“I was first contacted by the Norwalk Police Department, before I got a certified letter from the State Police. It was a real surprise. They told me I had been involved in domestic violence and I told them `You’ve got the wrong person.'” – James Gorman in State took guns of man for mischief night egg fight [at ctpost.com]
and if there is any damage to his weapons, he needs to sue for the mishandling. another stupid law . . . . doing a lot to stop the criminals and gang bangers clearly
If past conduct by police is any guide….#1 He will be lucky to EVER see them again, or #2 by the time they are returned, his grandson will be a father, or #3 the condition of the firearms will be significantly damaged.
Good luck with all that.
His guns will most likely be heavily damaged. Most certainly not returned in the same condition they were stolen in. Cops simple don’t care.
The sad thing is, if you read the article, the author sounds like the state of CT is blessing the people of CT with an amendment to the gun laws. Giving back what they already had. Just like a sale at a store, or say, when you remove Hitler.
There has been a clear campaign by Connecticut Media, especially CT NPR to report the news with a clearly pro Gov. Malloy and pro CT Democrat bias. It isn’t just on guns. And not just the CTpost.com, for an example of their revisionist history making read this article just out June 5:
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Malloy-Security-becoming-more-personal-4577184.php
The news in CT has been a constant replay of the same propaganda message. All this when there is other news happening of course.
Also Malloy has signed a bill attacking CT Freedom of Information, originally developed in secret meetings and only discovered through a leaked email:
http://articles.courant.com/2013-05-22/news/hc-secret-foi-bill-0523-20130522_1_school-shooting-recordings-malloy
The window dressing for this was the threat of FOI release of the crime photos from Newtown, but Connecticut State Police, as far as I can discover have never released crime scene photos of this type under FOI requests. The threat of releasing the photos was of course started by Michael Moore the documentation, who wanted the photos released to “Finish off the NRA” instead he is apparently working to finish off Freedom on Information, and open government in Ct.
Can we have the same stringent background checks on MSM and politicians, like disqualification from issuing publications or becoming a candidate for office, respectively, if there are any clouds on their records?
Maybe invoke a 10-word limit and a CA truth release button…
…just askin’.
I would vote for that!
And the truth release would only be actuated by the tip of a bullet?
He dutifully submitted to the will of his masters like a good slave. If they ask for his wife and his firstborn certainly he will comply.
SUBMIT. COMPLY. OBEY.
That’s the part that got me too.
I would never have done that.
I would have moved them out of state and told CT to fvck off. Then I would have pursued my rights through the legal process. And I would have become the biggest pain in the @ss the state has ever known, suing everyone and everything in sight and being generally disruptive.
What would you have done?
What guns? Oh, the ones that were stolen from my car last night? I havent had a chance to file a report on those yet, been too busy filing IRS forms for my diabetes treatment.
“Resistance is Futile.”
do they confiscate your car when you get a traffic ticket too?
Umm, yes they will, thanks to Obama. They can already listen inside any GM car with OnSTAR, track its parameters, and shut it down at will by remote. Obama liked that feature so much at Govt Motors he is mandating it for all cars in 2014.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-bypasses-congress-mandate-black-boxes-all-cars-beginning-14
If you weren’t presently aware, On Star has some freakish abilities. It can report itself stolen, kill the engine, and trap occupants inside by locking the doors.
Wasn’t GM a “too big to fail” corporation the American taxpayer mailed out with Obama thus becoming the indirect unofficial CEO by default? America’s “right to privacy” is “too big to fail”.
Looks like I am going to daily drive my 69 Mustang and 70 Charger. Of course they will try to find a way to force me to put in a black box I bet. But it’s an old car, wires just happen to short out in it all of the time depriving a black box from getting the power it needs to run!
I heard a commercial about that “OnStar” thing – the guy gets a call, and the caller says, “your car has experienced a frontal impact…”
Gee, thanks! I wouldn’t have noticed!
“In January, state police ordered Gorham to surrender all his guns because they discovered a “misdemeanor handgun disqualifier” during a routine criminal background check after he used a gift certificate his wife gave him at Christmas to purchase a new Smith & Wesson .380 revolver.”
So, do you think they mean a .38 revolver or a .380 semi-auto?
Typo, they meant to write it was a “AR15 Glock full auto high capacity assault rifle machinegun destructive device terrorist tool of choice.”
Well, there were S&W revolvers chambered for the .38 S&W cartridge, which is sometimes referred to as the .380 revolver cartridge in Merrie Olde England. I have a rather nice Webley revolver (civilian, not military) chambered for this cartridge.
Granted, I suspect that’s not what’s being spoken of here.
Their is actually a .380 revolver.
How does egging someone you don’t live with or are not in some personal relationship with become categorized as domestic violence?
Because The State says so.
Given the recent revelations of the extent of gov’t spying and surveillance of US citizens (I think most here already knew that, without needing a breaking news story), our tin foil hat fears of gun registries and confiscation really aren’t so far-fetched.
Imagine how badly a registry will be abused. Our histories will be combed over relentlessly until some alphabet agency finds the slightest excuse to come knocking on the door to take your firearms. You think think they care whether or not they got the law right, or whether or not they even showed up at the right house? Hell no, they’ll take what they want, leave, and have full immunity.
I see literally no fault in your thinking.
How can forcing someone to get a “permit” to exercise a right be constitutional? This I have never understood.
Boy, talk about the state bending-over backwards to take someones guns?
Geez, isn’t spitting on the sidewalk still a misdemeanor in some states?
This is simply the next step in the big plan to confiscate all guns. Make laws that turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals. Then prosecute the new criminals. Good luck to everybody.
Clearly public enemy number one
This dude ACTUALLY turned his guns in on such a flimsy premise? I would NEVER have turned them in (under such instances). A ten dollar fine nearly a half century earlier as a teen? There would be more than a few dead pigs at my door if they even tried taking my firearms (freedom).
And if they succeeded, I would have….come to them.