In which an attempted blow to freedom becomes good news for freedom? Stay tuned, I guess.
It’s reasonable to believe that the non-Connecticut press covered the December registration drive because its members were happy to see the state achieve what appeared to be a new level of control over a compliant populace.
It’s also reasonable to believe that they are ignoring the widespread defiance of an obviously unconstitutional state demand because exposing it will give aid and comfort to freedom lovers throughout the land. We can’t have that.
H/T to Codrea.
Good news for freedom, maybe. Depends.
It’s almost certainly bad news for the people of Connecticut, though, because history has proven time and again that unenforceable laws result in increasing levels of frustration and brutality on the part of law enforcement. Look at the drug war for a good example.
As for my “depends” above, here is what this is riding on:
Public perception of the first violent incident.
When (not “if”. WHEN) the first shots are fired over this, because the first guy that follows through with this “cold dead hands” ultimatum starts giving law enforcement his gun, one bullet at a time, the public perception of that event will result in a sea change in America.
If popular opinion falls along the lines of “serves them right for trying to trample his rights under color of law and authority” then we’ve won the fight, forever and irrefutably.
If popular opinion falls along the lines of “nutty nutter with evil black assault weapon shoots father of four who was just trying to get his job done and make it home safe at the end of the day” then we’ll take a big hit. A big one.
My personal opinion is that we have an inalienable right to keep and bear arms, similar to those kept and born by the military. The founding fathers had just gotten done revolting against their government, and the most powerful military on Earth at the time – they weren’t thinking about sporting purposes when they wrote the 2nd amendment. So to eliminate our ability to bear a military rifle without first asking permission from the government is a violation of that right.
This is not a right granted by the government, but a right we already have, that was simply recognized by the 2nd amendment.
Any “father of four” that actively intends to enforce this illegal, illegitimate offense against the rights of the people deserves what he gets.