[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Fox News (Page 2 of 2)
|
Quoted:
Like I was saying a few posts ago... http://newcanaan.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/is-there-a-loophole-in-the-new-connecticut-gun-law_a132902b-newcanaan Quoted:
Like I was saying a few posts ago... A Connecticut gun-rights group says it has found a loophole in the state's new firearms legislation that would allow the purchase of assault weapons if they were manufactured prior to 1994. http://newcanaan.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/is-there-a-loophole-in-the-new-connecticut-gun-law_a132902b-newcanaan Actually its the sentence after the one you quoted I think is worse... Connecticut Citizen's Defense League president Scott Wilson told Fox 61 Thursday the state law overlooks "pre-existing, pre-ban types of rifles that were grandfathered in prior to the 1994 assault weapon ban." They basically hint that CCDL/Scott Wilson thinks prebans should also be banned. I do LOL at how they say CCDL has "found a loophole". This is the kind of shitty anti gun reporting that brainwashes the low information voters, law allowing prebans has been on the books since 2001. |
|
Quoted:
That gun shop / range is Tactical Arms in Torrington in the video. I have shot there 2 times and never going back  Quoted:
Quoted:
What the hell is up with the CCDL guy blabbing on the news about this? We don't need to rub anything in. Also the reporter stated "my source purchased 37 of these..." Then they showed a wall full of rifles that sure looked a lot like BMG's wall. It may seem like he was blabbing too if that was indeed his store. Last but not least could some one please make me understand this whole 10 round mag in prebans thing?? That gun shop / range is Tactical Arms in Torrington in the video. I have shot there 2 times and never going back Yeh , that guy is a dick. |
|
Quoted:
Been saying it for weeks... everyone needs to just STFU about it. Don't fuel the fire and it will burn out on its own... Talk about it, or don't talk about it doesn't change the fact that the gun grabbers will eventually repeal 53-202m. If they can. Won't change the fact that they will try to pass more anti gun legislation next legislative session. Like it or not people have been talking about prebans for ages (since 2001). There is plenty of information out there prior to 4/4/13 to tell even the most ignorant gun grabber that scary rifles would still be available for purchase post 4/4/13. Hell the legislature even exempted a whole shitload of government employees and others who can still buy those evil baby killing Boooshmaster rifles while Joe six pack cannot. We face a problem here. Do we stop discussing information/laws that is public knowledge out of fear of what might happen? Of what the gun grabbers might do? Do we curtail our first amendment rights because the public information we discuss might be used by progressives to curtail our second amendment rights? If so are we not loosing both rights? It seems like its a win-win for them if they have curtailing discussions so we don't talk about our rights and how the law impacts them. 
|
|
Quoted:
We are here 20 years later because the sheeple and low information voters in CT place other issues above their 2A rights. For many, if not most, of our fellow citizens, they do not spend even one moment of their normal day thinking about guns or their rights in general. The ONLY time they think about guns is when they pull the one or two they have out of the back of the closet and dust it off, or put of the night stand. They rarely if ever go to the range. Or they only care about the 2nd Amendment when the go to buy a gun, and now ammo. Most people while they know some kind of new gun restrictions have been passed since Sandy Hook, have not taken even five minutes out of their day to investigate. We see people come into this and other sites from time to time who say "I didn't know" when the general details on the new gun ban, and new permits/certificates has been spread across the news for more than six months. We are hear because people walk into a voting booth and always throw the lever for one political party because its how they've always voted, because its how their parents always voted, and walk out patting themselves on the back for doing their civic duty. We are hear because people are duped by what they hear in the media. We are hear because there is a sizable number of our fellow citizens who no longer, for what ever reason, vote. We are here because in CT a large majority of the politicians from both political parties are just different sides of the same progressive coin. We are here because people vote on emotion (social issues) rather than logic, reason and facts (spending, budget, debt). Quoted:
Quoted:
What happened to the days when everybody knew Martin Looney was nothing but a gun hater? Guy got his way in congress back in the early 90's and then everyone quickly caught on to what he was all about. So why are we here 20 years later with people suddenly catering to this guy or trying to play it off like he's some kind of expert on reasonable gun control? Its just stupid. He isn't gonna stop with these proposals, he wants all guns banned from civilians, he's just forcing through the legislation piece by piece. We are here 20 years later because the sheeple and low information voters in CT place other issues above their 2A rights. For many, if not most, of our fellow citizens, they do not spend even one moment of their normal day thinking about guns or their rights in general. The ONLY time they think about guns is when they pull the one or two they have out of the back of the closet and dust it off, or put of the night stand. They rarely if ever go to the range. Or they only care about the 2nd Amendment when the go to buy a gun, and now ammo. Most people while they know some kind of new gun restrictions have been passed since Sandy Hook, have not taken even five minutes out of their day to investigate. We see people come into this and other sites from time to time who say "I didn't know" when the general details on the new gun ban, and new permits/certificates has been spread across the news for more than six months. We are hear because people walk into a voting booth and always throw the lever for one political party because its how they've always voted, because its how their parents always voted, and walk out patting themselves on the back for doing their civic duty. We are hear because people are duped by what they hear in the media. We are hear because there is a sizable number of our fellow citizens who no longer, for what ever reason, vote. We are here because in CT a large majority of the politicians from both political parties are just different sides of the same progressive coin. We are here because people vote on emotion (social issues) rather than logic, reason and facts (spending, budget, debt). LEMMINGS 
|
|
Quoted: Looney was a congressman? Ummmm..... Quoted: Quoted: What happened to the days when everybody knew Martin Looney was nothing but a gun hater? Guy got his way in congress back in the early 90's and then everyone quickly caught on to what he was all about. So why are we here 20 years later with people suddenly catering to this guy or trying to play it off like he's some kind of expert on reasonable gun control? Its just stupid. He isn't gonna stop with these proposals, he wants all guns banned from civilians, he's just forcing through the legislation piece by piece. Looney was a congressman? Ummmm..... Martin M. Looney (born July 23, 1948) is an American politician. Looney, a Democrat, has been astate senator from Connecticut since 1993. Since 2004, Looney has served as Majority Leader of the Senate. Looney, a resident of New Haven, represents the eastern half of the city as well as part of Hamden in the Connecticut Senate. He is also a part-time professor at Quinnipiac University and the University of New Haven in Hamden, CT and West Haven, CT, respectively, where he teaches classes such as State and Local Governments. Looney was born in New Haven and graduated from Fairfield University and received his J.D. fromUniversity of Connecticut School of Law. Prior to being elected to the Connecticut Senate, Looney served as a Connecticut state representative. |
|
Quoted:
i know for a fact there are moles in the CCDL facebook group. there is someone on there that leaked the info about "Starbucks Appreciation Day" i got bored one night and look thru everyone suspicious account (sorry - women and people with equal sign profiles ARE allowed to enjoy firearms, but it does raise a flag). there's a couple people that not only "like" Barack Obama, but Michelle Obama, the Toyota Prius, NPR, The United Nations, Planned Parenthood, and other screaming liberal things. i doubt they like guns, honestly. you're allowed one accidental "like" from the above. two = you're caught out. anyways, if they know how to infiltrate the FB group, they definitely know about this site considering how much people reference AR15.com in the comments on that group. Big whoop. The CCDL has people infiltrating the Connecticut agaist Gun Violence as well. How do I know? belong to the CCDL and I went to their "Conference on Gun Violence" at Wesleyan a month or so back and I was posting updates on the conference to the CCDL Facebook page Get this; on the CCDL facebook page I head word that other CCDL members were there as well, so I described myself on the page so that other peole could identifyy me at the conference. Not too long aftrwards there was a blonde girl who came into my aisle and stood right next to me while watching me. Eithr she found me incredibly attractive or someone in the CAGV was monitoring the CCDL page and read my description and she alked over to see what I was up to. Personally I don't mind and I don't care. You forget that we're the ones who are in the right and they're the sniveling skunks who have to skulk around in the shadows lying to people to get others to believe them, and these mutual gun hating jerk off fests are the only place in creation they can let their hair down without gun rights people confronting them.. They openly admitted at the meeting that they were outnumbered five to one at the public safety committee hearing...which is a lie 'cause I was there, and it was more like 10 to 1, but whatever...as well as openly discussed how disturbing the Colorado recalls were for politicians pushing gun control...and yet they were trying to convince themselves they were "the silent majority". Good GOD it's like listening to a cult. |
|
Quoted:
Liberalism is a cult. They do not respond to facts or logic, prefer to attack the messenger.. Can not admit or retreat from their spasm ... Are well organized and indoctrinated ... And totally hypocritical about things like tolerance and open ideas. I think a lot of it is smoke n' mirrors though. The numbers of people showing up don't lie regardless of how badly the MSM spins it. For those of us that lived in the LOB this past session, there was no opposition save a handful (at best) of kooky sock-puppets. With a bought and paid for legislature though, it doesn't matter what anyone wants. They know they can now pass whatever insane laws come down the line. The bought and paid for MSM then just runs cover fire for their criminal and treasonous actions. Guillotines. |
|
They did a follow up last night. More of the same drivel, opinion masked as a legitimate news story.
http://video.foxct.com?freewheel=91060&sitesection=WTIC_hom_non_fro&VID=25284686 |
|
More. Be sure to leave a comment.
Connecticut Firearm Law Loophole http://foxct.com/2013/10/22/connecticut-firearm-law-loophole/ Gun store owners are taking advantage of a supposed loophole in Connecticut’s firearms legislation by selling pre-1994 manufactured “assault weapons.” Last week, Fox Connecticut uncovered an exemption in the gun bill which allows citizens to buy, sell, or transfer any semi-automatic rifles made prior to 1994. Those firearms were put back on the market after President Clinton’s assault weapons ban expired in 2004. “If you can prove that they were manufactured before 1994 they are not affected by this law,” Undersecretary for Criminal Justice in the Office of Policy and Management Mike Lawlor said. Firearms dealers have begun using the exemption, by purchasing what are called “pre-bans” from out of state and selling them off Connecticut shelves. Tactical Arms in Torrington has sold 11 pre-bans already. A shipment of 26 or more are due next week. Two other gun stores told Fox Connecticut that they have only one pre-ban left to sell. There is also a thriving demand for the guns on the internet where potential sellers can advertise the firearms to interested buyers in Connecticut. One person wrote on the forum 24hourcampfire.com , “This may be your LAST CHANCE to get a PRE-BAN rifle” and “They are selling around here for $4,000 to $4,800”. It is unclear how many pre-bans are in the U.S. right now. According to a 1996 Institute of Justice Survey, 76 million rifles were possessed by U.S. civilians just two years into the Clinton ban. |
|
So why are they trying to imply that it's a bad thing that people are still allowed to buy pre-bans? It's as if they're trying to say... "look there's a loophole and dangerous criminals all over the state are still buying these." Which isn't the case. How about them just admitting the truth... which is that "normal law abiding citizens are buying these." Just the fact that a lot of people in CT want them should send enough of a message to liberals that the majority of citizens just don't agree with them on gun control. But I suppose the corrupt local news will keep trying to play it off like "90%" of the population agrees with liberals.
|
| The reason why they are pissed is the same reason why people who supported Obamacare are pissed. They found out that the law isn't what they were told it would be. They thought all those evil baby killing boooshmasters AR-15's would be banned. Little did they know, a law on the books since 2001 allows for us poor peasants to continue to buy AR's. Even if they got rid of 53-202m AR's will still be sold, its just they will be sold to those the state has exempted, who most just happen to be employed by the government. |