Ammo For Sale

« « Snake Plissken on gun bans | Home | On Trump » »

In CT

Governor to pen executive order banning gun purchases to those on the no fly list. How does a state get its hands on the list?

Posted in uncategorized on December 10th, 2015 by SayUncle | RSS 2.0 |

7 Responses to “In CT”

  1. rickn8or Says:
    December 10th, 2015 at 8:00 pm

    How does a state get its hands on the list?

    Probably the same way the airlines do. But I expect a lawsuit and an injunction before this EO takes effect. (Denial of a Constitutional right without due process.)

  2. Blue Falcon in Boston Says:
    December 10th, 2015 at 10:13 pm

    MA’s legislature is trying to do the same. =(

  3. Patrick Says:
    December 11th, 2015 at 7:18 am

    New York is also right behind.

    This might be a show of solidarity with the President, if nothing else. I don’t think states can get access to the list because the National Counter Terrorism Center (originators of the original list, if I recall) won’t let it go. Airlines run their people though DHS, who then tell if there is a hit. I suppose the system could be used in other ways, but that would be far from the intended purpose. Forget guns: I don’t think it’d pass muster as an administrative act. Of course that won’t stop Obama, who knows the courts will move slower than his pen.

    The upside is it’ll force the courts to once again face Heller. I suspect even some of the lefty justices are now starting to see what happens when they sign on to “reasonable” measures that restrict fundamental rights in the name of “public security”.

    The same people who hate Trump and the GOP people who say to hell with Muslims are the same ones saying an entire amendment from the Bill of Rights can be erased because “public security”.

    Payback is a bitch, and I wonder if they go to bed fearing President Trump’s pen.

  4. JK Brown Says:
    December 11th, 2015 at 1:49 pm

    They really want to make us more like Europe. On interesting outcome of the Paris attacks, quickly squashed by the media, is the shock at the complete tossing out of civil liberties in France under the state of emergency. Thoughtfully, the officials haven’t thrown their weight around for the average person, but the reality did rear its ugly head.

    And yes, this has been undermined by judicial fiat with judge made immunities that deny citizens the right to hold police and officials accountable for their wrongful acts, mistakes or often due to intent.

    Then we come to chapter 39 [Magna Carta], the great “Liberty” statute. “No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned or be disseised of his freehold or his liberties or his free custom [these important words added in 1217] or be outlawed or exiled or otherwise destroyed but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land.”

    p35
    One must not be misled by the generality of the phrase used in chapter 39 [Magna Carta], and think it unimportant because it looks simple. It is hard for an American or Englishman to get a fresh mind on these matters. We all grow up with the notion that nobody has the right to arrest us, nobody has the right to deprive us of our liberty, even for an hour. If anybody, be he President of the United States or be he a police officer, chooses to lay his hand on our shoulder or attempts to confine us, we have the same right to try him, if he makes a mistake, as if he were a mere trespasser; and that applies just as much to the highest authority, to the president, to the general of the army, to the governor, as it does to a tramp. But one cannot be too often reminded that this principle is peculiar to English and American civilization. Throughout the Continent any official, any judge. anybody “who has a red band around his cap’ who, in any indirect way, represents the state — a railway conductor, a spy, a station agent — not only has the right to deprive you of your freedom, but you have no right to question him; the “red band around the cap” is a final answer.

    Hence that extraordinary incident, at which all England laughed, the Kupenick robbery. A certain crook who had been a soldier and was familiar with the drill and the passwords, obtained possession of an old captain’s uniform, walked into a provincial town of some importance, ordered the first company of soldiers he met to follow him, and then with that retinue, appeared before the town hall and demanded of the mayor the keys of the treasury. These were surrendered without question and he escaped with the money, representing, of course, that he had orders from the Imperial government It never occurred to any one to question a soldier in full uniform, and it was only some days later, when the town accounts were sent to Berlin to be approved, that the robbery was discovered.

    Such a thing could by no possibility have happened in England or with us; the town treasurer would at once have demanded his authority, his order from the civil authorities; the uniform would have failed to impress him.
    —-Popular Law-making: A Study of the Origin, History, and Present Tendencies of Law-making by Statute, Frederic Jesup Stimson (1910)

  5. Austrian Anarchy Says:
    December 12th, 2015 at 11:16 pm

    How do the rest of us get our hands on this list, in case we do a private sale?

  6. Ron W Says:
    December 14th, 2015 at 4:37 pm

    How is a private sale background check to be enforced?

  7. rickn8or Says:
    December 14th, 2015 at 4:55 pm


    How is a private sale background check to be enforced?

    Setups and police stings?

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives