then, what good would the Second Amendment be if Americans just surrendered their guns when ordered to? The lesson of Captain Parker is not lost on some.
Has The Courant got a plan for when a percentage of Connecticut gun owners -- and it needn’t be more than, say three percent -- meets the order to surrender or be destroyed with defiance? Have they, along with Gov. Malloy and his enforcer Mike Lawlor, considered what their next move will be when that determined minority answers back that the state is going to need to do things the hard way?
And have they considered what having their bluff called will do to produce an epiphany, and embolden gun owners everywhere, when it suddenly becomes clear to all who holds the true power in this country if they would only first realize and then exercise it?
If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance."
Despite all those blood-curdling screams coming from those haunting the halls of politics, the true chilling threat is to our rights. My latest GUNS Magazine "Rights Watch" column is online, and you can read it well before the issue hits the stands. Click here to read "Ghost Guns.”