Confiscatory gun law gaining traction nationwide

California Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-15th District) co-sponsored what's been called the "gun violence restraining order bill."  (Photo: Aseb.org_

California Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-15th District) renewed her push for her “gun violence restraining order bill” following the spree killing in Isla Vista, California. (Photo:

At the nexus of protecting one’s Second and Fourth Amendment rights and the government’s interest in public safety is a Connecticut law, currently gaining traction nationwide, that would allow police to temporarily seize firearms from individuals thought to be a danger to themselves or others.

The law, enacted in 1999 following a spree killing of four managers of the Connecticut Lottery perpetrated by a mentally deranged employee, permits judges to review evidence submitted by local law enforcement to determine whether one’s Second Amendment rights should be stripped until a court hearing can be scheduled to evaluate the person’s mental well-being and suitability to possess firearms.

The hearing must be held within 14 days and during the proceedings the judge will decide to either return the confiscated firearms or authorize the state to keep them for up to a year, as the Associated Press reported.

In the wake of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as the more recent spree killing in Isla Vista, California, lawmakers around the nation are taking a closer look at the Connecticut law to determine if it has the capacity to prevent future tragedies.

Specifically, the legislatures in California and New Jersey are now reviewing similar statutes. And Indiana passed a version of the Connecticut law in 2005, following the death of an Indianapolis police who was fatally shot by a man suffering with mental illness.

From the perspective of Michael Lawlor, Connecticut’s undersecretary for criminal justice for planning and policy, the law could have prevented Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza from killing 20 school children and six educators in December 2013.

“That’s the kind of situation where you see the red flags and the warning signs are there, you do something about it,” Lawlor said. “In many shootings around the country, after the fact it’s clear that the warning signs were there.”

Hindsight is always 20/20. Though, it’s worth noting that none of the mental health professionals who treated Lanza over the year saw this violent outburst coming.

“Those mental health professionals who saw him did not see anything that would have predicted his future behavior.” said Peter Lanza, Adam’s father, according to a report conducted by the state attorney general. “Here we are near New York, one of the best locations for mental-health care, and nobody saw this.”

Meanwhile, many pro-gun rights activists oppose the law, believing that it violates one’s right to keep and bear arms.

“The government taking things away from people is never a good thing,” said Rich Burgess, the president of Connecticut Carry. “They come take your stuff and give you 14 days for a hearing. Would anybody else be OK if they just came and took your car and gave you 14 days for a hearing?”

Along those lines attorney Rachel Baird, who has represented eight gun owners who’ve had their firearms confiscated by police under the law, said the law is being abused by law enforcement.

“It’s stretched and abused, and since it’s firearms, the courts go along with it,” noted Baird.

To Baird’s point, gun seizure warrants have doubled since 2010, with 183 filed in courthouses around the state last year. To put that in context, the number was nine times higher than the annual average for the first five years the law was in place.

Yet police officials believe that the law is not being abused but properly enforced and that the increase is due to the fact that more departments have recognized the power they wield to stop potential mass killers.

“With all that we see in the news day after day, particular after Newtown, I think departments are more aware of what authority they have … and they’re using the tool (gun seizure warrants) more frequently than in the past,” South Windsor Police Chief Matthew Reed told the AP. “We always look at it from the other side. What if we don’t seize the guns?”

Perhaps one could argue that another way to rephrase Reed’s argument is that when one suddenly realizes they have a giant hammer then everyone looks like a nail.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 39 comments… add one }
  • Nemo November 16, 2015, 8:48 am

    The National Firearms Act of 1934 was brought into existence after the false-flag operation of the Business Plot of 1933 (which was supposed to be a coup led by former Marine General Smedley D. Butler and paid for by businessmen who were against FDR, but was laughably unrealistic and farcical from the get-go, as it never had a chance, and Butler blew the whistle on it) . The laws took automatic weapons from the hands of the law abiding, out of (legitimate) fear of revolution.

    (FDR was pushing through one unConstitutional law after another, laws that still stand, today, with only the Supreme Court standing in his way, until he gelded them with the threat of adding more judges to the SC in 1937. After that, they rolled over and played dead, and passed those laws. )

    The ultimate intent is always the same: disarming the populace so tyranny can be more effectively carried out. This ‘precrime’ law is no different.

  • JB July 21, 2014, 10:04 pm

    How can this law have stopped Lanza from killing people? He did not have any guns to confiscate, he took his mothers guns after killing her.

  • john amato July 21, 2014, 7:01 pm

    My god, I suppose if one of my children were murdered by an a-hole w/a firearm, I too could rally a political ally who’s agenda would be to propose laws that would never make a dime of sense or difference. Illinois, the land of Lincoln and barry, would be a good example.

  • Vondee July 21, 2014, 2:26 pm

    Does the law provide any framework and guidelines for confiscating someone’s firearms? If not, does any infraction become justification to confiscate? Maybe you don’t like the attitude and tone of the officer writing you a parking ticket and you tell them so. The next thing you know SWAT is knocking on your door.

  • Doug White July 21, 2014, 1:49 pm

    The lottery was involved with the Sandy Hook hoax.

  • IPDAILY July 21, 2014, 10:23 am

    These people trying to confiscate our legal guns are really scary; to think that these people would want to deprive the American people of what has become a recreational past time for millions, for 2 hundred years is ridiculous.
    They know very little about responsible gun ownership. All they see and hear is these heinous killings.
    The issue is we now have many mentally unstable people living among us.
    There is nowhere for these people can turn to get help. ( They feel people will judge them.)
    So mentally unstable people take out their frustrations on helpless unarmed civilians that there delusional mind considered done them wrong.
    You will never see one of these psychopathic killers enter a shooting range or a gun club, they pick the most vulnerable to inflict their pain and misery.
    There once was asylums where these people were kept locked away from us?

  • Janus Livingston July 21, 2014, 3:30 am

    Damn sold out politicians,
    depriving people of their Constitutional rights again, you are crooks, deceivers-this doesn’t have anything to do with public safety-this playing on people’s emotions, dividing citizens, and disarming the populace for total control-from our cold dead hands, to you, Skinner and the rest of you bastard politicians!

  • Brian Smith July 15, 2014, 8:09 am

    So, guilty until proven innocent.

  • mtman2 July 14, 2014, 10:54 pm

    LEAVE A COMMENT…. I left two short decent ones that are not there!? (almost an hour ago)
    What, I should check tomorrow to see if coming here is worth it, because had I taken much of my valuable time to then not be posted I would be insulted. I am a Constitutional/Bill of Rights Conservative and can contribute well to this debate, however…..

    • Russ July 21, 2014, 4:33 pm

      mtman2…we see you above 53,47 and 45 minutes ago.
      It takes the admin a while to review……..Ooooohmmmmmmm

  • Bobby July 14, 2014, 7:39 pm

    A fool and his freedoms are soon parted. That seems to cover this subject quite well.

  • Ken July 14, 2014, 6:40 pm

    So the new law only wants to keep firearms from crazy people. If you know someone that isn’t crazy, you don’t know them very well because everyone is crazy to some degree some more than others. Who here can say that they have never went on a hopping up and down yelling and making threats that you never intend to make happen? It might just be me but I don’t think so.

  • Russ July 14, 2014, 3:02 pm

    People need to wake up don’t they?
    The only reason people want your guns is to control you, PERIOD!

    You may want to watch this Sandy Hook School Board meeting, (eyes & ears people).

  • Tom July 14, 2014, 3:00 pm

    This is an excuse to disarm, Jail or Murder Christians, Conservatives, Oath Keepers, as these are the people I would hope would Not surrender their firearms to a Corrupt Govt. system. Without 2 witnesses, and a court warrant, I will Not give up my arms, property, rights to religious freedom, pursuit of happiness, etc. With all the Liberal, anti Constitution Judges we seem to be producing today, I don’t think arguing in a court of Law will help any if they want to disarm you.. Not to mention, drawing it out for years. Better to resist tyranny armed, than Disarmed.. Of course, if Govt. doesn’t misuse it’s power, we have nothing to worry about, right?

  • Dave Stiebs July 14, 2014, 2:33 pm

    The cops will submit bogus information to judges to confiscate your guns. I know a few crooked cops and that is just what they will do. What recourse will the law abiding citizens have to prove they are not unfit? This law is a set-up.

  • cawpin July 14, 2014, 1:12 pm

    “And Indiana passed a version of the Connecticut law in 2005”

    That isn’t exactly true; please don’t confuse the two. The Indiana law requires multiple levels of legal work to get done. It must be approved by a judge to be used.

  • Mikie July 14, 2014, 12:21 pm

    Read the Turner Diaries then tell me if its fiction … I say its happening now ….

  • mellpell79 July 14, 2014, 12:10 pm

    This law is too open ended. Who is going to make that judgement on a person. Has anyone looked at some of the decisions these judges make with their rulings. No, I’m sorry, this is a bad law. If this is going to be the way things are going to be well then a lot of Police, Marshall’s, FBI and a lot of other agency’s are going to be having members not carrying any firearms. I sure would like to make a few judgments on the mental condition of some judges and police. My opinion is probably a lot better then theirs is. This is a bad law. The government is making to easy for themselves to take away our rights. Once gone, it will be near imposable to get them back.
    You folks that don’t like the 2nd Amendment, just wait until the government starts taking more things away from you, and they will, its coming. You’ll see.

  • Dino July 14, 2014, 11:35 am

    MUST SEE FULL CUT : Obama born in Kenya in 1960 says British Intelligence Advisor CIA DNA Test !
    1 strike PLZ sub to my back up channel… See More

    Article 1 Section 7 Clause 2 ……………. Of the Constitution

    No laws of Congress are valid

    “Congress can pass no law while a usurper pretends to occupy “the Office of President.”
    The Constitution provides that “[e]very Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives
    and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States
    ” (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to a usurper posturing as “the President of the United States,” but to
    the true and rightful President. If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no “Bill” will or can,
    “before it become a Law, be presented to [him].” If no “Bill” is so presented, no “Bill” will or can become a
    “Law.” And any purported “Law” that the usurper “approve[s]” and “sign[s],” or that Congress passes over the usurper’s “Objections,” will be a nullity. Thus, if Obama deceitfully “enters office” as an usurper, Congress will be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his pretenses as “President.””

    Furthermore, Obama Could not be Removed Except by Force. As a USURPER posturing
    as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach Obama because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”
    (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest him—with physical force, if he would not go along quietly—in order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to
    armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people.

    ALSO, Bear in mind, that as an imposter Commander–in-Chief of the Armed Forces, “he will be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from anyone in those Armed forces and Law Enforcment. Indeed, for officers or men to follow any of his
    purported “orders” including law enforcement will constitute a serious breach of military discipline—and in extreme circumstances even charged with “war crimes.” In addition, no one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch of
    the General Government will be required to put into effect any of Obama’s purported “proclamations,” “executive orders,” or “directives” (Viera, J.).

    Biden cannot step in to take over as President nor can Pelosi, Reed, Clintons, Boehner,…NO ONE can step in because they are all Criminally in COLLUSSION with the NWO, England, Bilderbergs George Soros, Rothchilds, Rockefellers, the EU and the UN, Tri Lats etc…. They all allowed this FRAUD to USURP the Office of President…. They know he is illegally there and has no power or authority to do anything yet they are all allowing this to go on, the are all continuing to BOW to a Criminal NWO USURPER as President and are enabling aiding and abbedding the collapsse of the United States….. This is the open published Agenda of the Nazi NWO,… If you cannot see it by all the evidence before you then your nothing but BLIND SHEEPLE and may GOD have mercy on your souls…. We must elect an intrim Government which will step in for 6 months untill new elections can be had…..

    I am tired of these people thinking they have the power to do this shit when they clearly do not….just because they say its the law does not make it the law!!!

    Especially concerning the TTP and giving Control of our Internet to our enimies and attempting to sign away our Sovereignty and take away our rights to bear arms…………..

    Constitution is clear…even if Obama Wannabe Dictator were legit and he is NOT, PROVEN and validated, but, (ignored with Criminal Intent) Neither the President nor Congress nor the Senate nor the Supreme Court nor the Federal Courts nor the States nor their Governor’s and Mayor’s even through Executive Orders and Treaties they STILL DO NOT possess the Power or the Authority to USURP the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or our Sovereignty….The Constitution weather they chose to ignore it is the Law of the land and they are BOUND to it Article 6 Section 3….all they do is NULL and VOID not to mention they have been Criminally DeFacto since 1871

  • Dino July 14, 2014, 11:33 am

    Violation of the oath of office and that oath taken ending in the words “so help me God” says it all. We are swearing allegiance to our nation and to God as the final arbiter! I took the oath and it is forever, it is a sacred honor! It cannot be set aside or violated! To do so is an act of Treason! To partake in acts of Treason they have become Criminal Felons and have NEGATED all power and authority of their office…….

    Article 1 Section 7 Clause 2 As long as a FRAUD USURPS the office of President Congress and the Senate can make and pass no laws and if they do as they have done since 2008 as they are doing now all they have done is NULL and VOID nor does he Senate have the power to Ratify…. As long as this FRAUD is allowed to USURP the Office they are all Dead in the Water!!

    Where is our Military, they are OBLIGATED under their Sworn Oath to physically remove Obama and all his Criminal Associates… remember your Sworn Oath to Protect and Defend against ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN and DOMESTIC!!! Anyone who is in the Chain of Command providing aide and comfort has NEGATED his position and power and authority that goes with it and is a FELON and needs to be removed for Treason… if your commanders are in bed with the enemy they need to be arrested and those below are authorized to do so.

    British Intelligence Advisor Michael Shrimpton is a British barrister (attorney), an adviser to British intelligence, and a serious person. (Hard Documented Files) Obama is Criminal Fraud USURPER and puppet for England and the New World Order, born 1960 in Kenya. DNA testing done on Obama already by CIA

    Michael Shrimpton is now a Consultant for British Intelligence and is well Connected a very serious individual! I have communicaed with Mr. Shrimpton this is his correct email! Shrimpton has his own blog, The Shrimpton Report. His email address is
    Feel Free to Contact him! I challenge you not to be afraid of learning the TRUTH!

    Although Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) is said to have been born on August 4, 1961, he actually was born in 1960. Obama’s alleged mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was not pregnant in July 1961. Although BHO is said to have been born in Honolulu, Hawaii, he actually was born in Mombasa, Kenya, which was then British territory, which means British intelligence has his records. The C.I.A. surreptiously took a DNA sample of Obama at a fundraising dinner and ran a test, but could not match Obama’s DNA with his [maternal] grandparents, the Dunhams. Former New York governor and GOP presidential aspirant Rudy Giuliani told Shrimpton at a recent lunch that he (Giuliani) knows all about this. Giuliani had hoped he would be the GOP presidential candidate and he’d then use the information against the Democrats. The Clintons (Bill and Hillary) also know about this.

    For the rest of the 1½ hour video, Shrimpton talked about British politics and the European Union. However, at the 1:09:30 mark, a man in the audience asked Shrimpton a question about Obama and Kenya. In his response, beginning at about the 1:11:55 mark, Shrimpton alluded to the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign as if it was ongoing as he spoke, which suggests that the forum took place in 2008. Shrimpton also made these additional claims:

    Given the above, British intelligence on the year (1960, not 1961) and place (Kenya, not USA) of Obama’s birth, Obama would “soon be pressured into withdrawing” from the presidential race or resigning of course with the benefit of hindsight, we know that didn’t happen.
    Senator John Edwards also knows because Shrimpton had briefed him. Former CIA director (under Bill Clinton) also knows. Shrimpton does not name him. Clinton had 3 successive CIA directors: James Woolsey, John Deutsch, and George Tenet. The Kenyan government, of course, knows. The UK newspaper Daily Telegraph also knows. The Honolulu press is aware that Obama’s birth records in Honolulu’s Queens Medical Center are fake. The Honolulu Advertiser knows this.
    Sen. John McCain knows Hillary Clinton and Bill knows
    British Intelligence knows because MI5 got the Nairobi Special Intelligence files when Kenya became independent.
    Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations from 1997 to 2006, also knows.
    Shrimpton also said something very strange — that Obama’s half-sister is actually his full sister, and that the sister is “missing.” (The only “half sister” of Obama about whom we are told is Maya Soetoro-Ng, the daughter of Stanley Ann Dunham and her Indonesian husband, Lolo Soetoro.)

    Play Video
    MUST SEE FULL CUT : Obama born in Kenya in 1960 says British Intelligence Advisor CIA DNA Test !
    1 strike PLZ sub to my back up channel… See More

    As a Criminal Fraud USURPER Obama has no power to do anything let alone wipe his ass…… Article 1 Secton 7 Clause 2 As loang as a FRAUD USURPS the office of President Congress and the Senate Can make and pass no laws and if they do as they have done since 2008 and are doing now is all NULL and VOID… NOR does the Senate possess the power to Ratify!!
    Play Video
    MUST SEE FULL CUT : Obama born in Kenya in 1960 says British Intelligence Advisor CIA DNA Test !
    1 strike PLZ sub to my back up channel… See More
    Play Video

    • Russ July 14, 2014, 5:13 pm

      Thanks for the info Dino.
      The joke is on the U.S. and I’m not laughing.

    • mtman2 July 14, 2014, 10:07 pm

      And this is why “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” is perfectly clear~!
      The Founders had the same percent of criminals and crazy people then.
      You have cars today and will have accidents, misuse, theft and deaths; WE all take that chance most everyday at 60+mph.

    • mtman2 July 14, 2014, 10:09 pm

      “Well”, he’s “wiping” with OUR Constitution and Bill of Rights.

  • Dino July 14, 2014, 11:30 am

    Sandy Hook was a false flag done by our Government to steal our rights and Freedoms and Disarm American Citizens so they can Seditiouslly and Treasonously bring about their Nazi New World Order….. They all need to be Mass Arrested and Hung for Treason……. One Investigator found that the week before this False Flag EVERYONES in this Town has all their Mortgages Paid in Full at the same time!!! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Everything they are doing is illegal and UnConstitutional with no power to enforce so yes arm urselves becasue the time is coming when we the ppeople will have to rise in mass and take this nation back from the hands of these Nazi British Whores……. Research the Illegal Creation of the USA CORPORATION by king George 1871……..

  • charles franchina July 14, 2014, 11:15 am

    There is a statement made that this would have prevented Sandy Hook. Adam Lanza didn’t own a gun, he supposedly stole his moms gun so how would this law have helped. Did his mom have mental illness that they would have taken her guns???? I have nothing against this law but don’t try to make a false case for it to win your point. The true point of Sandy Hook is that if the mom knew her son had issues she shouldn’t of had a gun in the home to begin with…..I agree with a background check but am shaky with gun registration. On the positive side a person wouldn’t be able to buy a gun and then resell it to a criminal. On the negative side the Government could use this to confiscate everyones weapons. To the naysayers this is exactly what happened under Hitler. First they said crime is up and home accidents are happening so we must register all firearms. After the registration they came back and said sorry it didn’t work so everyone must turn in their guns. Only after the guns were turned
    in did the people see the real Hitler. Too late, you are helpless to do anything about it.

  • Rick July 14, 2014, 9:56 am

    As I recall,Adam Lanza killed his mother and stole her guns and went to Sandy Hook Elementary School to kill those children! How exactly would this law have prevented that? She wasn’t dangerous or deranged,HE was! This law is nothing but feel good bologna(NOT my first choice of description!) designed to make the politicians look like they care and have done something about “the problem!” That’s bad enough,but even worse is that it gives them the ability to confiscate firearms and make YOU prove you’re worthy of their return! Any politician who votes for this should be run out of office in the next election!

  • augest west July 14, 2014, 9:47 am

    First off I would like to say that laws to keep the mentally unfit from purchasing or possessing firearms is all in all a good idea. But there are so many loop holes that law enforcement can use to disarm an otherwise normal sane person is also as dangerous as the law itself.
    One person commented WHO will make the final decision on whether or not a legally born US citizen is mentally unfit? Well I would imagine a doctor of psychology would be that person.
    However I know for a fact that once they take your firearms away the chances of you ever seeing them again is about as high as seeing a pink elephant fly.
    Having as one put it a restraining order or someone saying “That guy is crazy” could have the police knocking down your door. Now I will admit that some restraining orders are real and that person could be a threat but I have also seen them get written, Given to that person and the next day it’s all over. Nothing but a piece of paper. Yet some of them are so frivolous and so demining just over visitation rights that they could cause the person man/women to be directed right into this program and lose their rights to keep and bear arms.
    This is just one of the ways for the anti firearm club to start their illegal intentions of disarming this country.
    I think another commenter had said Something about Christopher Dorner, An ex LADP Officer. I know of two others in NJ that went on a shooting rampage, One killing an entire family leaving one who wasn’t home.{The young man/kid worked with my son} He was drinking on the job, He was a mess and also was part of the old school SWAT team were certain officers carried full auto weapons. He also shot his boss in the legs before killing himself as I recollect. The other was almost as bad. So who will police the police? this has been a question on peoples minds for a long time, Look at how many officers have killed their wife’s or other cops and so on. If this law comes to perdition it will be just that….Hell on Earth or AMERICA anyway.

    • mtman2 July 14, 2014, 10:01 pm

      And this is why “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” is perfectly clear~!
      The Founders had the same percent of criminals and crazy people then.
      You have cars today and will have accidents, misuse, theft and deaths; WE all take that chance most everyday at 60+mph.

  • Reed Vergin July 14, 2014, 8:33 am

    Michael Lawlor, Connecticut’s undersecretary for criminal justice for planning and policy, is a fool to make such a comment. Lanza took the guns from his mother. She would not have been investigated. There were no red flags exhibited by her. The guns would have still been available for Lanza. Nothing in this confiscation law would have prevented the Sandy Hook tragedy based on the circumstances and his own fathers comments. Lawlors comments are reckless, irresponsible, and immature and should not be tolerated from anyone.

  • Frank July 14, 2014, 7:58 am

    Firearms are the least of our worries, the direction of America’s leadership in Washington is far worst!

    • Johnh July 14, 2014, 11:30 am

      What do you think they would do if we did not have guns. Most every country that took the guns from their citizens kill those same citizens by the millions.

    • ED SPOWHN July 15, 2014, 12:34 pm


  • Mark Shean July 14, 2014, 7:50 am

    They already abuse peoples 4th Amendment rights here in Ma. under the guise of a so-called 209-A restraining order. It has striped people of their firearms for years based on nothing more than the word of another person with, in many cases, no documentation/paper trail to prove what the accuser says. In other words, ‘hearsay’. It is used in many cases as a tool of harassment that the court goes along with, and then the burden to prove innocence is placed on the accused. Guilty until you can prove your innocent, I thought it was supposed to be the other way around. Government can, will and does abuse their authority every chance that it can if we allow it.

  • david brent July 8, 2014, 2:43 pm

    Keeping in mind the Christopher Dorner case, how many police officers will we have to disarm?

  • josh July 8, 2014, 9:52 am

    Who are the ones to deem the individual unsafe and unworthy??? So if you get into a little spat about anything now you would in essence be considered a danger or threat and then the police would come knocking at your door with the swat team behind them…. not good for anyone here to give that right to police they will abuse it!!! We are humans, and we are unpredictable… no one can predict their future and everyone has emotions that they need to vent its just that some bad apples vented the wrong way, and now all of us law abiding citizens are paying the price for the actions of a few out of 318,343,000 legal people!!!!

  • July 7, 2014, 4:40 pm

    There are not enough people or trucks to go house to house collecting and hauling off all the guns in this country! For two years after 9/11 my son and I had a brisk business selling guns we had an FFL as I do now. The business was stimulated by 9/11. The Gun Manufacturers help promote the fear that that O’l Bummer is coming to get their guns. My business is brisk the people I deal with already know they must have a CHL or pass a NICS background check. They don’t seem to live in fear of that O’l Bummer, they are like me they just like guns.

    • mtman2 July 14, 2014, 9:52 pm

      So the question will be what is normal?
      Do decent Americans-99+% go on “killing-sprees” = NOT;
      crazy people are what -a fraction of 1% of us. Criminals don’t utilize law abiding principles let alone Goobermint mandates.
      If WE let “the-feds” decide who, what and where on what’s NOT normal, which by them include Christians 1st, military next, hunters, shooters and working/taxpayer/homeowners; and the rest don’t need them -so us Goobermint folks R here to help yeew by taking all firearms from the abnormal folks to protect you and them from themselves. You R welcome!

      • phil box July 21, 2014, 12:26 pm

        if stupid people do not understand that “gun control” isn’t about guns, it is about controlling people then they(stupid people) do need some “on” to take care of them. but the care will not be the type of care you want and the lose of your freedoms will be devastating. the same thing happened in europe in the late 30’s and look at what happened there. if you don’t then you better research it.
        the bottom line is you will become a slave and have no control of your life. all you possessions will become the “states” and you will do what you are told or you will die. that is it pure and simple.
        remember this, stupid is a life time occupation and too many people have mastered their craft.

    • Neon July 21, 2014, 9:29 pm

      The article misses the point that the threshold at least the one being contemplated in CA is nothing more that any person filling out an affidavit against the party they want to have the guns removed from. Any disgruntled, malicious, or vindictive neighbor could file an affidavit without consequences of any kind against you or me or anyone. The person being filed upon receives first notice when the SWAT team is at their door. There is no initial day in court to have your side of the story told. That comes much later after your firearms, firearms accessories, your computer etc. are seized. Then it has been estimated by firearms attorneys that you will have a minimum of $10,000. in legal expenses to get back your first gun. Is your gen 3 Glock worth $10k to get it back? Is it worth another 10K to get back the rest of your other firearms? That’s one of the hidden insidious deliberate parts of this bill. It is to disarm you and force you to think about whether or not it is worth having firearms or not. It is designed to get rid the firearms culture and do nothing about removing guns from mentally deranged people. There is no particular need for a gun restraining order any more than a knife or baseball bat or club restraining order. There already is a mechanism for an all encompassing restraining that at least provides a modicum of Constitutional protections. We don’t need something that doesn’t that will be fraught with abuse.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend